Lucianarchy Uncovered

[ScaRZ]

Fine then! Point it out as you have days ago......BUT move forward.
Once you whip the bullies butt, no need to repeat the whipping every day. In my opinion once you do that, you become the bully.

[Hidden Hand]

Scarz -

I was prompted to do this research simply because of accusations that what the RU group has done are unethical and/or immoral.

All I'm doing is laying out evidence that Lucianarchy has done precisely these same behaviors.

It is not my interest here to make any sort of judgement about Lucianarchy's statements and behavior - I am trying to present this as evidence sans commentary. However, there is a word for holding other people to a standard that one does not meet themselves, or for holding one group to a standard but not another group - hypocrisy.

And I do not see how you can call this "skelotons in the closet" - this is all publicly available information, Lucianarchy's own words (including things he wrote on his website) and the consequences of his words. That is, thousands of posts in the last decade - hardly something hidden away in the closet.

[ryguy]

Fine then! Point it out as you have days ago......BUT move forward.
Once you whip the bullies butt, no need to repeat the whipping every day. In my opinion once you do that, you become the bully.

Scarz - I see your point. The reason I reposted the link to Hidden's research is when I noticed that the Bully was at it again.

-Ry

[GalacticG]

Scarz, you ask a fair question - why consider lucianarchy's past actions online and in forums? Do they have any bearing today?

You're right, everyone has skeletons in their closet and does stupid/embarrassing things and hopefully grows more mature over time and learns to do better. Has lucianarchy done so?

Well, LA's actions happened 1998-2005, that's pretty recent history. That's also quite a few years to repeat the same behavior. And if you check the links HH provided (or Google lucianarchy yourself) you'll find quite a few discussion boards where LA 1) made claims about having psychic powers 2) created sock-puppets to support / defend his story / bump threads 3) got banned.

Scarz, my question I ask you is WHY do you think lucianarchy did these things? Are the above actions of a mature person? Someone we can trust to be honest and truthful?

Or are they the actions of someone who NEEDS and CRAVES attention?

I've gone through the links HH provided, and now I wonder how many sock-puppets there are at OM. Or even how many actual members there are. Perhaps LA gave an account to each one of his/her stuffed animals or imaginary friends. After all, OM is lucianarchy's own board and was dormant until Serpo came around.

A related point about checking out the background & character & motivations of another - OM members gushed excitement and awe at Bill Ryan's interview of Dan Burisch. If only they had seen and kept up with the Eaglesdisobey / Dan Burisch board discussions that Shawnna, Xena and others participated in about a year ago. DB displayed a hideous Jeckyll & Hyde personality. If you were one of his cronies/supportes, DB was as courteous as a church minister. But if you dared to question the many, many inconsistencies of his story, the mask came off. Not unlike OM banning those who questioned GW's fervent belief / promotion of Serpo or tried to debate the inconsistencies of the Serpo story.

I wonder what would happen if any OM members attempted to discuss LA's sock-puppetry on his own board? No one dares to, because they don't have the courage to, because they need the attention of OM as much as OM needs theirs. So what's up, non-sock-puppet OM members? Are you going to do your own research and thinking on lucianarchy and ask him/her your own questions? Or are you going to do what GW does and close your eyes and plug your ears and pretend nothing's wrong?

[Shawnna]

deleted

[ScaRZ]

Scarz -

I was prompted to do this research simply because of accusations that what the RU group has done are unethical and/or immoral.

All I'm doing is laying out evidence that Lucianarchy has done precisely these same behaviors.

It is not my interest here to make any sort of judgement about Lucianarchy's statements and behavior - I am trying to present this as evidence sans commentary. However, there is a word for holding other people to a standard that one does not meet themselves, or for holding one group to a standard but not another group - hypocrisy.

And I do not see how you can call this "skelotons in the closet" - this is all publicly available information, Lucianarchy's own words (including things he wrote on his website) and the consequences of his words. That is, thousands of posts in the last decade - hardly something hidden away in the closet.

I agree, your point was made early on that he has done the very same thing.

I thought you were going after every written word he has posted and just trying to smear his name for his beliefs, past beliefs, or his word usage.
That's the way it came over to me, and I know that's a wrong path to take.

[ryguy]

I agree, your point was made early on that he has done the very same thing.

I thought you were going after every written word he has posted and just trying to smear his name for his beliefs, past beliefs, or his word usage.
That's the way it came over to me, and I know that's a wrong path to take.

I promise you Scarz, Hidden's research was not based on LA's belief in the paranormal - something I believe in (and many here believe)...it has only to do with past and present behavior (as described in GalacticG's post above).

-Ry

[Hidden Hand]

Fine then! Point it out as you have days ago......BUT move forward.
Once you whip the bullies butt, no need to repeat the whipping every day. In my opinion once you do that, you become the bully.

What you are saying is that it is OK for Luci to behave this way online from 1998-2005 - but if somebody else comes along and examine what he has said and done, then *they* are "the bully"?

I thought you were going after every written word he has posted and just trying to smear his name for his beliefs, past beliefs, or his word usage.
That's the way it came over to me, and I know that's a wrong path to take.

"Smear"? Please point to what I said that was smearing, and I'll go back and edit AND apologize.

[ScaRZ]

Scarz, my question I ask you is WHY do you think lucianarchy did these things? Are the above actions of a mature person? Someone we can trust to be honest and truthful?

Or are they the actions of someone who NEEDS and CRAVES attention?

I have no idea why he does what he does.
I don't trust him anymore than I do the guy that lives one block up the road from me. I can count the number of people I trust to be honest and truthful on one hand.
On this thing we call the web there are millions who need and crave attention.
I can't look them in the eye or observe their body language, or their tone of voice. It's only written words typed out upon a keyboard. They don't know me any better than I know them.

[ScaRZ]

If you're not going to lead, be very careful who you choose to follow.

If this refers to me then I will say this.
I have NO intention to be a follower of him or anybody else.

[ScaRZ]

Fine then! Point it out as you have days ago......BUT move forward.
Once you whip the bullies butt, no need to repeat the whipping every day. In my opinion once you do that, you become the bully.

What you are saying is that it is OK for Luci to behave this way online from 1998-2005 - but if somebody else comes along and examine what he has said and done, then *they* are "the bully"?

I thought you were going after every written word he has posted and just trying to smear his name for his beliefs, past beliefs, or his word usage.
That's the way it came over to me, and I know that's a wrong path to take.

"Smear"? Please point to what I said that was smearing, and I'll go back and edit AND apologize.

If you by now can't understand the point I was trying to make, then there is no need for me to type another word. I did my very best to explain it using a keyboard.

[Shawnna]

deleted

[ryguy]

**Ryguy whispers over to Shawnna***

"Shawnna...language....please......"

-Ry

[BlueTileSpook]

Scarz -

I don't think Shawnna meant it as a comment aimed directly at you. I took it as a general comment that fits in with what you wrote above, the we all have to be careful of whom we put our trust and faith in.

Some people blindly put their faith in the people around them. Kiwicocky wrote in the Bill Ryan thread that she readily accepts that she does this and doesn't know why she does (sorry Kiwi, you just sprang to mind).

I think a lot of people are fooled into thinking that a person putting themself in the spotlight is legitimate because they give that person more credit or power than what they deserve.

"Oh? Bluetilespook? Yeah, he has that website. I don't understand quite everything that is going on there but he must have a better grasp on it than I do if he put up a website and all. I bet he has got some really good stuffen hidden on his computer that he isn't telling anyone about."

And that doesn't take into account hoaxers (whether in the business world or the UFOlogy world) that say they have more "going on" that what they actually do.

**Disclaimer** This is not a shot at Bill Ryan, so don't go there.**

Both Bill and Alex Jones have come out with stuff in the last couple of days saying in effect that they may "be killed" for bringing info out into the public and that bothers me because people give credence to whatever future bad circumstances that happen to that person.

"Bluetilespook had an auto accident and it got reported in the news? Gee, 'They' must be out to get him."

"Bluetilespook's book supplier is late with a shipment of new books? Gee, 'They' will try anything to shut him down."

I think that we, as a society, are losing our healthy sceptical side in our lives. Not disbelief or outright closed-mindedness, just healthy scepticism of what people are trying to tell us or sell us or ask us to believe.

Cheers to you Scarz for writing what you genuinely feel (lol there I go, putting faith in you!). We may agree, disagree or agree to disagree, but I like it when someone puts forth their genuine thoughts.

Cheers,

JDub

[dragonfire]

Shawnna wrote:

I have little tolerance for b.s., and holier than thou a--holes who manipulate people for their own gratification - period. And it seems as if all of UFOlogy is filled with some form or another of this.

Like I've been saying, I shoulda stuck with golf as a hobby.

To the first part, You go girl

And IMO, many of those are disinfo artists

To the second part, haha golf is just as aggrivating, but at least you blame the club, the ball haha and still be able to swing at some insignificant weed to break the tension. Please just don't throw the club, remember, you paid good money for it And after all, it is just a game

By the way, I suck at it