If you are posting on this message board, you DO have the option when filling out the posting page, to OMIT your "email". It is shown in yellow and may appear to be a "required" field, but it's not. You do have to put a screen name or real name in the "name" field.

Once you've posted, posts can't be edited. They can only be deleted, so if you find you've made a mistake, you won't be able to re-enter your post to edit it. That's just the way it's set up by the provider.

Just wanted to clarify that to answer some questions.

Say, this could be a useful thread to make a few suggestions about posting.

Here's one: How about breaking up some of those page-long discussions into shorter paragraphs? I find shorter paragraphs much easier to read and take in.

Thanks!

People may take that suggestion. Formatting is done according to how a poster types in their message, too.


Paragraphs will only show up if they are entered that way.

Threads are ongoing - which is one more reason why it's helpful if posters are mindful of threads that are getting very long - start a new thread =-)

There can be a PAGE 2 (or more) to a thread. Some of us have ALOT to say :o) So check at the top of the page your posting on and/or hit "next" at the bottom of the postings... there may be MORE

People who willing to recieve emails from others on the forum have a little mailbox icon under their name, you can click that and their address will pop-up under the post.

Can anyone explain how to get the message icons/smilies to show up? When I click on the place where I want the icon, then click on the icon, sometimes it shows up and usually it doesn't.

I wondered re the icons too....

The little icons after the phrase "message icon" that each have a circle next to them are like message headers, they come before your message, like the question mark you used in your post.
The smiles,frowns, etc., at the bottom of the message box where we type our posts those, will only come up where your curser is going to next, and I think if there is not enough room for one, as they are aboout 4-6 spaces, depending upon which one you choose, then they insert on a new line, below where you are typing. Ive put them in and then dont see them and they have gone to a new line down below my text. So I just find 'um and move 'um... hope that helps
The email icon under you name in the left column only appears if you have put your email in the light yellow field under your name, and then allows others to email you.
This is what Ive figured out so far anyway!

Also...
I dont think you can insert the icons in the text like this if you have typed ahead, like you have to do it as go. I have tryed to insert them later after I have typed a bunch, and they just go to a new line at the end...
Hope that helps, it's important to be able to successfully decorate!!!!

"I have heard what I am sharing from several people."

If this forum is to be a credible source of information a post cannot be based on hearsay. Hearsay is secondhand speech which the listener/reader has no way to question or verify(Hearsay is the legal term for gossip, referring to the speech of someone not present.)

It is the responsibility of each poster to keep their input clean and accurate. To do anything else is to diminish the reliability of this forum.

I asked a newspaper reporter today about this issue of “hearsay”
It really boils down to context…
If our task of networking factual information is to be successful then hearsay is an important aspect of that process…
If a poster has stated upfront that their information is hearsay or “from several people” then we have an opportunity to authenticate, disprove, or even possibly remove the post…


David

I disagree that "hearsay" has no place on this forum. There are a number of posts that have elicited, by people posting things that they EXPERIENCED by hearing, seeing, or otherwise sensing, responses from other posters. Those responses have served to add to a fuller picture in a number of cases. I may recall something from an event directly, or indirectly because I was told. In posting about it, others can validate that what I heard (or anyone else) was also what they experienced. Perhaps they were at the same event that the person who told me what they saw/heard was also at, even though I wasn't there.

In that regard, I agree with David's post about context. I would also add that clarity is important. When we say that we did experience something directly, or indirectly, in whatever ways we did, that is not misleading and it is truthful.

In no way does that, in my opinion, negatively affect the integrity or credibility of this forum.

Also, in keeping with the intent of the forum, we have the right to free speech to do just that - talk about our experiences, and in some instances, that includes hearsay - that may or may not be validated by someone else.

It's all good.

Hello David,
If I may ask, how can the repeated comments of a third party be authenticated? The person isn't here.

Respectfully, David,

Do you know for a fact that the reporter who gave you information on hearsay has a college degree in journalism and is truly qualified to speak with authority on journalistic matters? Would it not be better to interview a college professor of journalism/communications?

I wrote a long post on the issue of hearsay, then it disappeared into the ethers, so I will just say this:

My dictionary defines hearsay as "unverified information acquired from another; rumor."

As this is not a court of law and we are not testifying in court when we post, when we repeat hearsay on this site, we are repeating RUMORS.

I think it's perfectly fine to post something like this: "I heard Rumor XYZ about Ramtha, but I have no direct knowledge about this. Does anyone reading this post know any factual information about this matter?"

What I don't feel helps the credibility of this site is to say that I directly experienced something, when I only heard about it from someone else. If I only heard about Rumor X from someone else, then I should clearly say that.

I could fill a book with all the rumors I've heard in 20 years of living in Yelm. We can keep this site a respected, credible forum if we are very careful as to how we handle repeating hearsay. Or we could become just another rumor mill. It's up to us.

I was at most everything from 1990-2003.

What DO you "neophytes" want to know?

Anybody out there got a clue?

Onehandontheelephant..

You questioned if the reporter I contacted was qualified to speak with authority. Yes..
He won a national prize for journalism.
Jurors are not selected because they have PhD’s in Law or journalism……
Rumor is much like smoke, it could warn of a dangerous fire, or just be smoke and mirrors… or even a smokescreen.. It is a two-edged sword.
To be handled very wisely.
Keeping in me context of the rumor will help us navigate through these tricky waters.

Legal Beagle.. you ask
“how can the repeated comments of a third party be authenticated? The person isn't here.”

If someone you respected comes to you and tells you off an incident where a child of a friend fell through the ice.., You would immediately tell your own children to stop ice-skating on the lake? Then you would investigate to establish whether the story “rumor” is true…. “authenticated”….
Here is an example of a “rumor” spread by JZ Knight to discredit a former high profile RSE staff member who went public in the early 90s to warn RSE students about her “Ramtha” deceptions.
This person told me first-hand his story…
Soon after he spoke out against RSE… JZ Knight called an event where she told everyone that this person was trying to kill her…
this effectively destroyed his standing in the RSE community and he moved away.

Ironically there was an event called soon after where “Ramtha” berated everyone for spreading rumors….

David.

P.S.

Any decision to remove a post is made by consensus of the EMF moderators.
Only one post has been removed so far,

David

Hello David,
Thank you for responding to my question. In the case of the story of the former RSE staff the fact remains that it is nothing more than an unsubstantiated story if I have no way to communicate with the person myself.

Except for yourself, the majority of posters on this forum are anonymous and there is no way to gauge how factually they may be conveying another person's experience.

In your example of the child falling through ice, "Suppose a person you respect..." you have established 2 conditions: the person is known to you and you respect him/her. We don't have those conditions on this forum. If you want the forum to be credible people should talk from first hand experience. If you don't care, then anyone can say anything and possibly will out of spite and anger.

What is gained by that?

Hi Legal,

I just wanted to chime in and let you know a couple of reasons why people may wish to be unidentified at this point; They may have family or loved ones still involved and do not want them put in jepardy or under additional duress, they may in fact be staff or former staff themselves, they might simply be concerned about the gag order they signed. On the other hand, you may be right, people could just be posting out of spite, or, to gain information and report back to JZ, or be ranting with anger.

However, those are situations one has to deal with in their everyday life so it is reasonable that it may take place in this forum. Continued communication tells much. Does the information a person relates contradict themself? or contadict other information? Can it be corroborated in other ways?

I do understand your desire for transparency and I think the day is coming and already is appearing more transparent. Perhaps, if you are qualified, you may want to comment point for point on the potential repercussions for someone who violates the JZ gag order.

journeythroughramthaland..

Some excellent points that have to be taken into account….
thank you..


Legal Beagle…

Surely you are not saying you only believe in first hand accounts?
If so?
You could go on to say… he made it all up..
Where are the witnesses?

If others come forward and “respectfully” add a piece to the puzzle….
Then hopefully this will reveal the bigger picture.. Be it truth or fiction.

Now if we say absolutely no posting “rumors “as I think you are suggesting?
This will limit “censor” the flow of information while adding a nightmare for the forum moderators to sort through what constitutes rumor from information.

I found this quote from a Harvard law School professor..

“To some extent, the definition of what constitutes a rumor can be as nebulous as. the substance of the rumor itself. ...”

LB...Thank you for digging deep..
but I dissagree...

David

My two cents worth...
The last few days there's been little "talk" about much other than the hearsay,rumors,gossip, etc, "issue". I am wondering if people are being quiet as the ball bounces back and forth... or if we're all just taking a long inbreath?

All the points that everyone has made are good ones, and each valid, depending on wher you are coming from, and where you'd like to see the future of this forum, go.

The post that was sited yesterday,about Dr. Joe D., posted by Graced is now deleted along with it's "being sited as an example", (I had posted a short response to and the response remains). That post in particular was STRONGLY reactionary, as it was obvious graced had alot of "stuff" going on in regards to Joe...

Many of US, at times, have gone off on these types of tangents, as we are (mostly) still "on the journey". The whole RSE experience can certainly be a virtual breeding ground for reactionary emotional experiences, and I believe that some of the multi-purposes of this forum is to allow a space for people to move thru and out the other side of those pent-up feelings...( as Graced even by virtue of the handle "Graced" hopes to do, and most often succeeds)

Alot of questions as to what, that we say here in this forum, would "hold up in court" so-to-speak, seem to be coming up. As for being just one of the many participants here, for my own purposes (mainly to heal and become "Free"), I am wondering how much of the "would it hold up in court?" aspect we even want/need to deal with?

I agree with those of us who dont want to hear "stories" 2nd,3rd,or 4th hand... And I know I also have a reaction to posts that start with things like... "I heard, from my friends cousin's grilfriends, uncles, brother Bob, that....." I am not even particularly fond of people saying "I heard..."(and I am pretty sure I have done this too)

BUT as David has tried to point out, I believe?, we have to start somewhere and we also have to be able to accept the way each one of us sees and relates things. If in fact this is a forum for supporting eachother and growing. Practicing what we would like to see others do, by demonstrating these principles ourselves, is probably the best way to achieve the goal.

I also think it is important to, repeatedly if necessary, reinterate the purpose and goal of the forum. Refining those definitions as we go along.

I dont envy the moderators their "job".

For me, I am not interested in taking the posts and threads to court as "evidence" of anything. I really hope we dont have to censor or monitor all that we say here. To me it feels like THAT was a large part of what the RSE experience was "about" with JZ taking everyone to court, and Ram (?) teaching all the "secret" teachings...YUK.

Perhaps we need a couple "Truth with documentation" threads?? My sense of that is THAT would be a whole other animal and probably NOT done best in this format; on-line, with psedo names, etc. Maybe those who want to pursue that idea could arrange to get-together somehow and do that, like those that spoke earlier of getting togther for social commerce...

Thanks for all the varied viewpoints on this subject.

I requested to have my post re Dr. Joe deleted.
Although I clearly stated I was speaking of MY EXPERIENCE and MY PERCEPTIONs; acknowledged that other people may have different experiences and different perceptions; acknowledged that Dr. Joe may have changed since my experience (which I clearly stated was years ago),- I confess, as indicated by watcha, that I was reacting - not my usual style. The most important point was that I find it horrific that people who have devoted their lives to Judy are treated so terribly - whether or not I personally have any respect for them.
It may also be noted here that there is an apparent inherent censor within the message board software such that asterisks are inserted when certain words appear. I had no hesitation in using the word I felt best described what Judy did to Joe - its just that the message board doesn't like the word which describes a human process of elimination.
Everything I said in that post was, again, my experience. I used no rumors. The information was first hand(mine); and reference to a specific type of behavior was told to me by the person who experienced it.

if the (I guess, now following) post is offensive in any way, you have my permission to delete it.

oops - previous....

Dance,

I would like to echo a good part of what you already said. This forum wasn't stated at the outset to be for the purpose of "holding up in court" at all. It was designed to give former RSE students, who had concerns/doubts, a place where they could 'gather' and talk about their experiences, opinions, share information and of course, get feedback from others. All of which, of course, contributes to the overall healing process, as well as informing anyone who chooses to read the forum, of what there is being offered here.

Of course, nobody is interested in reading about 2nd, 3rd, or more hand information. But if one person shared something they experienced at RSE with me, FIRST hand, because THEY experienced it themselves, I will share that. I have shared such information and cited it as such. I think we should do that if we choose to. There has been more than one instance, where information that was shared indirectly, has been corroborated by another poster. To me, that shows that it's good to communicate. Being honest and being clear about our posts, is always important, of course.

There is a fine line wherein censorship comes into play and our freedom of speech rights are trampled. I know the moderators walk that line, and do not want to see censorship happen here. The "guidelines" are stated at the outset and those who disagree with them are free not to post.

Also, fellow readers, we do have a webpage available where people can write a summary of their journey into and out of, RSE. It can be posted there, on that page, just by sending it to the contact email address so the webmasters can get it uploaded properly. Ideally, a "real" name would be good, but not necessary. Yes, there are some complex reasons that certain people feel they want to, or need to, at least for now, remain anonymous. As JTR already pointed out, that doesn't invalidate what they have to say. If we are being honest in our postings, we are not going to contradict ourselves.

I have a LOT to post, as I get closer and closer to unpacking and reviewing my numerous notebooks, tapes, CD's, DVD's....

As David already stated, too, we don't have to do all of this overnight. All in due time.

Whatcha

Some interesting reading on the subject of credibility...

Titled..
What Constitutes Credible Evidence in Evaluation and Applied Research?

Dr. Mel Mark integrated the viewpoints expressed during the day in a talk cautioning all researchers and evaluators to contextualize their designs and their findings. He drove home the point that quantitative and qualitative methods cannot exist without one another for true understanding. The "gold standard" depends on the context, and just as gold is literally only the standard in dollar value—and not in clockworks or bullet-proof vests—credibility can be found amidst criteria such as validity, relevance, feasibility, or precision. Differences in qualitative/quantitative may result from different default assumptions about appropriateness itself.

From http://www.cgu.edu/pages/4085.asp

Hi Everyone! Thanks for that last post watcha... I feel that sharing someone's 1st hand experience, as they related it, is valid as information is passed. I too have shared some information in that way. Also as David? expressed, posting something as hearsay & then asking for validation from anyone who does have 1st hand experience allows information from the larger group. This is a "healing" way we can use the rumor material & find out if there is any truth to it. Thank everybody for your wonderful posts! M.

In reply to a private email:

Question: How do I edit a post once it has been made and I later notice a typo?

Answer: POSTERS cannot edit posts after they are submitted. Moderators cannot edit them, either. Once a post is made, it is also protected, so that some wacko moderator cannot go and distort the words of a poster. One can see where abuse of authority could come into play with that potential, for a moderator who does not have integrity.

SO...the ONLY thing that can be done with a post, is to delete it.

The moral of the story is to re-read your own posts before clicking "Post Message".

I'm responding to this question as it may benefit others, as well.

I am sure many of us have experience a brilliant post bi-locate into cyberspace without a trace...
leaving us clicking frantically… wondering if “Ramtha’” had deleted our post…
Dark chuckle..

One solution… is to write the post in a word processor, then spell-check it...
Then copy and paste it to the EMF forum..;
For those that do not have Microsoft Word…
There are some Office Suites and Word Processors out there for free download.
Here are some of them…


Abi Word
Abi Word is a free word processor that supports Microsoft Word documents, OpenOffice documents, WordPerfect documents, Rich Text Format documents, HTML web pages, etc. Supported platforms include Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, and QNX. A Mac OS X port appears to be in the works.

Jarte Word Processor
The free version of the Jarte wordprocessor handles Microsoft Word 95, 97, 2000 documents, rich text format (RTF) documents, and plain text (ASCII) documents. It is designed to be a superset of Windows Wordpad (which comes free with Windows). It works on Windows only.

Yeah Write for Windows
Yeah Write has an unusual approach to creating documents: it sports a fill-in-the-blanks interface, saves files automatically without users having to know the file names of the files, etc. It runs on Windows.

OpenOffice.org
OpenOffice.org probably needs no introduction. It's the free, open source version of Sun's commercial Star Office, and has not only a word processor, but also presentation software (akin to Microsoft's Powerpoint), spreadsheet (similar to Microsoft Excel), database (like Microsoft Access), drawing software, web editor, formula editor, etc. It can handle numerous Microsoft Word formats, the RTF format, its own compressed format, etc. The software is available on numerous platforms, including Windows, Linux, Mac OS X and Solaris. You can also export your file in the PDF format.

KOffice
KOffice is an office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation program, flowcharting application, image manipulation program, business report generation tool, formula editor, graph and charting program) for the K Desktop Environment (KDE). It runs on systems that are supported by KDE (like Linux).

David

P.S.

Here is the Link...

http://www.thefreecountry.com/utilities/wordprocessors.shtml

Thank you for those helpful tips, Sir David !

Thank you chocolate Queen..

Ive been called worse..

chuckle..

If you download a Google toolbar there is also a facility to check spelling on any web page you write on.

Navigating the EMF forum..

All posts are now displayed on a single page.

Often there are more pages to a topic,
click on the "next" tab to find them.

There is also the option to switch from Threaded Style to Board Style.

Is there anyway of having the links posted take one to the website by just clicking on them??

I seem to have trouble attempting to cut and paste them in the address bar. Anyone else have the same problem or a solution for me?

Thanks

That would be a fine improvement...
We will look into it,

thanks JTR

David