Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00154)

Dear Paul, dear friends,

I just want to say that I regret the unpleasantness of the last few
days but there seems to be a need for it.  If we don't stand up for
one another, people will continue to post personal attacks with
impunity.  I am hoping that when this is all over this can be a
constructive site where everyone feels safe to post their work.  We
should be building bridges not tearing them down.

I too want to thank Paul for his brilliant contribution.  I don't know
why Daniel is so fond of fights, but it is disruptive and undoubtedly
turns people away.  What Paul writes concerning internet trolls is
very informative.  Perhaps, it is something we should all read in
order to guard against the "internet trolls" within us (and yes, I'll
read it twice).

In the end, this site is the responsibility of everyone.  If we want a
civil site, we can't expect the moderator to babysit us, we have to
stand up for one another.  When bad behavior is exhibited, we might
have to hiss a little bit.  Don't be afraid to call someone out for
bad behavior, the rest of us will back you up.

Thanks again Paul,
Bruce


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "carlosaveline cardoso aveline"
<carlosaveline@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Dear Paul, dear friends,
> 
> 
> Paul Johnson has my thanks.
> 
> Your well-written text below is an important contribution to our
Theos-talk.
> 
> I guess we will hear something from Daniel Caldwell -- or from Mr.
Green, 
> perhaps.
> 
> Shanti,   Carlos.
> 
> 
> 
> >From: "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@...>
> >Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Theos-World David Green's crusade against the ULT
> >Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:42:45 -0000
> >
> >Folks,
> >
> >Now that the feud between ULT members and Daniel Caldwell has entered
> >theos-talk as a two-way street (rather than Daniel just posting his
> >side of things) I feel obliged to share some background material that
> >will help explain the dynamics.
> >
> >As might be expected, I disagree entirely with the objections that
> >have been made to the HPB Letters volume and Daniel's compilation.
> >TPH books should be more in line with scholarly standards, not less.
> >Suppressing damaging information out of spiritual loyalty is
> >something that TPH has done too much, not too little.  Nonetheless,
> >whether or not David Green is an independent entity, Daniel has been
> >on an anti- ULT crusade for a long time, and having been on the
> >receiving end of a similar crusade it looks like it is falling to me
> >to point out what has been happening:
> >
> >David Green and theos-talk
> >
> >Posting on theos-talk from 1998 through 2000, "David Green" appeared
> >obsessed with attacking the United Lodge of Theosophists.  For
> >example, in one month alone, March 1999, he contributed more than 20
> >posts to theos-talk critical of the ULT, and a dozen more the
> >following month.  A year later in April 2000 he was still obsessed,
> >contributing a dozen more such posts.  His website includes twenty
> >articles he authored which are critical of Robert Crosbie, and
> >another four critical of William Q. Judge and Katherine Tingley:
> >http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/
> >
> >All remaining articles there were written by others.  No one in theos-
> >talk (with one exception) reports having met David Green in person,
> >which is unusual in the small world of Theosophical history
> >research.  But he is clearly associated with Daniel Caldwell;
> >claiming to be an Australian posting from Sydney, "Green" was in fact
> >posting from the same Tucson ISP as Caldwell.  A "see also" link to
> >Caldwell's Blavatsky Archives website appears prominently at the top
> >of Green's site.  The two share a literary style that includes
> >relentless rhetorical questions and extensive quotations from primary
> >sources.  They share a narrow set of obsessions, mostly attacking
> >Theosophical and related organizations other than the Adyar TS.  In
> >addition to literary style and subject focus, Green and Caldwell
> >created websites that are remarkably similar in appearance, which can
> >be judged by comparing them; here is Caldwell's:
> >
> >http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/
> >
> >Google shows 82 appearances of the email address
> >davidgreen@..., every one of them in posts on Theosophical
> >subjects within a period of about three years.  One clear difference
> >between Green and Caldwell, however, is that Green was regularly and
> >overtly hostile to individual Theosophists in the ULT; e.g. these
> >remarks to and about Dallas Ten Broeck and Jerome Wheeler:
> >
> >http://theos-talk.com/archives/200004/tt00073.html
> >
> >http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/200005/tt00232.html
> >
> >Another notable feature of Green's activity was his complete disdain
> >for reformist critics of the Adyar TS, who organized in the late 90s
> >as the Association of Concerned Theosophists.  He presented himself
> >as Australian, residing in Sydney, wrote in a peculiar style in which
> >articles were largely absent, and always called HPB "Mrs.
> >Blavatsky."  In general, he was contemptuously dismissive in tone
> >towards almost everyone, as in this post to Govert Schuller:
> >
> >http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199808/tt00042.html
> >
> >His hostility to the ULT even extended to Dr. James Santucci, accused
> >of excessive deference to ULT sensibilities, e.g.:
> >
> >http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199905/tt00066.html
> >
> >Occasionally a ULT member noticed something awry with Green, and
> >commented on it, e.g. Peter Merriott:
> >
> >http://theos-talk.com/archives/199902/tt00125.html
> >
> >But no one ever seemed to connect the dots and suspect that Green was
> >a fictitious persona.   His posts were often devoted to stirring up
> >antagonism, as evident in this post attacking HPB:
> >
> >http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199907/tt00015.html
> >
> >Here is an excellent article on Internet trolls, explaining the
> >phenomenon:
> >
> >http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm
> >
> >which helps explain the history of Theosophical cyberspace.  Some
> >relevant points from the article:
> >
> >"An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on
> >the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and
> >upset people.
> >
> >Trolls see Internet communications services as convenient venues for
> >their bizarre game. For some reason, they don't "get" that they are
> >hurting real people. To them, other Internet users are not quite
> >human but are a kind of digital abstraction. As a result, they feel
> >no sorrow whatsoever for the pain they inflict. Indeed, the greater
> >the suffering they cause, the greater their 'achievement' (as they
> >see it). At the moment, the relative anonymity of the net allows
> >trolls to flourish."
> >
> >All this applies to Green and his "colleague" Caldwell, but there is
> >a big difference between the two in that Caldwell for many years
> >refrained from publicly attacking the ULT, while Green did so
> >relentlessly.  Since Green disappeared from theos-talk, Caldwell has
> >gradually become more open about his hostility to the ULT.  Another
> >difference is that Caldwell, more than Green, has been a practitioner
> >of the troll technique called "flooding":
> >
> >"When a troll attacks a message board, he generally posts a lot of
> >messages. Even if his messages are not particularly inflammatory,
> >they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations
> >(this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's
> >opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel."
> >
> >"I love a good fight" was a very telling line, and I suggest that
> >theos-talk deserves an honest explanation of the "good fight" waged
> >against the ULT by Mr. "Green."
> >
> >Paul
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Seja um dos primeiros a testar o novo Windows Live Mail Beta.Acesse 
>
http://www.ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d
>