See
here
Extracts
(with our responses):
Quote:
“Seeing
that you have FAILED to prove your criticisms of Linwood Monday Night
Group or myself, here are a few pointers.”
Our
response: Again we refer you to the original blog entry. You will
observe we made no criticisms – our correspondent did. We applied
an entirely neutral reporting tone to the information we were sent.
It was only on receiving your somewhat clumsy email implying legal
action that we decided to modify our approach. Your latest offering
doesn't incline us to change our tack one bit! But you do seem
remarkably defensive!
“1.
NEVER have we referred to ourselves as black panthers, and I have
absolutely no idea what that term would even insinuate.”
Our
response: See here for Black Panthers
“2.
Anonymity: I personally use my full name, along with some others I
know so as NOT TO violate the tradition of anonymity.
In
an article in the February 1969 Grapevine: "Dr. Bob on Tradition
Eleven," Volume 25, Issue 9, D. S. Of San Mateo, California,
wrote that Dr. Bob commented on the Eleventh Tradition, "We need
always maintain personal anonymity At the level of press, radio and
films,"as follows:
"Since
our Tradition of Anonymity designates the exact level where the line
should be held, it must be obvious to everyone who can read and
understand the English Language that to maintain Anonymity at any
other level is definately [sic] a Violation of this Tradition."
"The
AA who hides his identity from his fellow AAs by using only a given
name Violates The Tradition just as much as the AA who permits his
name to appear in the press in connection with matter pertaining to
AA."
"The
former is maintaining his anonymity ABOVE the level of press, radio
and films, and the latter is maintaining his anonymity BELOW the
level of press, radio and films---whereas the tradition states that
we should maintain our anonymity 'AT' the level of press, radio and
films.")”
Our
response: Dr Bob may have been many things but he certainly wasn't a
logician or a semanticist. The tradition means what it says:
anonymity applies to AA members qua AA members when communicating via
the indicated media. It cannot be taken to offer any guidance
(explicit or implied) as to how AA members identify themselves to
each other in any other context. So, for example, if a 'rule'
proposes that one should always attire oneself in formal evening wear
when attending certain social engagements this does not preclude
wearing exactly the same kind of outfit on any other occasion one
chooses (including going swimming if you should be so inclined!). The
presence of a 'condition' in one situation does not automatically
imply its absence in another. Or to put it briefly – it's
contingent, not necessary! Moreover the notion of the word “at”
(as in “at the level of”) as defining a precise boundary between
an “above” and “below” and excluding both (as Dr Bob
suggests) is not supported by its full meaning ie. in or near the
area occupied by; in or near the location of (see any good
dictionary). Finally, in practical terms, we've never had any problem
identifying somebody on the sole basis of their first name and
initial. How many Zebadiahs (or Ebenezers etc etc ) for example do
you know??
“3.
Berate the fellowship? Hmmm, I belong to the fellowship, so that
would be rather foolish would it not?”
Our
response: Clearly you haven't attended enough meetings. Lecturers,
gurus, Big Book experts abound! As to your foolishness we'll let
others be the judge of that.
“4.
To the best of my knowledge each member at Linwood belongs only to
that group, and would therefore have to be members of another group
in order to change another's format. So the answer is NO.”
Our
response: Interesting! Such an exclusive society! (sounds familiar –
almost dare we say ….. cultish!). Would that be part of your group
conscience?
“5.
What is the measuring device to determine energy given by others?
Could it possibly be an individual with a resentment? As at the end
of the day, it has taken ten years for such allegations to be
levelled against the group.”
Our
response: More apposite was the application of the qualifying term
“dark” (as in sinister, oppressive, controlling, burdensome,
stultifying, vitiating, corrupting etc etc). As for ten years! Better
late than never!
“6.
That I am miserable and controlling? Well, who would I be to answer
such a question. Just lets say that it has taken over 21 years for
that accusation to be made at me. I think you shall find that
alcoholics who are miserable don't hang around AA too long.”
Our
response: see 3 above. Correct us if we're wrong (and by now we're
quite sure you will) but didn't Bill W suffer from depression
(something rather more serious than being “miserable”) for quite
a few years. See Bill Wilson's Fight With Depression.
Didn't he stick around for a while? How long was it now? Ah yes.
Right up till 1971 when he died (sober). Now when was it he joined
AA? Oh yeah …. we forgot. He was a co-founder wasn't he! So that
would be round about 1935. Now let's see ….. 71 minus 35 … who's
got the calculator? Oh bugger it! It's a long time anyway ...
“To
finish, I never knew we had a police service in AA, self appointed at
that too. So the controlling allegations fair made me laugh, it
really did. When all over your blog you try to control others , even
using the terms "our investigations". By hiding behind a
computer, you's and your correspondents really do need to take a good
look at yourselves FELLAS. “
Our
response: Finally! But fun though this all is we are starting to get
a teensy weensy bit bored! You're really going to have to try a more
original line of argument though. The “police service” slant is
starting to wear a bit thin. See the Minority Report 2013 for the whys and wherefores of it all! And yeah,
yeah.. we'll be good boys and girls and do our usual written
inventories – and then get straight back on the keyboard!
And
just when we thought it was all over we received an addendum to the
original email:
“Do
you now have a page for the obviously resentful, lying correspondent
to be named and shamed as you attempted to do with the Linwood group
and myself?”
Our
response: No. But wouldn't that breach their anonymity? But then
you're an expert on the subject? But do you and the Linwood: Change Through Action BB [Big Book] Monday group think we should?
(someone pass the man a pick and shovel. We don't think he's dug
himself in deep enough yet!)
Cheerio
The
Fellas (Friends
of Alcoholics Anonymous
….. sounds of police sirens fading into the distance …..)
PS
Don't mention it! We're happy to give you the free publicity – or
rather – exposure!
