3 ms·

How about it's 1 AM in DC? Can't wait until morning for your apology? "I demand justice—and I have to have it before going to bed!" I saw the article—there wer

How about it's 1 AM in DC? Can't wait until morning for your apology? "I demand justice—and I have to have it before going to bed!" I saw the article—there were plenty of negative comments. Not all of them were overt ("Too bad Shelly Miscavige couldn't attend!") but there were plenty there, along with huge quantities of downvotes on ambivalent and pro-Scientology comments. Much like unreported rapes, how accurate can your statistics on censored comments really be? Did you leave a "fuck you, Scientology!" comment and it didn't show up? Maybe there are other explanations we can identify before positing some kind of conspiracy. Changing behavior because of backlash has to be enough sometimes. Especially with organizations. Not every person in this country is as acquainted with Scientology as we are—most Americans think they're just some kind of new age religion for celebrities and are totally unaware of the kidnapping, abuse, murder, etc. Not every company can afford to have every decision filter through every person in the hierarchy to the top before its effects are felt.

illuminate 14y ago
"I saw the article—there were plenty of negative comments" Before they started censoring negative comments and downvoting all but positive sockpuppet accounts.
neumann_alfred 14y ago
Thanks for not taking my anger at this personally, I was being out of line. But to think that just one gullible person might fall into the clutches of Scientology because of this, really does bother me. I know they might follow up on all this with an editorial or something, but I would be surprised if it was an equally strong criticism of Scientology as the ad and the comments to it was praise of it. So I don't see the potential damage being undone. Trying to get away with something like this, to me marks any organization, unless it expels its elements which lead to those decisions, as utterly poisonous. And maybe they really cannot learn, maybe we have to play natural selection, instead of being understanding and patient and whatnot. But still, thanks for a level-headed reply to a kind of BS post, I'm just not editing it because I think that's lame; but I regret having it phrased that way, and being so full of myself when it's not really about me at all.
- fusiongyro 14y ago
  I saw this and thought of you: http://www.theonion.com/articles/sponsored-the-taliban-is-a-vibrant-and-thriving-po,30910/ http://www.theonion.com/articles/sponsored-the-taliban-is-a-...

illuminate 14y ago

"I saw the article—there were plenty of negative comments" Before they started censoring negative comments and downvoting all but positive sockpuppet accounts.

neumann_alfred 14y ago

Thanks for not taking my anger at this personally, I was being out of line. But to think that just one gullible person might fall into the clutches of Scientology because of this, really does bother me. I know they might follow up on all this with an editorial or something, but I would be surprised if it was an equally strong criticism of Scientology as the ad and the comments to it was praise of it. So I don't see the potential damage being undone. Trying to get away with something like this, to me marks any organization, unless it expels its elements which lead to those decisions, as utterly poisonous. And maybe they really cannot learn, maybe we have to play natural selection, instead of being understanding and patient and whatnot. But still, thanks for a level-headed reply to a kind of BS post, I'm just not editing it because I think that's lame; but I regret having it phrased that way, and being so full of myself when it's not really about me at all.

fusiongyro 14y ago
I saw this and thought of you: http://www.theonion.com/articles/sponsored-the-taliban-is-a-vibrant-and-thriving-po,30910/ http://www.theonion.com/articles/sponsored-the-taliban-is-a-...