Quote:

---

From Shadowman “prove it” 11/1/01
My concern is, if you continue to criticize the SRF leadership without moving towards an examination of causes, you may end up giving the impression that you are basically in this to smear former employers, supervisors, and heads of the organization for personal reasons.

First off, very few have substantiated their complaints. From the angle of an outside member, it doesn't put you in a favorable light if you liberally toss around terms like "abusive" and "bad ladies" but keep us in the dark about the details. With this tack, you set yourselves up to be percieved as complainers (Labels are subjective judgments. What one considers abusive, another might deem tolerable), OR others may wonder if you are using them to fuel a personal vendetta.

The last possibility is the one that worries me the most. Playing people off one another by spreading misinformation or exaggerated information may be one way to deal with imbalances of power, but it is a soul-corrupting endeavor.

If the intention of this board is to reach out and inform members outside the SRF work environment of real problems then you are working at cross purposes when you critically label without substantiation and then respond to those requesting proof that you either can't give it (because it would jeopardize your identity) or you don't see the need to prove a point to someone who didn't work or live there.

IF YOU MAKE AN ACCUSATION, YOU CARRY THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

---