Eric Stetson on a serious Ego Control-Trip on yahoogroups

[NUR]

As for you, I don't remember you saying that you will leave -- I >remember you said you'd consider it. If you leave, so be it. I'd >be very sorry to see you go, but I'm not going to override the will >of this community

Who is the will of the community here, Eric? So far it seems to be
your voice claiming to be the will of a community that only exists as
a yahoogroups. Quit this doublespeak when it is pretty transparent
what's going on here, i.e. you are pushing an agenda that has NOTHING
to do with the stated aims of this group and then hiding behind talk
of democracy when there is no such thing operating here.

I'm not going to set a precedent of running this group as a dictator.

You already are.

Wahid

[NUR]

This is thoroughly undemocratic behavior, summarily closing an issue
like this when the actual vote over the issue is questionable to begin
with.

You have no integrity, Eric, and have learnt well from your various
Haifan mentors like Susan Maneck and Steve Marshall!

Wahid

Dear Unitarian Bahai Group,
As group owner, I have prayerfully considered the issue of Susan Maneck's presence in this group and its implications. Previously I had voted to remove her from the group in our poll. I was surprised that the majority of people who voted wished to allow her to stay, but I respect the wishes of this democratic community.
As of a few minutes ago, I have changed my vote to the position of allowing her to stay. The poll closes at a count of 6 votes in favor of letting Susan stay, 3 votes against, and 2 undecided.
This issue is closed. Unless Susan Maneck actually does something to cause offense to the members of this group in the future, from now on further discussion of her presence here is prohibited. The other moderators and I will only approve her posts if she is polite and respectful of the members here, and will refuse to approve any attempted posts by her that are offensive, disrespectful, or combative.
Now I will explain why I personally changed my vote to the position of allowing Susan to stay, joining the majority of voters in this position.
One of the things I believe in is the principle of "associating with the followers of all religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." That's a quote from Bahaullah, a person we in this group recognize as a prophetic voice.
Susan Maneck is a human being, and a follower of a different denomination of the Bahai faith. As supporters of Bahaullah's message, we have an obligation to uphold the principle of interfaith and ecumenical/interdenominational fellowship and friendliness, rather than practice shunning or dehumanizing of any person.
I refuse to allow the Unitarian Bahai movement to start out by setting a precedent of refusing to engage in dialogue with Bahais from other denominations. If such a precedent were to have been set, it would have had to be done by me unilaterally, in violation of the democratic vote of this community. Therefore, not only would I have been setting a precedent of anti-ecumenism, but also a precedent of anti-democratic authoritarianism. Both of these are features of the Haifan Baha'i Faith that we don't like! We should not import such disturbing attitudes and practices into our own new movement, which is seeking to practice Bahaism in a liberal, inclusive, and truly democratic spirit.
I respect that this community has revealed its wisdom in voting to allow Susan Maneck to stay here among us, because in doing so, we are demonstrating that we are willing and able to actually *practice* what we preach -- to have a friendly attitude and attempt to fellowship even with people from a different religious denomination or tradition, who disagree with some of our beliefs and may say so vocally.
I reiterate that any attempts by Susan Maneck -- or anyone else for that matter -- to post disrespectful, offensive, or combative messages to this forum will be blocked by the moderators.
Yes, Haifan Bahais will be here -- probably not many of them, but maybe a few on occasion. Are we afraid of ecumenical dialogue? I'm not. I have no problem with it at all. And the moderators will ensure that if Haifans want to dialogue with us, they can do so, as long as they do it respectfully.
Yes, Haifan Bahais will be spying on us. They would do so regardless of whether they use their real names or pseudonyms. We can't stop it, because the only way to stop it would be to personally interview everyone who wishes to join this group and somehow check to make sure they are not a member of the Haifan denomination (which is not actually possible to do).
Therefore, my suggestion is that any group member who is concerned about being spied on by Haifan Baha'i officials should use a pseudonym on this forum.
As for me, and I suspect also for many of us here, we aren't worried about people from a different religious denomination knowing what we believe, what we're doing, and who we are. Be bold! Have courage! Stand up for what you believe! Who cares if somebody is spying on you from some pathetic religious organization that keeps files on everyone they don't like. Let them do their ridiculous thing, and we will do our thing. It's not as though they're going to find you and murder you because you're a Unitarian Bahai.
So there it is. If anyone wishes to practice total shunning of Susan Maneck -- not only refusing to dialogue with her, but even refusing to enter a common online space in which she is present and mostly silent -- you may choose to leave this group if you wish. Our community has spoken, and the majority decided that Susan can be here, at least for now.
Bahaullah promoted the practice of dialogue with people of different religious beliefs. Bahaullah also promoted democratic decision-making among the Bahais. That is the whole idea of the House of Justice -- that wherever at least nine Bahais are gathered, they can make democratic decisions and that those decisions reflect the will of God for the community. We must uphold these principles or else it would not make sense for us to call ourselves "Bahai".
In the spirit of peace and love for all,
Eric Stetson
Unitarian Bahai Group Owner

[NUR]

Frankly, Ernesto, I don't consider Wahid or Michael key people.

Interesting that I was key when you were desperately seeking contact
with the Muwahhiddin/Aghsan, who seem to have snubbed you for good
reason. I'll post your letter on TRB. But that said, are you seriously
that deluded that you believe that this yahoogroups list has any real,
tangible consequence for the creation of a movement in the real world?
Get a grip, Eric.

Wahid is a non-Bahai, and in fact is openly hostile to Bahaullah.

And you are a Christian minister whose relationship to Baha'ism is,
frankly, quite dubious to say the least. Other than fluff and
platitudes, you have NEVER really come clean about the hold this cult
has over you. And if you yourself don't know, maybe I can explain it
to you.

Wahid

[NUR]

From: unitarianbahai <***@yahoo.com>
Subject: Message not approved: Who is the will of the community?
To: "fatimiya88" <***@yahoo.com>
Cc: unitarian-bahai-***@yahoogroups.com
Received: Wednesday, 4 November, 2009, 10:21 AM


Wahid,

I cannot approve this message, because it is an attack on the owner of
the list as well as the people who voted in the poll who belong to
this online community. The poll results speak for themselves. I
suppose you believed I stuffed the ballot box -- and there's no way I
could ever prove to you that I didn't -- but the fact is I didn't.

You can believe whatever you want about my agenda. I'll just let my
actions speak for themselves and let each person make up their own
minds about my goals and purposes in this endeavor.

Eric

As for you, I don't remember you saying that you will leave -- I >remember you said you'd consider it. If you leave, so be it. I'd >be very sorry to see you go, but I'm not going to override the will >of this community

Who is the will of the community here, Eric? So far it seems to be your voice claiming to be the will of a community that only exists as a yahoogroups. Quit this doublespeak when it is pretty transparent what's going on here, i.e. you are pushing an agenda that has NOTHING to do with the stated aims of this group and then hiding behind talk of democracy when there is no such thing operating here.

I'm not going to set a precedent of running this group as a dictator.

You already are.
Wahid

[NUR]

Wahid,

I cannot approve this message because it is a personal attack on the
listowner and is also an attack on the members of this community who
voted in the poll, and who had a right to vote in the poll and have
their vote counted and have it mean something.

Eric

This is thoroughly undemocratic behavior, summarily closing an issue like this when the actual vote over the issue is questionable to begin with.
You have no integrity, Eric, and have learnt well from your various Haifan mentors like Susan Maneck and Steve Marshall!
Wahid

Dear Unitarian Bahai Group,
As group owner, I have prayerfully considered the issue of Susan Maneck's presence in this group and its implications. Previously I had voted to remove her from the group in our poll. I was surprised that the majority of people who voted wished to allow her to stay, but I respect the wishes of this democratic community.
As of a few minutes ago, I have changed my vote to the position of allowing her to stay. The poll closes at a count of 6 votes in favor of letting Susan stay, 3 votes against, and 2 undecided.
This issue is closed. Unless Susan Maneck actually does something to cause offense to the members of this group in the future, from now on further discussion of her presence here is prohibited. The other moderators and I will only approve her posts if she is polite and respectful of the members here, and will refuse to approve any attempted posts by her that are offensive, disrespectful, or combative.
Now I will explain why I personally changed my vote to the position of allowing Susan to stay, joining the majority of voters in this position.
One of the things I believe in is the principle of "associating with the followers of all religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." That's a quote from Bahaullah, a person we in this group recognize as a prophetic voice.
Susan Maneck is a human being, and a follower of a different denomination of the Bahai faith. As supporters of Bahaullah's message, we have an obligation to uphold the principle of interfaith and ecumenical/interdenominational fellowship and friendliness, rather than practice shunning or dehumanizing of any person.
I refuse to allow the Unitarian Bahai movement to start out by setting a precedent of refusing to engage in dialogue with Bahais from other denominations. If such a precedent were to have been set, it would have had to be done by me unilaterally, in violation of the democratic vote of this community. Therefore, not only would I have been setting a precedent of anti-ecumenism, but also a precedent of anti-democratic authoritarianism. Both of these are features of the Haifan Baha'i Faith that we don't like! We should not import such disturbing attitudes and practices into our own new movement, which is seeking to practice Bahaism in a liberal, inclusive, and truly democratic spirit.
I respect that this community has revealed its wisdom in voting to allow Susan Maneck to stay here among us, because in doing so, we are demonstrating that we are willing and able to actually *practice* what we preach -- to have a friendly attitude and attempt to fellowship even with people from a different religious denomination or tradition, who disagree with some of our beliefs and may say so vocally.
I reiterate that any attempts by Susan Maneck -- or anyone else for that matter -- to post disrespectful, offensive, or combative messages to this forum will be blocked by the moderators.
Yes, Haifan Bahais will be here -- probably not many of them, but maybe a few on occasion. Are we afraid of ecumenical dialogue? I'm not. I have no problem with it at all. And the moderators will ensure that if Haifans want to dialogue with us, they can do so, as long as they do it respectfully.
Yes, Haifan Bahais will be spying on us. They would do so regardless of whether they use their real names or pseudonyms. We can't stop it, because the only way to stop it would be to personally interview everyone who wishes to join this group and somehow check to make sure they are not a member of the Haifan denomination (which is not actually possible to do).
Therefore, my suggestion is that any group member who is concerned about being spied on by Haifan Baha'i officials should use a pseudonym on this forum.
As for me, and I suspect also for many of us here, we aren't worried about people from a different religious denomination knowing what we believe, what we're doing, and who we are. Be bold! Have courage! Stand up for what you believe! Who cares if somebody is spying on you from some pathetic religious organization that keeps files on everyone they don't like. Let them do their ridiculous thing, and we will do our thing. It's not as though they're going to find you and murder you because you're a Unitarian Bahai.
So there it is. If anyone wishes to practice total shunning of Susan Maneck -- not only refusing to dialogue with her, but even refusing to enter a common online space in which she is present and mostly silent -- you may choose to leave this group if you wish. Our community has spoken, and the majority decided that Susan can be here, at least for now.
Bahaullah promoted the practice of dialogue with people of different religious beliefs. Bahaullah also promoted democratic decision-making among the Bahais. That is the whole idea of the House of Justice -- that wherever at least nine Bahais are gathered, they can make democratic decisions and that those decisions reflect the will of God for the community. We must uphold these principles or else it would not make sense for us to call ourselves "Bahai".
In the spirit of peace and love for all,
Eric Stetson
Unitarian Bahai Group Owner

[NUR]

The only reason you have my letter that I attempted to send to the >contact you gave me is because it probably never even went to >somebody in Israel; it probably just went to you.

Whatever!

I'm 99% sure that you are the owner of that email address you gave >me.

Whatever!

Frankly I don't even think you've ever had any contact with any of >the descendants of Bahaullah.

Whatever! And kindly don't posit your own twisted strategies on to
others. Not everyone in the world lives in the cultural vacuum of
amoral corporate narratives that you live by. Susan Maneck used to
make such silly arguments once upon a time regarding myself and the
nonexistent "Azalis" she claimed didn't exist other than in my head,
and lived to seriously regret it. With you it will also be the same.

Why would they want to talk with you?

The same reason they have been actively speaking to Bayanis since the
1920s. And the same reason why when Negar Bahai-Anselem went to Iran
in the 1970s, she made contact with her Bayani relatives. The same
Susan Maneck who claimed nonexistent Azalis is the same Susan Maneck
who publicly broadcast this story when BAHAIS IN MY BACKYARD first
came out. Moreover it is the same reason why the wife of Jalal Azal,
i.e. the youngest daughter of Badi'ullah, married this grandson of
Subh-i-Azal. You see, Eric, the world is not so completely simple or
composed by simpletons or arrogant like many of you white Americans
seem to think the world is a projection of yourselves. The entire
Iranian relations of Mrs. Negar Anselem consider Husayn 'Ali to have
been the antichrist in person. Yet when Negar went to Iran, it is with
them she stayed.

You hate Bahaullah and his teachings. You even frequently call him >Satan. I don't think Unitarian Bahais in Israel would have any >interest in corresponding with you.

You think what you want, Mr Head-Trip! Meanwhile we'll start posting
more items from our Muwahhidin contacts in Palestine on various fora,
including Bayanic.Com. You ruined your own chances in making a genuine
contact with these people.

I have been honest about my relationship with Bahaism, which is as >follows: I believe Bahaullah was a prophet, but also a fallible man >like anyone else.

Then you cannot be a Christian. Simple as that. You seem to be
confused in your articulated positions, Eric. Seriously confused. But
I believe your posited confusion is all an act, and now you have
proven it to me once again. Why someone who claims to wish to be
declared a CB then seeks public validation from the likes of Susan
Maneck and Steve Marshall points to only one thing: that your efforts
are being strategically coordinated by the same parties using the
Haifan Bahai organization for their various ends. You might think you
are smart and pulling wool over eyes, but your methods and aims are
completely transparent to me -- as are the people pulling your puppet
strings from behind the scenes.

I have an interest in seeing a liberal Bahaism emerge,

Then you cannot be a Christian. Unless you possess some kind of
unresolved Messiah-complex, in which case you need a shrink and not a
forum, your position as simultaneously a Christian minister and Baha'o-
phile do not gell. Simple as that.

and since I happen to know a lot about this religion, I'm trying to >do what I can to help in that effort.

Poppycock! I know a self-aggrandizing show-man when I see one!

Wahid

[NUR]

The only reason you have my letter that I attempted to send to the >contact you gave me is because it probably never even went to >somebody in Israel; it probably just went to you.

Whatever!

I'm 99% sure that you are the owner of that email address you gave >me.

Whatever!

Frankly I don't even think you've ever had any contact with any of >the descendants of Bahaullah.

Whatever! And kindly don't posit your own twisted strategies on to
others. Not everyone in the world lives in the cultural vacuum of
amoral corporate narratives that you live by. Susan Maneck used to
make such silly arguments once upon a time regarding myself and the
nonexistent "Azalis" she claimed didn't exist other than in my head,
and lived to seriously regret it. With you it will also be the same.

Why would they want to talk with you?

The same reason they have been actively speaking to Bayanis since the
1920s. And the same reason why when Negar Bahai-Anselem went to Iran
in the 1970s, she made contact with her Bayani relatives. The same
Susan Maneck who claimed nonexistent Azalis is the same Susan Maneck
who publicly broadcast this story when BAHAIS IN MY BACKYARD first
came out. Moreover it is the same reason why the wife of Jalal Azal,
i.e. the youngest daughter of Badi'ullah, married this grandson of
Subh-i-Azal. You see, Eric, the world is not so completely simple or
composed by simpletons or arrogant twats like many of you white
Americans seem to deem the world as a projection of yourselves. The
entire Iranian relations of Mrs. Negar Bahai-Anselem consider Husayn
'Ali to have been the antichrist in person. Yet when Negar went to
Iran, it is with them she stayed.

You hate Bahaullah and his teachings. You even frequently call him >Satan. I don't think Unitarian Bahais in Israel would have any >interest in corresponding with you.

You think what you want, Mr Head-Trip! Meanwhile we'll start posting
more items from our Muwahhidin contacts in Palestine on various fora,
including Bayanic.Com. You ruined your own chances in making a genuine
contact with these people. Sorry.

I have been honest about my relationship with Bahaism, which is as >follows: I believe Bahaullah was a prophet, but also a fallible man >like anyone else.

Then you cannot be a Christian. Simple as that. You seem to be
confused in your articulated positions, Eric. Seriously confused. But
I believe your posited confusion is all an act, and now you have
proven it to me once again. Why someone who claims to wish to be
declared a CB then seeks public validation from the likes of Susan
Maneck and Steve Marshall points to only one thing: that your efforts
are being strategically coordinated by the same parties using the
Haifan Bahai organization for their various ends. You might think you
are smart and pulling wool over eyes, but your methods and aims are
completely transparent to me -- as are the people pulling your puppet
strings from behind the scenes.

I have an interest in seeing a liberal Bahaism emerge,

Then you cannot be a Christian. Unless you possess some kind of
unresolved Messiah-complex, in which case you need a shrink and not a
forum, your position as simultaneously a Christian minister and Baha'o-
phile do not gell. Simple as that.

and since I happen to know a lot about this religion, I'm trying to >do what I can to help in that effort.

Poppycock! I know a self-aggrandizing show-man when I see one!

Wahid

[NUR]

Wahid...Where do I find Bayan 19? Thanks Maureen

On yahoogroups. It's BAYAN19 (no space).



Note that the listowner has been censorsing various messages of mine
one of which is a response to his last post. This message can be found
on TRB and will shortly be going on a blog together with other
censored messages. The message is this http://tiny.cc/oX8rg

[NUR]

NUR <***@gmail.com>
to Eric Stetson <***@yahoo.com>
date Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 6:10 PM
subject Re: Message not approved: The Susan Maneck Issue Is Closed
mailed-by gmail.com

hide details 6:10 PM (10 minutes ago)

Because the people you are associating with need to have their balls
cut off. And you need to acquire some integrity and quit your
dishonest mind games using religion as the cloak. The good Lord has
sent me to teach you. But you are a slow learner, so the teaching
needs be implemented in more drastic ways. Sooner or later you will
learn. Guaranteed.
- Hide quoted text -


On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:31 PM, Eric Stetson
<***@yahoo.com> wrote:

Don't you have anything better to do with your time, rather than
try to start some stupid pissing contest with me, which I'm not even
going to participate in anyway? Why not write another book on
Gnosticism or something instead?

[Jeffrey]

This shows you why moderated groups cannot stand. They always end up
becoming censors. A moderator should only weed out spam and completely
off-topic posts. Otherwise, it is ridiculous for any one person or
group of persons to try to decide what ideas are acceptable or not.
It is embarrassing for these people when they take upon themselves
this role of being a watchdog of what ideas are worthy of being
expressed and what are apparently too harmful for the list members to
take.

And what is with Eric Stetson? Is he not an ex-Baha'i who converted
to Christianity? So now he is starting his own version of Baha'i?

What's next? Wahid claiming to be the Guardian?

Jeffrey

[NUR]

This shows you why moderated groups cannot stand.  They always end up
becoming censors. A moderator should only weed out spam and completely
off-topic posts.  Otherwise, it is ridiculous for any one person or
group of persons to try to decide what ideas are acceptable or not.
It is embarrassing for these people when they take upon themselves
this role of being a watchdog of what ideas are worthy of being
expressed and what are apparently too harmful for the list members to
take.
And what is withEricStetson?  Is he not an ex-Baha'i who converted
to Christianity?  So now he is starting his own version of Baha'i?

Let's put it this way: Stetson represents the product of a certain
investment made by the usual culprits for implementing creative ways
of controlling the agenda of discussions and flow of influences on
these moderated Bahai yahoogroups lists these "marginal" Haifans put
such enormous reputational stock into. Since the various levels of the
powers that be have to molly-cuddle everything and everyone in every
situation, including when pretending to openness, what better
candidate than Stetson need be wheeled out for the job. Flackius
Stetsonius has leash-holders, two of whom to the surprise of many
(except yours truly) actually started posting to the list, and are the
very core reason why the list soured in the first place.

What's next?  Wahid claiming to be the Guardian?

I believe I am much better looking than Nosrat Effendi is ;-) And I
already am the Guardian, just not of Bahaism.

Jeffrey

Wahid