Rick Ross may of had confirmation bias when making his statement on TZM
Tags: Rick Ross, null, Rickross.com, Monica Pignotti, Cathleen Mann, Steve Hassan, cult expert, cult, cults, scam, rapper, nominate, Rick ross is a scam. He is not a professional as he claims., Rick Ross Debunked [ Add Tags ]
[ Return to Health | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 05, 2012 - 06:36 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Hi and welcome to Skepticproject.com! To anybody that has googled stuff on Rick Ross the self-proclaimed cult expert or clicked a link on Rick Ross flame list, this topic is dedicated towards questioning Rick Ross academic integrity. I have done some consolidating to make it a easier read. If anybody wants to discuss more about this you are welcome to communicate with me via e-mail anytime or if you have more information you would like for me to post towards Rick Ross's academic integrity. cs2012ct at ymail dot com Background music before you read. This song is dedicated to Rick Ross for being butt hurt LULZ Q.Q Carly Simon - You're So Vain XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX As you can see I decided to do some looking in on Rick Ross mainly because in the back of my head I always thought he was a quack it's just as far as I know no one has cared to see if he is besides Scientology, Destinian or some other crazy group. I decide to add a skeptics perspective to examine Rick Ross academic integrity. I would like to have a discussion about Rick Ross and his academic credibility (one of my first posts on the health section of SP). Before we get into that I'd like to start off by saying before you read the topic take a glance at link below. Why I started this topic on Rick Ross academic integrity XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX update 12.25.2013: Do to Rick Ross incompetents lost everything from individual posts, entire threads, archived private messages, membership approvals, posts, basically everything from September 2011 to August 2013. Lost data from September 2011 to August 2013 Made it on Rick Ross flame list site with 2 out of 4 flames! Flame list award! http://www.rickross.com/flamingwebsites.html (no longer works update 8.26.2013 Rick Ross sold RR.com to a gambling company new site to find flame list is. http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html Apparently Rick Ross has done a update on the flame list award on this topic. I have archived the update and have wrote a response to Rick Ross about it. updates to flame list award 1/23/2013 made it on Rick Ross flame list site! 2 flames out of 4! update 3/27/2013 Rick Ross added a update to flame list award update 3/28/2013 update 3/29/2013 update 4/01/2013 update 4/07/2013 Rick Ross archive updating flame list award with screen caps and dates Response to Rick Ross flame list update: 1. My response to Rick ross flamelist update 1/23/2013 2. My response to Rick Ross flamelist update 3/27/2013 3. My response to Rick Ross flamelist update 4/2/2013 4. My response to Rick Ross flamelist update 4/7/2013 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Rick Ross feud with Steve Hassan, The Waco incident, Rick Ross going out of his way to discredit Steve Hassan and Rick Ross is a hypocrite. Rick Ross worked with Steve Hassan (a cult expert who has credentials), but soon Rick Ross deemed Steven Hassan a troll and fell out of touch Because of the way Rick Ross handled the Waco incident that resulted in 74 men, women and children died at Branch Dividian Compound in Waco, TX. 1. Feud between Steve Hassan and Rick Ross. 2. Rick Ross goes out of his way on RR.com to discredit Steve Hassan 3. Rick Ross involvement on Waco incident which resulted in 74 men, women and children died at Branch Dividian Compound in Waco, TX. 4. Just a website page Rick Ross made as a disclaimer about Steve Hassan which basically attack the person than the actually work or arguments made by Steve Hassan. 5. In Rick Ross banter against Steve Hassan the only references he mentions who oppose Steve Hassan are two individuals with credentials who are Monica Pignotti and Cathleen Mann. What are their academic integrity? 6. Rick Ross is upset because he thinks Steve Hassan counseling is to high but when offer was made to buy RR.com Rick says $10,000 was to low. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Court Cases: Attempt to exclude Rick Ross testimony by the defense. (Really good in examining Rick Ross academic integrity) 1. Motion in Limine (No.9) To Exclude Testimony of Rick Ross MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 2. More information on James Arthur Ray court case, Rick Ross being upset about what's in the motion to exclude him in this case, and why Rick Ross is a leech XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX My e-mail correspondence with Rick Ross. A e-mail correspondence between me and Rick Ross, that was pretty vague and unprofessional response by Rick Ross. Rick accused me of plagiarising, at which he could not say, and for being a troll. My e-mail correspondence with Rock Ross XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#1 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 05, 2012 - 17:41 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter More the the feud between Steve Hassan and Rick Ross. Rick Ross and Steve Hassan had worked together up until the Waco incident around 1993. If anybody is unfamiliar with the Waco siege here is a brief abstract about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege " The siege began when the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), accompanied by several members of the media, attempted to execute a search warrant at the Branch Davidian ranch at Mount Carmel, a property located in the city of Elk, Texas [2] 9 miles (14 km) east-northeast of Waco, Texas. On February 28, shortly after the attempt to serve the warrant, an intense gun battle erupted, lasting nearly 2 hours. In this armed exchange, four agents and six Branch Davidians were killed. Upon the ATF's failure to execute the search warrant, a siege was initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The siege ended 50 days later when a fire destroyed the compound when a second assault was launched. 75 people[3] (24 of them British nationals)[4] died in the fire, including more than 20 children, two pregnant women, and the sect leader David Koresh." Steve Hassan attempted to get himself as well as other people involved as he thought even before the horrible tragedy of in Waco occurred, the way the FBI was handling Branch Davidians cult was more like handling a terrorist organization than as a cult. He went to such steps as to write a letter to the president of the United States at the time who is Bill Clinton. Steve in 1994 did a lecture at Harvard University Science Center at which he specifically talks about how poorly the Waco incident was handled by the government. Steve had suggested the Waco incident was done so the FBI could get publicity from it and believes what really happened was covered up. http://tinyurl.com/7dyyn6b
In Steve's lecture he talks about Rick Ross in the Q&A. As he suggests that Rick Ross should of never of been involved in Waco. That he has "no love for Rick" as well as he suggest Rick is limited as to what he can do for cults and that Rick was never really in a cult himself and does not have the mindset that Steve has for cult intervention. http://tinyurl.com/7dyyn6b
Rick's response was to add Steve Hassan to a special section on Rick's site called the flame list. Rick has a flame rating system which goes up to 4, four indicates the worst flame possible on his rating scale 1 flame means not so bad flame. Rick Gave Steve Hassan response toward Rick about the Waco incident a two flame. 2 flames Steve Hassan--Waco Rick Ross responds towards what Steve Hassan said about Rick in his lecture about Waco. Rick has problems with Steve's cost for deprogramming a individual as the problems were raised by a unknown individual who Rick never really says who the individual is nor says shows exactly what this persons concerns are besides money. Rick then states he had to rip two of Steve Hassans books off his website but does not give a logical nor rational reason to do so besides he has a problem with Steve Hassan Critizing his action in Waco as well as he has a problem with how much Steve Hassan charges for deprogramming sessions. http://www.culteducation.com/reference/scientology/Scien47.html#Steven_Hassan
Steve Hassan acknowledges the attacks against him by Rick Ross and explains his perspective on the matter. http://tinyurl.com/6v575jl
Rick Ross responds to Steven Hassan Response about Rick Ross attacks by linking Steve's response in Rick's flame section of the site and giving it a flame rating of 3. http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX In my opinion based on the above Rick Ross is not very professional in a academic sense towards legitimate critics. As Steve Hassan has been able to handle himself professionally without having to result in personal attack towards Rick. Rick is a bit dishonest on the academic level as he has ripped two good books off his website written by Steve Hassan. I find it unprofessional as just because you do not get along with the guy it is certainly not grounds to delete books related to cults because you are still upset at being a critics towards yourself. I find Rick Ross to be juvenile in the academic world as well as academically dishonest. I find Rick Ross work to be riddle with confirmation Bias not just on Steve Hassan but others who he defines as critics towards him as well. I do not think Rick Ross in my opinion should be taken seriously when it pertains to cultic activity or to describe him as a cult expert. In my opinion when it comes to the term "cults" one needs to be a credential/professional training professional in these matters at which Rick Ross lacks credentials/professional training to do so. Rick Ross is playing a very dangerous game that could potentially have very serious negative affects on outsiders as well as people within cult organizations wanting out. It is my recommendation that people stay clear/not take serious of any of Rick Ross advice, academic works, or anything else that pertains to cults made by him. As I will post more on the topic of Rick Ross I have concluded that Rick Ross academic/research often comes in conflict with his emotion at which the out come is as I have shown, led to be confirmation bias. Confirmation bias should have no barring in research let alone in someone's thinking. Just because Rick is upset at Steve Hassan for being a critic toward Rick's work (in Waco), does not mean it invalidates Steve Hassans work nor does it invalidate Rick's work. Rick's active incivility towards Steve Hassan is not going to help his cause as I pointed out it's just going to hurt him more and his credibility in the end. I would recommend that if Rick Ross has a problem with Steve Hassan (at which he does) that he contact Steve directly instead of indirectly like he has done. As Rick actively is going on the attack on a consistent bases unlike Steve Hassan. Anybody want to discuss more about this you are welcome to communicate with me via e-mail anytime. e-mail cs2012ct at ymail dot com Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#2 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
Agent Matt | Posted: Jul 06, 2012 - 13:05 |
| ||||
Genuine American Monster Level: 70 CS Original | You raged at VTV and got banned. Nothing deeper than that bro. This is why you do not respond to VTV. | |||||
#3 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 06, 2012 - 17:02 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Quote from Agent Matt @Agent Matt I'd say VTV has done plenty of raging himself on Rick Ross site. I thought what I wrote I was fairly tame in comparison =P. However rick did not claim to of banished because I was raging anybody but states I was arguing and did copyright infringement on some of his material, at which I completely disagree but at this point I don't care to dispute the matter towards RR.com. I believe Rick got upset because I criticized his work. In the back of my head I've always was skeptical of Rick's work when I come come across it on occasions (from Meurtos blog etc..). I mean I've read some of what Steve Hassan has done and I have to Rick Ross looks like a guy who is basing his work on outdated modules. There is a reason why people update there modules Ross. Just because you often refer to Lifton doesn't mean what Lifton says or models are set in stone or up to date. After doing some quick reading/searches over a few things Rick Ross wrote I do think there is room to raise the question of Rick Ross academic integrity as well as credibility, when it comes to his claim of being a cult expert and therefore will attempt show reasons to raise such a question as I did above. | |||||
#4 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 07, 2012 - 02:12 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Here are some Topics on RR.com where Rick Ross goes out of his way to belittle Steve Hassan's work without any evidence to show why Steve's work is bad. I have posted below forums threads where Mr. Ross talks about Steve towards another member. It will be obvious as I will link to a particular forum thread that the discussion is occurring as well as page number. Abstract: On RR.com Rick Ross says to another user who has questions about Steve Hassans work that "he cannot write well", or "Steve does not do much research". Yet Rick Ross shows zero evidence as to why that is. It's truly despicable how much Rick Ross goes out of his way to bash his old colleague. Of course Rick Ross is not uset this is purely his academic perspective *sarcasm* NEW July 31, 2013: I decided to search for Rick Ross disclaimer at which I search for at first "To whom it may concern: rick ross" which eventually lead to the search being "To whom it may concern: steve hassan rick ross site:forum.rickross.com". I soon come to find out Rick Ross has added his disclaimer, and has copy/pasted this disclaimer on older topics that talk about Steve Hassan, even modifying older posts he made or others made to include the disclaimer. A lot of the posts where Rick puts in the disclaimer have been referenced within this thread Example: Steve Hassan? http://web.archive.org/web/20130731234203/http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?7,111783 was To Other examples of Rick Ross adding May 2013 disclaimer of Steve Hassan: Last post in this topic is April 27, 2005 but RIck feels the need to post on May 10, 2013 a disclaimer to it. http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?6,9834,120382#msg-120382 Rick adds his disclaimer to another persons post by the name of Cosmophilospher... S http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?4,9919 And another... http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?5,6804,8610#msg-8610
Abstract: Rick Ross goes out of his way to complain about Steve Hassan. So what if Steve Hassan wants to charge the rates he does at which Rick neglects to link to anywhere on Steve's as to how much Steve is actually charging. Rick instead says Steve overcharges, then gives specifics to how much Steve charges yet Rick neglects to give specifics as to how much the other councilors charge so one can compare prices.
Abstract: E.P. Grondine mentions Steve Hassan in RR.com TZM cult thread at which Rick Ross immediately posts after E.P. Grondine post basically saying it's not a convincing argument. Two pages over on Page 16 of the TZM cult thread Rick puts his verdict down. I believe there is room for discussion that Rick Ross confirmation Bias towards the mention of Steve Hassan may have led to the verdict he made on Page 16. As I myself am on the boat that there isn't enough academic evidence to really say if groups on the internet can be cult; I do believe based on past forum thread that Rick Ross may have said TZM is not a cult based on .P. Grondine mentioned Steve Hassan work within his post. Merly mentioning Steve Hassan works gets Rick Ross relied up to the extent hat I believe he would make such unprofessional decisions. This would also support Rick Ross lack of academic integrity and how he should not be taken seriously as a cult expert in a academic sense.
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY So far You see Mr. Ross going out of his way to say that Steve's writing style and research is no good, that Steve charges to much for his deprogramming sessions, suggesting Steve Hassan writes books because he's "largely an ego-driven self-promotional book that offers very little substance.", Steve's books do not sell well (no proof) etc.... Clearly Mr. Ross goes out of his way to belittle Steve Hassans work without putting any real legit criticism with substance down. I will be posting up more supporting material on Mr. Ross lack academic integrity and in return lacks credibility in a academic sense. Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#5 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 08, 2012 - 15:16 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | I don't mean to get off topic but for Rick Ross or anybody on RR.com. In response to VTV and my prediction about him talking about this topic on RR.com to justify what he does. http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,97823,page=25
I'd like to note that I predicted on SP FB (which is private) VTV would try to use what I said about Rick Ross as some sort of justification as to what he is doing. First of all this has nothing to do with VTV, this is a separate issue as I often call out quakes (banished or nto banished off there site EX: David Ike reptilians) on SP besides Rick Ross himself. I'm sure by now Rick Ross is use to it so what I'm doing is nothing new. At that I have from the start known about the TZM cult discussion on RR.com and did not insert myself in the conversation mainly because I usually do not. However based on my own research after Meurtos first mentioned RR.com I found Rick Ross to be a pseudointellectual but had no incentive before to do the work to examine the integrity of what Mr. Ross does. I have read some of the works of Steve Hassan and find him to be up to date on his research, and have better explanations of what may happening within a persons mind whose in a cult but more importantly what is going on in the mind of the cult leader themselves as they are victims themselves as well. Another point the position I take on Rick Ross is a very unpopular position to take as I am also a author on James Kush site as well and as far as I know many support what Rick does. I actually made sure this thread was appropriate to post on the SP site so I asked a few people there thoughts some said they didn't really like what Rick Ross does and therefore that gave me more of a incentive to write this topic. Again VTV this has nothing to do with you. In no wher ein this thread does it invovle you, and in no rational sense can you use this thread against me as some sort of justification based on what I said above. A post I made on SP FB of the prediction I made that VTV may try to use the material I wrote about Rick Ross question him on his academic integrity for the justification of what he does. People from Sp can collaborate what I wrote because VTV is that manipulative to say I never made the prediction that he would do this. VTV is again a narcissistic manipulator. Here's the important segment that VTV would mention my post I wrote about Rick on SP that VTV may try to contact Rick about what I wrote about him "(I also assume show Rick my thread I wrote about Rick on SP)". Here's more on Rick Ross site a article about people like VTV who are what I'd define as manipulative people and the techniques they often use to confuse and control people http://www.culteducation.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing11.html . I'd define VTV as using Covert-Aggression tactics.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX I also want to note that VTV lies and I can actually point out an example on Rick Ross site. VTV said that Rick Ross agree to be on VTV radio show at which Rick Ross states he did not but acknowledges VTV contacted him. VTV often uses such tactics to get people onto his radio show. Example being when people like Stefan Molnex (spelling), stormcloudgather, charlie veitch disagree with him he got his hoard of TZM members to spam there channels and convince them to go onto his web show. VTV MO is attempting to intimidate people to eventually go onto his radio show to gain publicity. This is one of many examples of how VTV lies, manipulates, twists information to his benefit. http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,97823,page=4
Just because I disagree with Rick Ross doesn't mean his work does not have any validity however just like corboy examines me or Rick Ross examines people/groups I have the right to do so on my grounds as well. I do not dispute the banishment by Rick Ross, Rick can do as he pleases as well as I can. I am however questioning Rick Ross academic integrity which I have always questions but never disputed until I got incentive after the e-mail exchange we had. Which the e-mail exchange confirmed to me the type of professionalism Rick Ross has not just towards handling critics but reflects more so on how he handles his work and being labeled a "cult expert" as well in a academic sense. I knew Rick was not fond of Steve Hassan however I never knew why until now which again reaffirms one to question Rick Ross academic integrity. Yes I am a troll as I'm a academic troll. | |||||
#6 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 22, 2013 - 23:44 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Someone informed me by e-mail I made it on Rick Ross flame awards list! I actually had more to add to this topic but I kept it off mainly because I feel I provided enough information and Rick Ross is by far pretty unprofessional in academic sense. To be honest I think Steve Hassan makes some good points about Rick Ross and what he doing is very dangerous. I personally as Rick suggest have "sour grapes" towards Rick Ross as if I did I'd also would have to have sour grapes with Alex Jones, David Ike and any other crank I write about on SP, to me Rick is a drop in the big crank bucket. To me Rick Ross is just what we call nowadays a gimmick expert a person with no credentials but jumps at the chance to go on TV. I don't know the guy however in a academic sense I suppose I do because Rick is simply in short wrong however Rick has the right to ban me off his site I have no problem with that and I actually support it, however I have the right to examine Rick Ross academic integrity based on my very short and mainly indirect dealings with him as well as evaluating other experiences as well. This is after all why this site was made and what we do on SP. In a few minutes from now I will post some information I neglected to add to this topic mainly because Mr.Ross has added me on the flame list site therefore more hits, more views, more reads. so why not? I think Mr. Ross is being overly sensitive to a honest critic of what he does but it's nothing new in the world of cranks and medical woo where there often on the attack rather than proving there critics wrong. Speaking about sour grapes though I think Mr Ricky gots some sour grapes towards Steve Hassan, and Rick I got no love for you either braa. http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html Skeptic Project -- "Cointelpro infiltration source" Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#7 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 23, 2013 - 03:28 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Rick Ross bankrupts Cult awareness network using cult deprogramming tactics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprogramming Deprogramming is an attempt to force a person to abandon allegiance to a religious, political, economic, or social group.[1][2] Methods and practices may involve kidnapping and coercion.[3] The person in question is taken against his/her will, which has led to controversies over freedom of religion, kidnapping and civil rights, as well as the violence which is sometimes involved.Deprogramming is an attempt to force a person to abandon allegiance to a religious, political, economic, or social group.[1][2] Methods and practices may involve kidnapping and coercion.[3] The person in question is taken against his/her will, which has led to controversies over freedom of religion, kidnapping and civil rights, as well as the violence which is sometimes involved. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprogramming During the 1990s, deprogrammer Rick Ross was sued by Jason Scott, a former member of a Pentecostal group called the Life Tabernacle Church, after an unsuccessful deprogramming attempt. In 1995, the jury awarded Scott $875,000 in compensatory damages and $2,500,000 in punitive damages against Ross, which were later settled for $5,000 and 200 hours of services. More significantly, the jury also found that the leading anti-cult group known as the Cult Awareness Network was a co-conspirator in the crime and fined CAN $1,000,000 in punitive damages, forcing the group into bankruptcy.[16] This case is often seen as effectively closing the door on the practice of involuntary deprogramming in the United States. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX I enjoyed reading this. Rick Ross credentials are in question in a case called "State of Arizona v. James Arthur Ray" . It's really a good read but the part I really enjoyed is the Rick Ross institute which isn't that professional as it sounds as you will read. His main professional activity is serving as "Executive Director" of the "Ross Institute," an entity with no employees other than Ross and no physical offices, and with "board members" consisting of two acquaintances and his brother. Ross's "work" at the "Institute" involves archiving news stories related to groups that, in his view, constitute cults or controversial groups or movements. "Rick Ross later had his credentials questioned in 2011 in the case of " State of Arizona v. James Arthur Ray, Case No. V1300CR201080049, Defendant James Arthur Ray's Motion in Limine (No.9) To Exclude Testimony of Rick Ross" credentials as a witness and his criminal record were questioned by the defendant.[28]" http://www.scribd.com/doc/53037268/State-of-Arizona-v-James-Arthur-Ray-Case-No-V1300CR201080049-Defendant-James-Arthur-Ray%E2%80%99s-Motion-in-Limine-No-9-To-Exclude-Testimony-of-Rick-Ros mirror http://archive.org/details/MotionToExcludeTestimonyOfRickRoss-StateOfArizonaV.JamesArtherRay mirror http://wikisource.org/wiki/State_of_Arizona_v._James_Arthur_Ray,_Case_No._V1300CR201080049,_Defendant_James_Arthur_Ray%E2%80%99s_Motion_in_Limine_(No.9)_To_Exclude_Testimony_of_Rick_Ross
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX More on Rick Ross case " State of Arizona v. James Arthur Ray, Case No. V1300CR201080049, Defendant James Arthur Ray's Response to State's Motion in Limine re: Witness Rick Ross" http://www.scribd.com/doc/53037279/State-of-Arizona-v-James-Arthur-Ray-Case-No-V1300CR201080049-Defendant-James-Arthur-Ray%E2%80%99s-Response-to-State%E2%80%99s-Motion-in-Limine-re-Witness-Rick-Ros mirror http://wikisource.org/wiki/State_of_Arizona_v._James_Arthur_Ray,_Case_No._V1300CR201080049,_Defendant_James_Arthur_Ray's_Response_to_State's_Motion_in_Limine_re:_Witness_Rick_Ross http://archive.org/details/ResponseToMotionToExcludeTestimonyOfRickRoss-StateOfArizonV.James
Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#8 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 10:47 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | Looks to me like Rick Ross is spitting his dummy out when someone questions his authority on the topic of cults. I would probably say his banning of you would likely be in accordance with his rules on the forum, and can be shown to be legitimate, however I also think the real agenda for him banning you has more to do with the fact his authority on the subject of cults is at stake if he lets you continue to rampage on his forum. Chances are once you started to show exactly why he is unprofessionally qualified to discuss cults, and how his history regarding cults has created a path of legal destruction against himself and the groups he represented, he would have been in a very bad position on his own website. Although I have to admit I don't frequent his website so maybe all this material has already been discussed in depth by critics on his forum ? Anyway, I have to agree that he has no medical or professional qualifications to warrant being considered an expert on the subject. If I wanted cult information I would turn to professional doctors and scholars research on the subjects before I went to a layman like him. | |||||
#9 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 13:32 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | @anticultist Sure Rick can bannish people because it's his stuff and he can do as he pleases on his communication mediums. I have nothing against Rick I don't know him, but based on my correspondence with the guy I think he's a bit overly sensitive which makes him do and think in crazy ways. The fact Rick would barr Steve Hasaan's material off his site because he got upset over one situation with Steve says enough about Rick's mentality, credibility, and academic integrity. Even if Rick does not like Steve, if Steve produces good work you should not pretend he never existed that's just plan dishonest on a academic level. For sure Rick can do that but that doesn't put Rick in a good light. If you read through my short e-mail correspondence with Rick at first Rick was upset because he claimed I was argumentative which to an extent yes but in comparison to everybody else I wasn't as bad as them on this thread and my intent was to has a discussion not be argumentative. The material I ripped on Trumpet Gods of Calling was copywrited which it was not on the site rules matter in fact I proved that based on RR.cm site rules each author who posts on the site owns there own posts and the site isn't responsible for what a individual author says on there site. In this situation on RR.com I simply wanted to put my thoughts up on TVP but it progressed into why I don't think internet cults exists on the internet do to the bases there isn't enough academic studies done, which Rick said he has done showed me the study, and then I said that one and only small relevant paragraph within the study doesn't really answer my question (published in I think a Chinese academic journal I never even heard of mind you). Corboy (Rick Ross modd) stepped in and suggested I think internet cults exists and showed a old OWS link where I called TZM a cult at which I showed them a link where I reconsidered my thoughts on internet cults. At that I attempted to have discourse on what academic material would need to be made/looked into more about internet cults. At which they tell me to research more at which I have mainly on Steve Hassan's work and various other websites and academic journals. I began to show them a website on how to prove there claims properly and suggested they follow that. Rick has a tendency almost all the time to throw down anecdotal evidence as fact from the things I did read about him. Although anecdotal evidence is ok it's not great and should never be pushed as fact that's only just the start in a more detailed quantitative work later on. Anyways that's when he got upset and banished me without telling me I was banished, at which I started a e-mail correspondence and found out I was banished. Usually when Rick banishes people lets say a cult advocate off his site he informs the site members that he banishes them in my case he did not. I actually was trying to have a academic discourse in the end with Rick but apparently that didn't happen. I do not perceive my actions as being rude or anything just merely questioning the way he goes about things in a academic sense at which I think he got upset because Rick is overly sensitive about such subjects. In my opinion I do not think I was banished on the bases because I violated rules as I wasn't as bad as anyone else in that topic I think it was mainly because I did not agree with Rick on internet cults, then proceeded to say his academic evidence he made is no good, then tried to help him with how to make and present better academic evidence because I also have a interest in studying potential internet cults as well and would appreciate a proper study on this subject. In this case if being a troll at that a academic troll means suggesting ways a person can produce more serious academic works on this subject then so be it. I'm not affiliated with a cult (as far as I know), as I'm just a regular person who has an opinion who knows what good academic studies look like. The academic journals I did read that Rick made are nice anecdotal pieces published on obscure (published in Chinese journals) so called academic journals but there not academic studies one bit from the ones I read. Rick needs a better understanding of how to write a proper academic studies. hat's just a drop in the bucket as to Rick's problems though (a major one but just a drop). All this aside in my opinion I think Rick should leave it to the medical professionals when it comes to cults and would strongly urge the guy the step down from the field of being a cult pseudo experts, what Rick is doing is dangerous. I have some more information I'll post up later as to why I have a problem with what Rick does. I looked into what other cult experts have done so I have a more rounded perspective on what should and shouldn't be doing. Reference Rick claims I ripped copyright material off his site from the Trumpet call of God thread. http://other.skepticproject.com/forum/5360/learning-more-about-internet-based-cults/ | |||||
#10 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 17:33 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | I did read your posts, a bit long winded though to be honest with you, but I understood your points. In all honesty to this subject of Rick Ross, he would never get any attention from me, so this post is probably the only time I have ever even considered he might have something interesting to say about cults. He pretty much goes under the radar when it comes to people who have expertise on the topic, his name is attributed to not a single academic article or journal about the subject of cults, so we are merely talking about an internet guru who holds no credible value to anyone who researches the topic. | |||||
#11 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 17:53 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | Look at the comparison of his site compared to james randi's website and forum: RickRoss.com and forum traffic http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/rickross.com# James Randi.org and forum traffic http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/randi.org Randi has been a source of information in the same way Rick Ross has and Randi covers everything and more than Ross does. | |||||
#12 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 18:51 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | @anticultist I'd agree with that. I can be long winded at times as I am attempting to either be thorough or explain things in different ways to get a point or points across. To me I do not believe Rick nor his mods understood how to do good research or evaluate good research papers. It may be a unfortunate (or for some fortunate) cause of being thorough means being long and boring sometimes as well. Anticultist are you a member on the James Rhandi site? Also on the topic of crank therapists I found it interesting that Jacque Fresco for a time was trying to be a private therapists for a time similar to what Rick Ross is doing but apparently dropped out do to the American Psychological Association complaining about him. That would be interesting to find out what the APA specifically complained about towards Fresco also wondered if they have endorsed Rick Ross or have given Rick Ross some honorary title for his work in cults (or if any credible organization gave Rick and honorary titles) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco#Midlife Really old news article on Fresco and his project called Project Americana http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=OAxgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UOkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1604%2C4941153
| |||||
#13 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Jan 24, 2013 - 19:36 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | I am not a member of randi's forum, but I read it. Yeah I think that is why Fresco likes people to pay to see him, he can use his manipulation techniques on them face to face. He can't use them in a therapeutic sense without getting into legal problems, but using them in his 'research centre' environment he can use all the tricks in the book to inculcate people and get them to support him financially. Have you heard of any casualties from Rick Ross's de-programming conduct after he was taken to court and found guilty ? Or has he ceased acting on the information, and just runs that website ? | |||||
#14 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 25, 2013 - 12:12 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter @anticultist I do not believe he has stopped deprogramming after he got sued for millions for attempting to deprogram a person forcefully. I do believe Rick has continued to do deprogramming techniques claiming to have a 75% success rate but I assume he's more careful on how he implements it, but typically means some are being involuntary restrained/detained and subjected to a counselling sessions against there will. I will look more into if there have been any more deprogramming session or things that went awry with Rick Ross and the people he attempts to deprogram. Deprogramming itself is said to do more harm than good. There is also a chance a individual will relapse as well. New methods such a exit counseling are way better and less dramatic. Exit counseling is much like a counseling session where the person being counseled can leave anytime they want too.
We could also talk about a big incident which was the WACO incident where Steve Hassan suggest that Rick could of influenced the FBI at the time to avoid forcefully raiding the compound, instead Rick actually supported there action. Steve Hassan (out of the country during the time) actually thinks it could of ended with zero deaths as 74 men, women and children died at Branch Dividian Compound in Waco, TX. I'm surprised the WACO incident Rick was involved in wasn't used in the 2011 court case (Then it probably wasn't neatly compiled like I have done in one spot). If I was a judge and saw this Rick Ross would never give his expert testimony in my court as well as I'd make sure other courts know. This is no longer about questioning a persons credibility when lives are lost this is much more serious than that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
| |||||
#15 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jan 29, 2013 - 17:28 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter In Rick Ross banter against Steve Hassan the only references he mentions who oppose Steve Hassan are two individuals with credentials who are Monica Pignotti (masters in social work, PHD in social work from Florida) and Cathleen Mann (PHD in psychology university unknown). Praise and reference of Rick Ross for Monica and Mann
Picture of Monia Pignotti When I go looking into these two ladies first I find out that Monica Pignotti is a complete nut bag as she was previously in two cults the first cult is Scientology from 1970 to 1976. She was also into Thought Field Therapy and its advanced version Voice Technology which in short thought field therapy is " it can heal a variety of mental and physical ailments through specialized "tapping" with the fingers at meridian points on the upper body and hands.". She was in TFT until around 2004. She was apparently with a fringe group whose leaders are Larry Sarner and Linda Rosa, who attacks therapists who help orphans. On top of all of this insanity she's fat, never been married with no child, and FUGLY. Lets not forget her background is in social work at which isn't that hard to become a social worker and it short the job mostly involves helping either disturbed, low income, drug addicts into integrate into society better. This by no means she is really qualified to be a cult expert or help cult members based on her credentials. That means any input on Steve Hassan's practices are null and void and are not of expert opinion, however integrating disturbed people back into society is what she would be a expert and credentials into talking about. Monica worked with Steve Hassan for a bit, she first developed a problem with Steve Hassan over allowing of a individual by the name of Dennis Erlich of allowing access to a server list. The server list that is referred is much like RR.com'swas a way of recording cults and other information on website. Monica got so upset that she eventually left the group because of Denniss as well as got upset with Rick for not doing anything to Dennis when requested. After dissociating herself from Steve in 2009, she goes across the internet in a one person active campaign against Steve Hassan. On wikipedia under the name MonicaPignotti she can be seen on Steve Hassan's wikipedia history page editing things on Steve Hassan Wikipedia. I do not see Monica editing things on anybody elses including Rick Ross wikipedia page yet she's clearly focused on this one and only person to the extent of it no longer within her own communication mediums but on other realms outside (on a consistent bases) to the extent of an obsession. Wikipedia history where MonicaPignotti is the main contributor too. At that if you google Monica Pignotti there are literally hundreds of sites about her. The first few you hit are made by her and it just gets a bit insane how much she tries to attempt to do damage control on her imagine. To the extent that she will go on a website that talks bad about her almost all the time. The fact that Rick Ross refers to her site as some type of expert opinion is academically wrong. She's not a expert as far as judging a way a person practice she has a opinion but not a expert. At that I have not found 1 academic journal that Monica has written besides on Thought Field Therapy. Why would Rick Ross brag about such insanity? Maybe because she has the qualification he doesn't have. How pathetic he would do such a thing. She doesn't even have the specifics credentials that would validate her criticism towards Steve Hassan in academic terms. Monica Pignotti is upset because Steve wouldn't discipline one person and now she's on a greifers campaign because of it. Pathetic.... Reference: http://practitionersofquackery.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/is-there-hope-for-monica-pignotti/ http://blinkercat.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/monica-pignotti-nine-lives-in-scientology/ The Thought Field Therapy (TFT) Trauma Relief Tapping Algorithm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlwUdtbT4uU Thought Field Therapy TFT Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?8,35015 Thought Field Therapy: A Former Insider's Experience http://rsw.sagepub.com/content/17/3/392.full.pdf+html Steve Hassan Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steven_Hassan&action=history Monica Pignotti And Robert Irvingson: Shills For Morford! http://www.usenetmessages.com/view.php?c=other&g=6323&id=478494&p=0 Monica's main website http://site.monicapignotti.net/ Monica Pignotti Wrecks a Home http://www.cookingjunkies.com/rec-food-cooking/monica-pignotti-wrecks-home-43466.html Recipes for Sour Grapes? http://www.foodbanter.com/general-cooking/405660-re-recipes-sour-grapes.html Cathleen Mann Responds to Dennis Erlich, correcting his Lies about Monica Pignotti https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/alt.religion.scientology/vLOQ4Ygwsso/9gN2YqLfZv4J Onto Cathleen Mann who is another nut bar that was actually hard to find any information about just by googling. She apparently was in a cult called Church Universal and Triumphant (CUT) for two years. More information on Cathleen Mann Cut cult experience. http://irr.org/former-member-describes-cut-abuses My Nine Lives in Scientology http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/pignotti/ Onto Cathleen Mann who is another nut bar that was actually hard to find any information about just by googling, to the extent I can't find any experience on a academic level of her writing a academic journal or counseling anybody who were in a cult. She apparently was in a cult called Church Universal and Triumphant (CUT) for two years. More information on Cathleen Mann CUT cult involvement http://irr.org/former-member-describes-cut-abuses
Picture of Cathleen Mann (Assuming picture taken in the 1970's) I googled Cathleen Mann and tried to find any book, video, audio on her. Surprisingly I could only find 1 audio and 1 thing on a website on a review about Steve Hassan. She's virtually unknown otherwise on the cult arena. There is zero reference to what she contributes to the study of cults besides mindless banter that she's against Steve Hassan. Again everything aside she's fat, never been married with no child, old, and FUGLY. She also got upset at Steve Hassan for not regulating the infighting happen on the list server between Monica and Dennis so she deleted the list server and left Steve Hassan group in 2009. She was pretty much silent about it talking through Monica about what happen until she wrote a review on Rick Ross site about Steve Hassan's recently released book called " Freedom of Mind: Helping Loved Ones Leave Controlling People, Cults, and Beliefs,", at which I did not read the newest book by Steve Hassan but I did read the review by Cathleen Mann and I'd say 95% of it was an attack on a person rather than on the work and attempting to pass that off as academic critique which rather than add credibility it hurts her credibility at which she speaks upon. Reference: A Former Member Describes CUT Abuses http://irr.org/former-member-describes-cut-abuses The Psychology of Violence Dr. Cathleen Mann - NPTR 31 http://www.blogtalkradio.com/national-progressive-talk-radio/2013/01/07/the-psychology-of-violence-dr-cathleen-mann--nptr-31 Cathleen Mann Responds to Dennis Erlich, correcting his Lies about Monica Pignotti https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/alt.religion.scientology/vLOQ4Ygwsso/9gN2YqLfZv4J Third installment of Steven Hassan's trilogy adds little understanding http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2444 Steven Hassan's new book -- critical review by psychologist http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,114193,page=1 Cathleen Mann main website http://psyris.com/cultspecialist Conclusion: If a person googles Monica Pignotti, or Cathleen Mann, they cold probably find other problems with these people as well at which post them up here in this thread. I find Rick Ross toting these two people around that have very obvious confirmation bias as some type of reason to discredit Steve Hassan, as well as makes Rick look more legitimate very laughable (Rick lacks any credentials). There to crazy/emotional and obsessed with Steve Hassan to really examine his work without attacking the person. In short there completely unprofessional when speaking professionally in a academic sense in there fields of study when it comes to Steve Hassan. They attack Steve Hassan not because he's right or wrong on a academic or other level they simply attack the guy because they has one bad experience with the guy. To note here is Steve Hassan is a class act as he does not actively go after Rick, Monica or Cathleen, which also show's you the professionalism with the guy. His work and integrity speaks for itself. I'm blown back at Monica and Cathleeens insanity spread across the internet it's again simply mind blowing insane I'd never refer nor take these two seriously in a academic sense. I'd actually be ok with these two if they were not speaking from a professional level but just talk just to talk, but since they constantly talk (almost all the time) on the professional level in there insane rants I have to call them out on there crap. I feel sorry for anybody that has to deal with the baggage these two bring on a professional level. Nice try to Rick Ross and trying to make these two be perceived as professional. This again also speak volumes about Rick Ross integrity. As Rick Ross has said to of ripped all material off RR.com of Steve Hassan, yet the very guy that discredits and barrs Steve Hassan Material is the very person who posts a topic up about a very negative review on Steve Hassan newest book called "Freedom of Mind", that focuses more on the person than on the material within the book. Rick Ross has reveals how butt hurt he is with Steve Hassan because he is successful and how bad he wishes to discredit him which only really discredits Rick Ross when you fully understand why Rick Ross goes after Steve Hassan so much.(http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,114193,page=1) . I doubt Rick Ross has read the newest book Steve Hassan has wrote though, I mean why would he buy a book/give money to Steve Hassan the man at which is barred from rr.com. The fact he didn't even read the book but is posting up a review of a book from a author who is banned off RR.com (http://www.culteducation.com/reference/scientology/Scien47.html#Steven_Hassan) would suggest Ricky has an agenda and will at any cost discredit Steve Hassan not on a academic level but in any way shape possible. Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#16 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 26, 2013 - 22:23 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Rick Ross wrote a update on the flame site about my topic on here! Was To http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html
In response to the update I will say that rick's obviously got some love for me. Rick's updated response: "James Arthur Ray, who was convicted of negligent homicide concerning three deaths" Thank you for the information and I knew this already however this isn't about what this topic is about, as this topic is about questioning your academic integrated we know the crimes of this man however I'm not examining him. Just because you among others are putting this person away however has no correlation to the material at which questions your academic integrity within a field you self-proclaim authority over with zero credentials backing you up, within this already controversial field. The case which motioned to exclude testimony from Rick Ross, the motion at least from what I read in the document was very professionally done, it contained truthful information that is referenced, that I otherwise would of not of known about. I mean Ricky would you contest that this information is false, as it basically demeans you and your Rick Ross institute in exposing it for what it is, which is a far cry from being real board or a board with any real purpose besides saying you have a board. "His main professional activity is serving as "Executive Director" of the "Ross Institute," an entity with no employees other than Ross and no physical offices, and with "board members" consisting of two acquaintances and his brother. Ross's "work" at the "Institute" involves archiving news stories related to groups that, in his view, constitute cults or controversial groups or movements." or this among a number of other problem with Rick Ross's credibility. "As he stated in his interview with Mr. Ray's attorneys on January 21, 2011, this "recognition" refers mainly to his media appearances, which fill over half of his 9-page CV. Ross has no college degree and no graduate degree. He has taken no college classes on psychology, medicine, group dynamics, sociology, or therapy, and has no training in any mental health field." or Rick's participation in abducting individuals against there will. "In upholding a punitive damages award against Ross of $2.5 million dollars, the district court judge noted that Ross "actively participated in the plan to abduct Mr. Scott, restrain him with handcuffs and duct tape, and hold him involuntarily while demeaning his religious beliefs," and that "[a] large award of punitive damages [was] also necessary" for "recidivism and mitigation" purposes, since "Mr. Ross himself testified that he had acted similarly in the past and would continue to conduct `deprogrammings' in the future."" Rick if you can refute anything within this court motion about you or your institute that reduced your credibility, I will gladly post them up here as well. If you can refute anything in this topic or will be in this topic that would be great. So maybe you should try and prove me wrong about your credibility because right now your doing anything but that. Rick you look more and more like a crank therapist than a qualified one. As I'm reading your resume I can literally compare it to other quacks and cranks, such as Jacque Fresco. Jacque Fresco resume (Fresco in the 1950's promoted himself as having a PHD in philosophy until it was exposed that it was from a unaccredited college. Also Fresco practiced as a crank therapist until American Psychological Association complained about him. fresco has zero credentials like Rick Ross.) http://www.thevenusproject.com/en/jacque-fresco/resume Rick's Resume (Rick also has zero credentials but selfproclaims himself as a cult expert.) http://www.culteducation.com/cv.html "Ray's lawyers sought to have me disqualified as an expert. but I was qualified despite their effort. ." Why mention I'm guessing another court case that happened in Feb, 28, 2001, where the court accepted your testimony, how does that have any barring in the 2011 court case? At that in the 2011 court case, I never disputed the courts accepting your testimony or not, at which you invented that I had some type of dispute with. If I dispute anything it's your academic integrity, at which giving testimony inside a court (which in the legal system anybody can give testimony) does not mean you are credible as a cult expert. However from what is said on your site that article is dated on February 28, 2001, this case started in 2011 so I do not see the relevance of a previous case where you have given testimony in 2001 to this case at which you are giving testimony in 2011. http://www.culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/jamesarthur64.html Group expert can testify in Ariz. sweat lodge case I will add some more information that questions Rick Ross's academic integrity in time that I had decided not put up unless he responded to this topic which he clearly did. Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#17 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
JimJesus | Posted: Mar 26, 2013 - 22:32 |
| ||||
Bacon Pancakes! Making Bacon Pancakes, take some Bacon and I'll put it in a Pancake! Bacon Pancakes that's what it's gonna make...Bacon Pancaaaaaake!! ♪ Level: 3 | So because they're one thread on a forum of a site: it's a Rick Ross flaming site. Seems legit. Unrelated: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQZmCJUSC6g | |||||
#18 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 27, 2013 - 10:03 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | "So because they're one thread on a forum of a site: it's a Rick Ross flaming site." I've seen this time and time again with cranks. Rick's going into crank defensive mode. | |||||
#19 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
CyborgJesus | Posted: Mar 27, 2013 - 14:15 |
| ||||
Level: 6 CS Original | Did any of you follow the JAR trial? I remember watching parts of the stream, but I don't think I caught Ross' testimony. | |||||
#20 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
anticultist | Posted: Mar 27, 2013 - 16:29 |
| ||||
Brainwashing you for money Level: 15 CS Original | All I am seeing from Rick Ross is BUTT HURT. | |||||
#21 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 29, 2013 - 03:40 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter @anticultist of course he is he should be, he's embarrassed about it to the extent that Rick does not even link to the documents on the page dedicated to James Arthur Ray about the motion to exclude Rick's testimony (Rick your welcome to post that information up, I got it here for you). Here check it out I cannot find documents that motion to exclude Rick Ross's testimony on RR.com but I do find documents to include Rick Ross testimony on rr.com site (reading it now). http://www.culteducation.com/groups/jamesarthur.html I think the defense lawyers did a great job in attempting to exclude Rick Ross testimony. The motion to exclude Rick Ross's testimony was so thorough. Smart move to convince client JAR to allow the defense team to try and exclude Rick Ross testimony on the bases that he's a crank with no credentials. I was even more surprised that one of the area lawyers who is Thomas K. Kelly had a background in science as he graduated with a degree in chemistry/zoology and for a time taught science ( http://kellydefense.com/personnel/thomas-k-kelly-certified-specialist-criminal-law/ ). States Response to Defendant's Motion In Limine No. 9 To Exclude the Testimony of Rick Ross http://www.culteducation.com/reference/jamesarthur/02-08-2011-RESPONSE-TO-MOTION2.pdf @CyborgJesus " Did any of you follow the JAR trial? I remember watching parts of the stream, but I don't think I caught Ross' testimony." Checkout the youtube 10 minute court case Arizona v. James Arthur Ray in 10 Minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMFMWd6dTQs I watched it to, I couldn't find anything on Rick's given testimony on the case though I did read something on wayback.com; which maybe the reason why we can't find Rick's testimony to the jury in this case. Rick is correct that he did qualify by the court to give testimony but the prosecution never called Rick to give testimony as the defense was prepared to discredit Rick's credentials with the information they had which would of ultimately of hurt the prosecutions case. I understand why Rick would be so upset (if anybody finds anything on Rick's testimony post it up). Here's what it says on wayback. " Rick Ross credentials as a witness and criminal record were questioned in the case State of Arizona V. James Arthur Ray. The Court ruled that Rick Ross could testify, but the prosecution in the end didn't call him as a witness (undoubtedly because he would not have been credible given what the defense was prepared to put in front of the jury about Ross lack of education and criminal background)." My thoughts on JAR is that he preaches "The Law of Attraction" on tv, so he preaches woo medicine, is a self-proclaimed guru, into new age woo, and also scams people out of money. When watching and reading up on the trial I do not believe JAR intent was to murder anybody but people did die on his watch. JAR seemed a bit delusional as well with some of the practices he did in the sweat lodge such as claims that he allowed members to defecate within the sweat lodge etc... He got two years in prison for negligent homicide for the 3 individuals who died of heat stroke, and is said to be out of prison this coming April 2013, or October 2013. I wonder how law of attraction is working out for him in prison lol... The sweat lodge at which members of the JAR seminar were attending is basically a big tarp tent that contained around 60 people and that had heated rocks in the middle to heat the tent up. Talking with my friends who do this stuff, these sweat lodges are suppose to be like American Indian woo sweat lodges where apparently individuals will see their spirit animal. The problem with JAR's sweat lodge is that he and the members are just doing something really extreme on the last day in a 5 day seminar which is where they stay in the sweat lodge for long periods of time to where the body cannot naturally adapt to such extreme temperatures to the extent that 3 people died. Ray made the members sign a waver which states that this seminar is intense and JAR is not negligible for things that happen within the seminar; In my opinion I do believe Ray is still responsible for individuals within the JAR seminar well being and this particular incident could have been prevented and lives could have been saved. As this court case was live on tv, any involvement with Rick Ross to this case was purely to be a gimmick expert. As James has been on Oprah and The Today Show pitching his stuff on there so he's gotten some media attention that Rick Ross wants to attach that type of publicity and success to himself, like a leech. Reference: "The Secret" on Oprah http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLMvtzJTKss&t=7m48s The Secret FULL MOVIE Law Of Attraction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6pDdHxARkc&t=32m43s A win for James Ray in court http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR1DJlsUO8o Arizona v. James Arthur Ray in 10 Minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMFMWd6dTQs Wayback exclude Rick Ross testimony http://archive.org/details/ResponseToMotionToExcludeTestimonyOfRickRoss-StateOfArizonV.James Undue influence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undue_influence The dangers of gurus & The Secret - 2 years prison James Ray 3 deaths - Patrick Wanis PhD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvMyoFLdQQ0 Sweat Lodge Trial Defense Gets a Doctor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2FKUNCYVTg&list=PLFC6F4AFCCE52E78F http://jamesray.com/ Negligent homicide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligent_homicide Negligent homicide is a criminal charge brought against people who, through criminal negligence, allow others to die. James Arthur Ray http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Arthur_Ray jamesray.com main site http://jamesray.com/docs/ Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#22 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 30, 2013 - 05:24 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter update: 1/23/2013 made it on Rick Ross flame list site! 2 flames out of 4! update 3/27/2013 Rick Ross added a update to my slame site aware. http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html 1/23/2013 From Skeptic Project -- "Cointelpro infiltration source" 3/27/2013 To To 3/28/2013 To 3/29/2013 update To 4/1/2013 update To 4/7/2013 update (Update is based on my recommendations posted within this thread. Rick changed a few words in the second paragraph in the first sentence which is "cut and paste" to "copy and paste" and added "seemingly forever" in the place of "ever". ) My response to Rick ross flamelist 1/23/2013 http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-09212bce My response to Rick ross flamelist 3/27/2013 http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-db5dcff9 My response to Rick Ross flamelist update 4/2/2013 http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-95b9f52b My response to Rick Ross flamelist update 4/7/2013 http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-502b7d36 Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#23 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 30, 2013 - 05:58 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Now onto my e-mail exchange with Rick Ross. I want to note that in the exchange with Rick Ross I did not send him the the last e-mail (down below) where I go into Steven Hassan/copyright information/question his academic integrity/; as I would like to have a discussion about this on SP site before I send off that last message to Rick. A brief abstract of the e-mail exchange is that Rick says I'm a troll (he is correct i am a academic troll), claims I was argumentative on RR.com (disagreed with him), and had lifted/copyrighted material on the TCOG thread of Sp off of RR.com site TCOG thread (he never came out right and said it but he did say I had copyright of something on his site). I told Rick I didn't want to be unbanned and I attempted to work with him as I would of ripped down the copyrighted material down SP site if it was the TCOG material he was talking about. I would also like to say to check out the reference list at the end of the e-mail. AT that check out the stuff Rick Ross says on his site about Steve Hassan (use to work with Rick Ross, has credentials) as on a academic level Rick Ross actively deters individuals from reading his material. I will hit up more on the feud between Rick Ross and Steve Hassan in the next post. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX E-mail exchange with Rick Ross. Requesting to know why I was banished off of RR.com 2012_CT wrote: > > > Hi there it seems I was banned from Rick Ross site. I was > wondering why > > > I was banned as I am currently trying to post in the TZM thread in > > > response to another. > > > > > > "The (user)name "2012_CT" has been banned from use. Please use a > > > different name or contact the forum administrators." XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Rick Ross wrote: > > > > You were "trolling". > > > > Rick Ross > > www.rickross.com <http://www.rickross.com/> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2012_CT wrote: > > Ok, where was I trolling? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Rick Ross wrote: > > 1. You were just engaging in arguments. > > 2. You have lifted material protected by copyright without permission to > place on another Web site. > > Rick Ross > www.rickross.com <http://www.rickross.com/> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2012_CT wrote: > I apologize if it may seem like was engaging in arguments, however I > must disagree with you no that Rick Ross. However I do believe I may > have irritated you're regular members of the site as well as > yourself inadvertently. I understand that I am critical of you're work > but that is certainly no grounds for banishment in my opinion (though it > is you're site and you will do what you do.). However > after reviewing you're site more and reviewing topics on trolling I had > a hunch you have a itchy trigger finger when it comes to labeling at > which I believe for the betterment of you're regular members the > banishment of me is justified so you can maintain the > more complacent/regular member base. I do not believe the Rick Ross site > is for me and will not be requesting to be unbanned because frankly I > don't fit in, but thank you for allowing me to have the time to present > some information as well as getting back to me on the issue. > > Second issue about copyright. I'm assuming the material I presented on > the site is perfectly ok or it would be deleted. However I am to assume > you are talking about the information within the TCOG thread. If that is > true are you requesting the information I posted on the Skeptic Project > site pertaining to that thread be deleted? Is so is there any part > within the thread I can keep in there for example the reviews of the > material? I was completely unaware that the material that the > information was under any form of copyright as for something to be > copywrite on a web forum is has to be on a per post bases it would need > to have a creative commons symbol or something indicating some form of > license agreement. Many sites actually copyright on a per post bases. > > Again I'm sorry for everything and being unable to work things out with > you, however I would be able to clear things up with the copyright issue > on my end. If the copyright issue is something you could clear up on > you're end then I give you a go ahead to do it however if the copyright > is on mine end of things I will be more than willing to comply. > > - 2012_CT > http://skepticproject.com/ XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Rick Ross wrote: I am not interested in an ongoing exchange with you. There is nothing further to discuss. You are banned from the message board. Rick Ross www.rickross.com XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 2012_CT wrote: I appreciate your fast reply. However I would like to say a few things on my last reply and maybe point out some problems I see. First this exchange will be posted up on the skeptic project site as well as James Randi site, not to shame but to show the type of exchange we had. Not everybody is going to praise your work and what you do, just because I do not praise your work like everybody else, does not mean it does not have any validity to it or that I do not see any validity to it. I think a lot of your work is interesting as you have a lot of experience in the cult area. The problems I see with your work is purely on a academic level. First problem I have is that the topic of "cult" is a hard word to define let alone attempting to label a entire group with. Normally I would accept experience as well as credentials in these matter but this really does fall under the medical realm and I suppose when it falls into these categories I have to defer to individuals with credentials in the medical field. At which you lack the credentials. I've read up on individuals such as Steve Hassan who does great academic work in the study of cults and has the credential to back up his findings, as his educational background is M.Ed., Counselling Psychology, Cambridge College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985, Licensed Mental Health Counselor (LMHC) in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1992, Certified as a Nationally Certified Counselor (NCC) by the National Board for Certified Counselors, 2003. I believe you think of Steve Hassan as a troll, but I think he's a legitimate critic of your experience in dealing with cults and as well as a critic of your work/credentials (lack there of). Again, no reason to get upset over legitimate critics, that to the extent you put them up on your RR.com/flame site. I have to say in my opinion you are a bit unprofessional not just on a academic level but how you handled this situation. I suggest in the near future if you have a problem with a individual it would be good to contact them through more personal means such as a personal message on the site or through e-mail. I would of gladly of listened and followed the rules/terms if I was contacted. I do not believe I was argumentative on your site, as well as I do not believe I have copyright infringed/stole work off your site as well or you would of showed me exactly where I did this and I would of gladly of taken the material down; Although you do not have a license to claim such infringement. I disagree that I lifted any material on the TCOG thread on the skeptic site, as I linked back to your site numerous times on a page to page bases, I never claimed I wrote those posts, wrote your academic journal, nor lifted Liftons evaluation methods, and claimed them for my own. I want to point out that you have taken information off other sites and in short, did exactly same thing I did in the Trumpets Call of God thread on the skeptic project site. I may also want to point out on your site rules themselves the material post on the forums by other authors is not owned nor supported by Rick Ross on the site forums but owned by the author themselves (again, no talk about a license). If you want to claim copyright over material said on a website by other poster the first step is to get a license such as a creative common license that fits your needs. Second you'll need to revise all statements in the rules/disclaimer to reflect accurately as well as delete portions that would come in conflict with the license. Third not all material will be covered by the license for instance a picture one posts up on the Rick Ross site may have it's own license therefore if I post that exact picture on another site RR.com can't claim copyright over that picture, this goes for video, as well a educational material. Forth you will need to on a per post bases on authors aka forum posters of the Rick Ross site to include a license agreement CC license symbol indicating that the statements made the RR.com site is copyrighted by the Rick Ross organization. Fifth (rehashing step two) if you do the forth step you'll need to revise statements on the rules/disclaimer to now reflect that all content posted on the site is in ownership of the site and not the author. I'd also like to say that licenses are only good if they can be enforced. What I mean is it's pointless to get a license unless one has lawyers and is making money off of the licensed material. I don't believe you're making money off people posting on your site so what would be the rational to put a license on such material? I believe you just have a problem with me reposting some of the material on another site as well as me being a critic towards your work. If you truly want content to not be quoted then make your site private, or get a license to cover this area. I would say in my opinion if I were to contact individuals who posted on the TCOG thread that most (excluding yourself) would not mind that I reposted some of the information on the site in a more easier to read format (as you do the very same thing). Next time you make up such accusation you might want to contact legal expert/s or someone with more experience with law than yourself. I would not recommend individuals to go to your site to ask for cult advice as Steve Hassin would also agree with me on that notion. I'd say your work is based strongly on confirmation bias than on the facts. From the works you wrote (including academic works) that I have read on your site by you, it reminds me of Pseudoscience/Pseudomedicine/Homeopathy. However I would say your website has a lot of good information based on information from other experts about cults and therefore may recommend for someone to go for the content mainly, rather than communicating with the maker/cult expert of the site. I am a troll, actually I am what is called a academic troll as I use logic and reason towards fringe none rational thinking. In my opinion I would say what you are doing is a very dangerous on a academic level as you portray yourself as a individual who is a expert on cults (with a lack of credentials). Normally I'd buy into experience but that simply isn't enough when it comes to define a group the label as a "cult" let alone labeling something a internet cult, I'd rather go with a person who has the credentials. I've come across Pseudointellectual and you definitely fit that category. People unknowingly may buy into your Pseudointellect however there are people (skeptics) that use logic and reason that can usually see through such things. Kudos to Corboy on the TZM Cult topic on RR.com site. - 2012 CT References: About The Licenses http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Steven Hassan gives opinions on Rick Ross and how waco was handled. http://tinyurl.com/7dyyn6b Steve Hassan Harvard Lecture 1-9 "WACO: The Government's Failure to Understand Destructive http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNiTeIVN34Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXrvOfWx7Gw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qB6VHp4QhzM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P1hUl2Tucg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqY87e5eiFg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVoaZxdM6N0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=viFs7Ce4UlU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGBis78BMhU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE94AA497B0 Steven Hassan about his thoughts on Rick Ross http://tinyurl.com/6v575jl Rick Ross on Wako http://www.culteducation.com/groups/waco.html WACO- A New Revelation - _2011. MOVIE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaMy_MVSkMg Steve Hassan website http://www.freedomofmind.com/ Rick Ross Flame site " Steve Hassan--Waco, Steve Hassan, cult expert and author, offers his criticism of my work related to Waco. Ironically, both Steve Hassan and myself are listed together on Rev. Moon's Unification Church page Faith Breakers, Dream Killers and Religious Bigots..." (i.e., Steve Hassan is the ..."Dream Killer" and I am the "Faith Breaker.") He concludes, "I think personally that the FBI made a major error to rely, or even to talk to [Rick Ross]. Because he was never in a cult himself. And in my experience, my ability, because of my first-hand experience...[gives me]...an awareness of what to say and how to say it...."Steve Hassan then laments,"I made numerous efforts to try to correct the situation...I approached my congressman...[who] wrote numerous letters and made many phone calls...encouraging them to get in touch with me. They did not. I faxed a letter to... President Clinton, a letter was faxed...directly to Janet Reno...[copies] of my book [were given] to Webster Hubble [and]...FBI negotiators in Waco...But I've never been called. I've never been contacted in fact, even though there was supposed to be a follow-up investigation..." Note: This award winning link has gone dead and the author's work is no longer available through a known Internet address. " " "Response to Rick Ross's personal attack on me," by Steven Hassan This somewhat heated response popped up on Steve Hassan's "Freedom of Mind" website after the Ross Institute (RI) posted a disclaimer regarding the cult specialist's fees. Complaints were received from families about the rates Mr. Hassan charged for services, which reportedly were $500.00 per hour and/or $5,000 per day. Some families mortgaged homes to pay him. Mr. Hassan refused to specifically respond to the substance of the complaints. That is, until a disclaimer went up that stated RI did not endorse or recommend Steven Hassan due to complaints received. After that was done for the first time Mr. Hassan publicly posted his fee schedule, which was reduced to $250.00 per hour and/or $2,500.00 per day. Once Steve Hassan reduced his fees and made this public, the RI disclaimer was taken down. Nevertheless Mr. Hassan appears to be miffed, and seems to think responding to complaints received about him is somehow a "personal attack." Note: Since these comments were posted Steve Hassan has removed his formerly publically posted fee schedule. His website now adivises, "Please call my assistant Debra [...] during office hours with any questions about fees." "http://www.culteducation.com/flamingwebsites.html Academic troll information http://afterallitcouldbeworse.blogspot.com/2011/04/interview-john-emerson-ex-doctor-ex.html http://moreorlessbunk.wordpress.com/2008/07/13/how-to-respond-to-an-academic-troll/ Academic troll example. http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5325/justintempler-debunk-on-douglas-mallettes-omega-volksgarden/#reply-d48bee59 Rick Ross Responds to his Critics http://www.culteducation.com/reference/scientology/Scien47.html website reviews http://www.culteducation.com/reviews.html Steve Hassan? (Rick Ross thoughts on Steven Hassan academically) http://web.archive.org/web/20130731234203/http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?7,111783 Rick Ross talks about Steve Hassan http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,103844,page=86 Rick Ross says Steve Hassan is to expensive. http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?4,76604 Someone named E.P. Grondine posted about reading Steve Hassan book on TZM thread at which Rick Ross posts right afterward. (Two pages over Rick Ross puts down his verdict on TZM). http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?12,97823,98495 Rick Ross says Steve Hassan has complaints against him. http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,103844,108560 My thoughts on TZM being a internet cult. I changed my opinion in this very topic to that there needs to be more academic evidence to support the thought of groups on the internet can be labeled as a cult. (the topic as a whole is a good read). http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/4542/is-tzm-a-cult-lets-see/#post-43979 Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#24 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Mar 30, 2013 - 06:14 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter I would like to have a discussion about Rick Ross and his academic credibility (one of my first posts on the health section of SP). Before we get into that I'd like to start off by saying before you read the topic take a glance at How to Determine If A Controversial Statement Is Scientifically True (thanks to Tony on SP FB) http://lifehacker.com/5919830/how-to-determine-if-a-controversial-statement-is-scientifically-true You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes http://thobbs.github.com/blog/2012/06/17/you-should-downvote-anecdotes/ ( I will keep this super short, or as short as possible) I have followed Rick Ross work somewhat but never really seeked out his "academic work". However when I saw VTV randomly post up in Rick Ross site I decided to respond to VTV as well as put down my stance on internet cults, which of course is that currently I'm on the fence but do not fault anybody for thinking one way or the other. Rick Ross suggests some sites to me as he believes internet cults can form on the internet based on the material he provided. so I check out the material, at which I give a review directly on Rick Ross site concluding that the academic work/material Rick Ross has suggested in supporting internet cults is not academically relevant to support such claims as that groups on the internet could possibly be labeled a cult as well as the evaluation tools he suggests as well although I do support that Lifton's evaluation methods can be applied to internet cults as well as cults in general in a more broader sense however that doesn't support the fact that there may need to be evaluation methods that strictly pertain to groups who could be labeled as internet cults under such evaluation techniques. Rick's academic article at best is anecdotal type of evidence. Rick Ross then claims he answered my question at which I do not press further. At this point I was still reading on the last piece of material Rick gave me which was the Trumpets Call of God discussion topic on Rick's forum. I thought that was actually the best piece of material that Rick suggested to me. After reading the TCOG 55 page thread, I felt to make a topic on the Skeptic Project site at a attempt to evaluate Rick's suggested readings he gave me as well as make a easier to read version of the 55 page thread (mainly cutting out most of the scripture talk and less important information). At that I wanted to link what i did on Rick Ross site so I posted on the TCOG at which post was denied and I was banished off the site unknowingly until VTV posted I attempted to do a clarification towards some of what VTV wrote and found out I couldn't post because I was banished. Which lead me to a e-mail exchange with Rick. Side Note: It took me a few days to do the TCOG thread on SP, thinking it may help people out as well as make it a easier read as not many want to wade through a 55page thread on Rick Ross site (at which a good portion of the 55 pages was filled with information that was not really helpful towards the furthering of knowledge of online cults.). I was trying to be nice. References: Exchange between Rick Ross and me between pages 18-19 (the other stuff is kind of old news for SP members) http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,97823,page=18 Rick Ross recommended reading a paper about deprogramming was published within a peer-reviewed academic journal published Published by the Institute of Religious Studies Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2421 Rick Ross referred me to take a look at Trumpet Call of God thread on his site. http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?6,62059,page=1 Rick Ross said " An Internet based group can be evaluated based upon Lifton's definition, which I regard as the nucleus for most other definitions of cults." the definition provided of a "cult", which was first written about and established by psychicatrist and educator Robert Jay Lifton. http://www.culteducation.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing1.html Clarification Towards VTV on Rick Ross Site on TZM Cult Thread http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5367/clarification-towards-vtv-on-rick-ross-site-on-tzm-cult-thre/ Learning More About Internet Based Cults. (TCOG thread) http://other.skepticproject.com/forum/5360/learning-more-about-internet-based-cults/ Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#25 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Apr 02, 2013 - 15:16 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Hey Rick Ross just updated the SP RR.com flame site award! I saw, screened grabbed, and dated where Rick Ross updated SP flame site award on three separate occasions. This would suggest he is actively watching the SP site. Why are all cranks so obsessed with any form of criticism towards their work? I keep seeing this within the cranks I run across. I'm going to respond to the update parts of Rick Ross flame list, as well as rehash other parts, screen grab by screen grab. Original 3/27/2013 To 3/28/2013 First Rick Ross took out this part in what I'm guessing is his poorly done copy/paste jurb. "This rambling thread was written by "2012CT", someone that was banned for "trolling" at the Ross Institute message board. This anonymous author admits "I am a troll", but insists that somehow he is an "academic troll", whatever that is. Since 2012CT is an anonymous troll no one can confirm his claims. He likes to copy and paste from other sources in what seems like a bad case of "sour grapes". 2012CT quotes or cites Steve Hassan, another "Flaming Web site" award winner. This rant only rates two flames, due to its boring repetition and lack of originality." Protip: Don't highlight previous text before you copy pasta more text to it, also ctrl C, to copy and ctrl v to paste ;). "Update: After receiving his Flaming Website award ever anonymous 2012CT decided to continue his cut and paste effort. " Seriously your using the term "cut and paste"? It's copy and paste genius. At that, " Flaming Website award ever anonymous" makes no sense, omit the word "ever" or add more to this. "Among his latest lifted additions is a court motion filed by lawyers representing the notorious self-help guru James Arthur Ray, who was convicted of negligent homicide concerning three deaths." Really now Rick, are you not the pot calling the kettle black. Self-proclaimed cult expert that abducts people and deprograms them. At that Rick Ross was involved in the Waco incident which resulted in 74 men, women and children died at Branch Dividian Compound in Waco, TX. "Ray's lawyers sought to have me disqualified as an expert at his trial, but I was qualified and accepted as an expert by the judge in the Ray case despite that effort in February 2011. Anonymous 2012CT still rates only two flames despite calling attention to my official recognition as an expert witness in court."" This is a red herring logical fallacy as Rick Ross is inventing a argument that suggest that I said that Rick Ross testimony in James Arthur Rays case was excluded at which I never did. However I quoted information within the case pertaining to question Rick Ross academic integrity. Nice try Rick in trying to change the topic. Lets just keep in mind on the James Arthur Ray case that Rick Ross was accepted to give testimony but to my understanding the prosecution never allowed Rick to give his testimony in this case as the defense would of tried to reduce Rick Ross credibility and it would of ultimately hurt the prosecution case overall. "Note: 2012CT did correctly call attention to the incorrect date of an archived Associated Press report about my expert status in the Ray case." Rick you are not to good at copying and pasting. I can image there being a lot of other major types of errors on this RR.com site as well. You'll have to take this up with RR.com board of directors LOL! Why don't you archive the original source and do a frame embed of the source on the site page itself? This copy and pasting job you're doing isn't working out, if you can't get a simple date right. "I have been qualified and accepted as an expert witness in court cases in ten states, including United States Federal Court (http://www.culteducation.com/reference/expert_witness/expert_witness7.html) through what is called a "Daubert hearing," which is a court proceeding specifically used to challenge experts." Naw man for real? OMG a judge accepted your testimony therefore you are an expert OMG! Amazing wow Rick you are a expert cause a judge accepted your testimony... This is a faulty appeal to authority logical fallacy. Just because a Judge accepts that you can give your testimony in trial to a jury of your peers does not make you a expert or have credibility on cults. The judge more than likely has no background or credentials when it comes to cults, at that Rick you have no credentials in the medical field. Rick is basically attempting to self-proclaim that he is an expert because a judge who does not have special knowledge in the area being discussed allows Rick to give testimony in a court case to a jury of his peers. Giving or being accepted to give testimony within a court to a jury of your peers does not add to your academic credentials. A judge more then likely will not have credentials within a particular field at which he or she is examining the motion to exclude testimony or anything else in a Daubert hearing, yet merely accepts that a individual has specialized knowledge beyond what the average individual/jury of your peers would know on a particular topic to give testimony on. So for instance a guy with no credentials and lets say picks up poop for a living could potentially give testimony on another case to a jury of his or her peers with any specialized knowledge on picking up poop as long as that other case had something that involved poop in it. Like I said anybody can give testimony within a court, but just because someone gives testimony in a court case that does not give them more validity, credibility, or be a "expert" within that field it merely means that you know more than the average Joe/jury of your peers when it comes to a particular topic to explain to a jury. To 3/29/2013 update Rick adds back a paragraph that he had previously deleted from before for at which I would imagine is a copy/paste attempt gone awry. Here is the deleted paragraph he added back in. "This rambling thread was written by "2012CT", someone that was banned for "trolling" at the Ross Institute message board. This anonymous author admits "I am a troll", but insists that somehow he is an "academic troll", whatever that is. Since 2012CT is an anonymous troll no one can confirm his claims. He likes to copy and paste from other sources in what seems like a bad case of "sour grapes". 2012CT quotes or cites Steve Hassan, another "Flaming Web site" award winner. This rant only rates two flames, due to its boring repetition and lack of originality. To 4/1/2013 update The new sentence Rick added to the delete paragraph portion is "My response to critics (http://www.culteducation.com/reference/scientology/Scien47.html ) (1998) has been posted publicly along with my CV (http://www.culteducation.com/cv.html ) since the 1990s." I have read Rick Ross response to critics page before, Ricks response to critics is mostly a deflective diatribe of responses consisting in mostly logical fallacies to self-validate himself then anything else. Your not proving your critics wrong in the "Credentials and Education" section of the page. Just because you acknowledge you do not have any credentials within this very controversial field does not mean people should give you a pass. Just because you give lectures at universities, that does not make you a expert on cults, this is again a faulty appeal to authority logical fallacy. However I may give a response to your "response to critics" page but overall with some exception your mostly using logical fallacies, at which most of it seems to be attacking the person rather than the actually content the person produces. It's not very professionally done from a professionally standpoint, academic standpoint, and technical standpoint. I've also read your Curriculum vitae before and that proves nothing on your credentials again your resume is equal to that of a lot of other cranks I've seen in the medical woo category. My response on Rick Ross being allowed by a judge to give testimony within a court case has been said previously within this thread. The best part of this resume which should have been the part that added to your credibility actually made you more of a crank. The majority of your academic publications at which none of your work has been peer-reviewed are published by some unknown institute in china. Get it peer-reviewed and posted within a credible institution. That was just LULZ funny when I read where you got your work published at. About the claimed academic papers written by Rick Ross well I did read a few, the papers mostly contained anecdotal types of evidence about particular cult/s as well as his writing style tends to be slanted to the extent of becoming obvious forms of confirmation bias. It was an ok read but with no meaningful content really. Rick if you went and graduated from college (which you did not) you would understand why my criticism on RR.com towards your "academic work" was not to be mean but to help. You are not doing anything to further the study of cults when you have no clue on how to write a proper academic paper and at that write a diatribe of statements towards your critics. Rick then changes a part in this sentence, which the sentence is ""Daubert hearing," which is a court proceeding specifically used to challenge and confirm experts." . The part he changed is near the end where it originally said to "challenge experts" he changes it to "challenge and confirm experts". I do not have a problem with that update on RR.com, however Daubert hearing basically allows the judge to be the gatekeeper when it comes to excluding or including testimony from a individual who is more knowledgeable than the average person and or jury of his or her peers on a particular subject. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX "Note: 2012CT did correctly call attention to the incorrect date of an archived Associated Press report about my expert status in the Ray case." I helped point out and correct Rick Ross copy and paste mistake here made where the articles date was suppose to be 2011 not 2001. Seriously how hard is it to copy and paste off another site? I can imagine how many other mistakes are made on RR.com. Thanks for giving me credit. From 2001 date is a mistake. To update 3/28/2013, correction of article date from 2001 to 2011 date in this. Conclusion: Rick Ross is trying to self-validate himself using logical fallacy and at that on a professional level he is attacking the person rather than the argument. I never denied that Rick Ross has made some efforts in the fight to stop cults but his approach on a professional level be it from deprogramming, to responding to critics at which he responds with logical fallacies, just undermines what little work he has contributed to the study of cults. Rick Ross has made it abundantly clear that he cannot accept any form of criticism. Do not tell me or others that just because a judge allows you to give testimony in a case, that adds some sort of clot in making you a cult expert. A judge does not have specialized knowledge within that particular field, therefore suggesting a judge makes you a cult expert because they allow your testimony in a case is simply a a logical fallacy. When it comes to the study of cults trying to circumvent your way around not having credentials by self-validating yourself through giving testimony in court, and or talking at universities does not give you those hard earned credentials and the knowledge that comes with it, or makes you more credible in such a controversial field. Normally I could accept a person with no credentials within engineering, or programming, however the field you self-proclaimed to be in is the medical health field and I always defer to people with credentials when it comes to that. Rick Ross is a self-taught quack expert in cults with no credentials in the medical field, his main objective is to be gimmicky to the point of being a overly dramatic sensationalist so he can promote himself on television. I highly recommend again Rick seriously gives some thought in discontinuing his self-taught quackery, as the real professionals with real hard earned credentials and medical experience are better suited for this type of work. References: How to Determine If A Controversial Statement Is Scientifically True http://lifehacker.com/5919830/how-to-determine-if-a-controversial-statement-is-scientifically-true You Should Downvote Contrarian Anecdotes http://thobbs.github.com/blog/2012/06/17/you-should-downvote-anecdotes/ What is a Daubert Hearing? http://www.helium.com/items/1807122-daubert-hearing-on-expert-and-scientific-evidence Quackery http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackery Mental Help: Procedures to Avoid http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/mentserv.html Brainwashing and Deprogramming http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4278 Logical Fallacy song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_LODZ-cDv0 Self-Validating http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self-validating Bigfoot DNA Discovered? Not So Fast http://www.livescience.com/27140-bigfoot-dna-study-questioned.html Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#26 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
JimJesus | Posted: Apr 02, 2013 - 16:40 |
| ||||
Bacon Pancakes! Making Bacon Pancakes, take some Bacon and I'll put it in a Pancake! Bacon Pancakes that's what it's gonna make...Bacon Pancaaaaaake!! ♪ Level: 3 | Steve Hassan > | |||||
#27 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Apr 07, 2013 - 08:18 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter I corrected Rick Ross word usage on a previous thread within this topic. Rick has taken my advice and did a minor update with the correction I suggested (I bet Muertos is doing back-flips over this one). It would again also suggest Rick Ross is actively reading SP.com LOL... My original statement on making the correction "Seriously your using the term "cut and paste"? It's copy and paste genius. At that, " Flaming Website award ever anonymous" makes no sense, omit the word "ever" or add more to this." Rick changed a few words in a sentence which is "cut and paste" to "copy and paste" and added "seemingly forever" in the place of "ever". The new updated sentence by Rick now seems a bit odd and too wordy. Rick I would recommend you omit the words "seemingly forever" as it doesn't make any sense and the sentence would flow much better if you did. If recommended omission took place it would read like this "After receiving his Flaming Website award, anonymous "2012CT" decided to continue his copy and paste effort.". Rick you should add on your flaming website award note on SP, that in the second paragraph first sentence I helped you correct words within that sentence. Was 4/1/2013 "After receiving his Flaming Website award ever anonymous 2012CT decided to continue his cut and paste effort." Now 4/7/2013 after my word usage recommendation "After receiving his Flaming Website award seemingly forever anonymous "2012CT" decided to continue his copy and paste effort." If my recommended omission to Rick took place it would read like this. 4/7/2013 "After receiving his Flaming Website award, anonymous "2012CT" decided to continue his copy and paste effort.". From 4/1/2013 update To 4/7/2013 Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#28 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 31, 2013 - 05:18 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Got this in my e-mail. Just a website page Rick Ross made recently in May 2013, as a disclaimer about Steve Hassan which basically attack the person than the actually work or arguments made by Steve Hassan. It could be said that since the last post I posted which was in April 2013 and at that a lot of it is about Steve Hassan, that this motivated Rick Ross to make a disclaimer site because of what was said here. I can say that within a decade and a half of which Rick and Steve have had their feud their was no disclaimer page dedicated to Steve but now since I have had this topic up and Rick has been indirectly responding to this topic all of a sudden there is a disclaimer page. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX NEW July 31, 2013: Found out on Rick's site that he posted in "Steven Hassan's new book -- critical review by psychologist" on May 10, 2013 Rick Ross linked the disclaimer on Steve Hassan which the disclaimer page is made on May 2013. I hadtalked about the review one of Rick Ross's people gave on Steve Hassan's newer book here (go to bottom of post) . Rick made that post on May 10, 2013 and the post before Rick's post was made on Sept 22, 2012, therefore it's reasonable to say that Rick wasn't responding to anybody within the thread at that it's been 7 months since the last post within that thread and at that all of a sudden Rick felt the need to post with a disclaimer about Steve. My last post on this thread before this on was made on April 7, 2013 which is only a month away from Rick's May 10 , 2013 post within that thread therefore their is reason to say I might have inspired him to make a disclaimer on Steve Hassan at which I'm glad. My guess is Rick after evaluating the response I made to the review on Steve's work made the disclaimer page in a attempt to address what I said as well as give the perception of professional, at which Rick's attempt gives the opposite effect. To respond to Rick on the review of Steve's new book, I decided to google the review one of Rick Ross's members gave on Steve's new book. So I googled "http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2444". What did I come up with? Well upon my google search a person came up time and time again who was none other than Monica Pignotti, who is obsessed with discrediting Steve Hassan by any means as possible as shown in this thread. Every place this link "http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2444" is on it's attached with Monica's name as poster. Even if Monica's name isn't attached, you will see a topic talking about Steve Hassan and you will see a random poster who only posts one time on that account using that link in the topic. Most of the links came from RR.com. I even googled the topic started by Rick on RR.com on "Steven Hassan's new book -- critical review by psychologist" http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,114193" and Rick Ross disclaimer page which is "http://www.culteducation.com/reference/general/general1529.html", at which both were only referenced on RR.com. So it's reasonable to say that the majority of the people outside of RR.com didn't buy into the negative review like Rick Ross would of hoped or other wise another fail for Rick Ross trying to character assassinate Steve Hassan yet again... References: Steven Hassan's new book -- critical review by psychologist http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?12,114193,120380#msg-120380 A user by the name of ninetailes posts Steve Hassan disclaimer link at which the regular posters of the site not only know it's Monica but are annoyed that she is always out to get Hassan. http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=107373 Third installment of Steven Hassan's trilogy adds little understanding by Cathleen A. Mann http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2444 Writes a negative reveiw about the reveiw on Steve Hassan book on RR.com http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/236577/1/Dr-Cathleen-Mann-Reviews-Steven-Hassane28099s-Latest-self-published-Book Dr. Cathleen Mann Reviews Steven Hassan's Latest (self-published) Book at which most of the comments within the blog support Steve Hassan. https://phtherapies.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/dr-cathleen-mann-reviews-steven-hassans-latest-self-published-book/#comment-888 NEW July 31, 2013: I decided to search for Rick Ross disclaimer at which I search for at first "To whom it may concern: rick ross" which eventually lead to the search being "To whom it may concern: steve hassan rick ross site:forum.rickross.com". I soon come to find out Rick Ross has added his disclaimer, and has copy/pasted this disclaimer on older topics that talk about Steve Hassan, even modifying older posts he made or others made to include the disclaimer. A lot of the posts where Rick puts in the disclaimer have been referenced within this thread on this link http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-26c1741f. Example: Steve Hassan? http://web.archive.org/web/20130731234203/http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?7,111783 was To Other examples of Rick Ross adding May 2013 disclaimer of Steve Hassan: Last post in this topic is April 27, 2005 but RIck feels the need to post on May 10, 2013 a disclaimer to it. http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?6,9834,120382#msg-120382 Rick adds his disclaimer to another persons post by the name of Cosmophilospher... S http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?4,9919 And another... http://forum.culteducation.com/read.php?5,6804,8610#msg-8610 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Back onto topic Rick Ross disclaimer page on Steve Hassan. http://www.culteducation.com/reference/general/general1529.html I will go line by line and address Rick Ross disclaimer on Steve Hassan with the intent of pointing out how unfounded and unprofessional Rick's criticisms towards Steve Hassan are on the disclaimer website. First of all Rick to make a disclaimer about Steve a guy who you have not talked to for nearly a decade and a half shows you are still a bit butt hurt and wish Steve would at least acknowledge your presence because you want attention from him so badly. My Response to Rick Ross's Steve Hassan disclaimer 1. News articles that mention Steve Hassan have been archived for historical purposes only due to the information they contain about controversial groups, movements and/or leaders. I interpret the sentence Rick wrote meaning that because Steve Hassan gets mentioned so many times in many different articles that he has importance and therefore Ricky can't simply ignore or not list all the articles that mention Steve Hassan on his site... 2.RI does not recommend Steve Hassan. RI meaning the Rick Ross institute which consists mostly of archiving news stories, that has no physical office, that RI has no employees and that it's board members are two acquaintances and Rick's brother. As previous information above was stated in State Of Arizona, Plaintiff,Vs. James Arthur Ray, Defendant. court case in evaluating Rick Ross credentials. Reference: http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-32823449
3.RI has received serious complaints about Steve Hassan concerning his fees. Steve Hassan does not publicly disclose his fee schedule, but according to complaints he has charged fees varying from $250.00 per hour or $2,500.00 per day to $500.00 per hour or $5,000.00 per day. This does not include Steve Hassan's expenses, which according to complaints can be quite substantial. First if you are upset with his fees that's fine however to include this in a disclaimer on your site and on a professional level is unprofessional on your part among various other action you have committed that do not make you remotely credible unless you are trying to get your PHD in being a unprofessional inept jealous scumbag. To me your just some crazy butt hurt nut ball. I can't say I don't know the average income for a counselor but Steve Hassan has every right to charge for his work within a free market. If no one wants Steve to help them out then they will go somewhere else that's the glory of the free market system no one is forcing anybody to go to Steve or anybody else. Steve is in the health care industry at that his skill set is a bit unique and very specific for such a rare and skilled skill set that he can back up with academic credentials it's not unreasonable for Steve to charge the rates he does. If the person can't afford him look for someone else, very simple. 4.Steve Hassan has charged families tens of thousands of dollars and provided questionable results. One family that recently complained about Steve Hassan cited total fees charged of almost $50,000.00 and said that the very expensive intervention effort ended in failure. And you are any better? I notice a thing where Rick attacks Steve but Steve never attacks Rick. At that can Rick show which families have been screwed over because of Steve? I can't simply take Rick's word for it. If a person make a accusation they also have to back it up, anecdotal types of evidence will not cut it as I have said to Rick time and time again. 5.Dr. Cathleen Mann, who holds a doctorate in psychology and has been a licensed counselor in the state of Colorado since 1994 points out, "Nowhere does Hassan provide a base rate and/or any type or accepted statistical method defining his results..." I have looked into Miss Cathleen Mann she is a nut ball. I will reference material I said within this thread again,
Reference: http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-81ba3d23 6.Steve Hassan has at times suggested to potential clients that they purchase a preliminary report based upon what he calls his "BITE" model. These "BITE reports" can potentially cost thousands of dollars. If these bite models cost thousands of dollars he's allowed to do that at that he has the credentials to back them up as well as the experience. Again I can't say I don't know the average income for a counselor but Steve Hassan has every right to charge for his work within a free market. If no one wants Steve to help them out then they will go somewhere else that's the glory of the free market system no one is forcing anybody to go to Steve or anybody else. Steve is in the health care industry at that his skill set is a bit unique and very specific for such a rare and skilled skill set that he can back up with academic credentials it's not unreasonable for Steve to charge the rates he does. If the person can't afford him look for someone else, very simple. 7.Steve Hassan runs a for-profit corporation called "Freedom of Mind." So what? Mind elaborating your thoughts on this? 8. Mr. Hassan is listed as the corporate agent for that business as well as its president and treasurer. Again so what? Are you jealous? "I can't say I don't know the average income for a counselor but Steve Hassan has every right to charge for his work within a free market. If no one wants Steve to help them out then they will go somewhere else that's the glory of the free market system no one is forcing anybody to go to Steve or anybody else. Steve is in the health care industry at that his skill set is a bit unique and very specific for such a rare and skilled skill set that he can back up with academic credentials it's not unreasonable for Steve to charge the rates he does. If the person can't afford him look for someone else, very simple. " 9.RI does not recommend "Freedom of Mind" as a resource. OK fine but Rick your arguments are made up with nothing but logically fallacies that are not even sound nor remotely professional. These arguments resemble a butt hurt jealous school kid because another kid is more successful than anything else. 10.RI also does not list or recommend Steve Hassan's books. How did the Rick Ross institution which consists of Rick, two acquaintances and Rick's brother reach this academically based decision? A vote? Can we see the transcripts of how the official board meeting took place to reach that decision? 11.To better understand why Steve Hassan's books are not recommended by RI ( http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2444 ) read this detailed review of his most recently self-published book titled "Freedom of Mind." I read the review which is written by Cathleen Mann and have written a review of the review. Reference: http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/5370/my-exchange-with-rick-ross-the-cult-expert-i-question-rick/#reply-81ba3d23
12. Steve Hassan's cult intervention methodology has historically raised concerns since its inception. The book "Recovery from Cults" (W.W. Norton & Co. pp. 174-175) edited by Dr. Michael Langone states the following: "Calling his approach 'strategic intervention [sic] therapy,' Hassan (1988) stresses that, although he too tries to communicate a body of information to cultists and to help them think independently, he also does formal counseling. As with many humanistic counseling approaches, Hassan's runs the risk of imposing clarity, however subtly, on the framework's foundational ambiguity and thereby manipulating the client." Rick's reading comprehension is a fail so I'll help him out. Dr. Michael Langone wasn't talking about Steve Hassan in a negative way but was talking about the humanistic counseling approach at which Langone says can be too imposing to the extent that it could run the risk of instilling values within a client that the client themsevles do not fully understand nor embrace. Basically Langone argues that humanistic counseling in a attempt to change someones line of thinking into something else can have negative affects as well that could lead the client to adopt values they truly do not embrace which could lead to problems later down the line. This wasn't a attack on Steve but a disagreement on what is the best approach among another academic within that field. Rick I'm not sure if you know this but academics do not tend to agree with each other all the time, but to be fair Rick you are not a academic so you wouldn't know you are not even close to one. At that as much as Steve may disagree's with Rick, Steve mentions Rick Ross on his Freedom of Minds site several times as well as Michael Langone, which again shows Steve's professionalism. 13. RI has also learned that Steve Hassan has had dual-relationships with his counseling clients. That is, clients that have seen Steve Hassan for counseling may also do professional cult intervention work with him. So what? And again you show zero evidence to back up your claim. Please stop using anecdotal type of evidence as the foundation for all your arguments in a attempt to discredit Steve Hassan through character assassinations, it's really pathetic. 14.Professionals in the field of cultic studies have also expressed concerns regarding Steve Hassan's use of hypnosis and Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP). And again you show zero evidence to back up your claim. Please stop using anecdotal type of evidence as the foundation for all of your arguments to attempt to discredit Steve Hassan, again it's really pathetic. 15.Based upon complaints and the concerns expressed about Steve Hassan RI does not recommend Steve Hassan for counseling, intervention work or any other form of professional consultation. All of Rick's complaints and concerns are logically fallacies founded mostly on anecdotal types of evidence that attempt to attack the person rather than the actual work they do or arguments made. This disclaimer page is is clearly written by a butt hurt jealous obsessed individual who clearly wishes they were Steve Hassan. Steve Hassan old response to Rick Ross:
Again Rick you did a massive fail and it shows how butt hurt, and jealous you really are as well as the lengths you will go in a attempt to discredit someone because you simply do not like them... Pathetic XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Archive of Rick Ross's disclaimer on Steve Hassan. http://www.culteducation.com/reference/general/general1529.html
Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#29 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |
The Burger King | Posted: Jul 31, 2013 - 20:12 |
| ||||
I can't stop posting pictures of poop, what the fuck is wrong with me? Level: 5 CS Original | Click to get back to topic starter Rick Ross recently. put his domain name for sale. Back in May 13 2013 it was reported the rapper Rick Ross wanted to buy Rick Ross's domain name for $10,000 at which Rick Ross is reported saying, ""One time -- but this was years ago -- I got a message from one his people saying they wanted to buy rickross.com," he said. "But their offer was, like, $10,000. And I thought, 'That's ridiculously low.' So I dismissed it. "" It's kind of funny Rick would say that because this is the same guy who complains that Steve Hassan charges to much for his services as Rick has said in his disclaimer "RI has received serious complaints about Steve Hassan concerning his fees. Steve Hassan does not publicly disclose his fee schedule, but according to complaints he has charged fees varying from $250.00 per hour or $2,500.00 per day to $500.00 per hour or $5,000.00 per day. This does not include Steve Hassan's expenses, which according to complaints can be quite substantial." Are you not a hypocrite Rick Ross? On June 7. 2013 Rick Ross announced on cultnews.com that he would be putting rickross.com domain name up for sale. on The RR.com Rick Ross posted on July 21, 2013 that RR.com was for sale and that they will be switching to culteducation.com is sold. Again I find the irony how Rick is complaining about Steve Hassan and his pricing yet Rick Ross is willing to sell his well known domain name to the higher bidder for profit as well. The pot calling the kettle black... References: Rick Ross Feud: The Battle Over Who Will Own Rickross.com posted on May 13 2013 http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2013/05/rick_ross_rickrosscom_url.php Domain name rickross.com for sale post on June 7. 2013 http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2464#respond The sale of domain name rickross.com on July 21, 2013 http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?14,122192 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Text archive of websites referenced Rick Ross Feud: The Battle Over Who Will Own Rickross.com posted on May 13 2013 http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/pulp/2013/05/rick_ross_rickrosscom_url.php
Domain name rickross.com for sale post on June 7. 2013 http://www.cultnews.com/?p=2464#respond
The sale of domain name rickross.com on July 21, 2013 http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?14,122192
Click to get back to topic starter | |||||
#30 | [ Top | Reply to Topic ] |