This is very important

[Barry_diller]

Nevermind

[aFireInside]

I don't think stefan cares about specifics attacks on him or freedomain radio , he cares about attacks on his ideas only . 

 

I don't think it would be a good idea to give the troll sites some credibility. 

if one actually reads the stuff on there its really fake and irrational . (and only certain people can fall for it ) 

 

 

This is my opinion , idk whats the right thing to do .. 

[Barry_diller]

Just spend some hours reading on the site, some very few points I can agree with. The site mostly critic defooing (They completely ignore that stefan always has advocating talking about your problems first before doing anything as drastic), deleted topic on this forum, and what stefan said that is not accepted in the widely community for psychology and therapy. Most of it is just slander

 

Well I guess the best is to adress the arguments if someone present some of it's conent on this forum, instead of just deleting it.

If someone followed my life and everything I said as intensely, they could easily make me look like the biggest idiot in the world. Glad im not semi famous

[Wesley]

Well I guess the best is to adress the arguments if someone present some of it's conent on this forum, instead of just deleting it.

If someone slandered you and called you names and insulted and everything else (as you say is the case), would you really wade through all that in search of one or two hidden arguments? Or after the first two insults and lack of arguments would you just ignore them as trolls or something else?

 

I do not think posting anything necessitates a response, especially from people who do not want to have civil discussion of ideas and do the things you describe.

 

Giving this site advertising by linking it is also silly, if it is as bad as you describe. Why would Stefan pay bandwidth to link someone to a site that does that stuff? That doesn't make sense either and it would be appropriate to delete it I would think.

[PatrickC]

They are well known to FDR. To be honest, they are mostly just a handful of malcontents and of no particular concern. Certainly on the surface it doesn't appear that they have grown much since their inception. Of course the more emotionally led critic is drawn to them, since they did a fine job of SEO on linking their content to FDR's. Which is why you always see 'cult' referenced in those Google searches. Stefan actually did address them around the time of the Guardian article in reference to a previous incarnation of the same website under a different name. However, these sites are particularly well known for their consistent slander of both members, Stefan and his family. Albeit that they have toned it down somewhat since Stefan's profile increased, which should tell you something about them. They are a poison well at best.

 

Anyway who doesn't have critics though. I'm guessing Zeitgeist, Alex Jones, even political parties have their fervent (sometimes rational, sometimes irrational) critics. I think it's just a fact of life, at least for now. However, probably appropriate to at least remove reference to the names of those sites mind. After all, if I owned a forum I wouldn't want to advertise (inadvertently) a website that had made viscous attacks upon my family and friends character and continuous to do so.

[Barry_diller]

If someone slandered you and called you names and insulted and everything else (as you say is the case), would you really wade through all that in search of one or two hidden arguments? Or after the first two insults and lack of arguments would you just ignore them as trolls or something else? I do not think posting anything necessitates a response, especially from people who do not want to have civil discussion of ideas and do the things you describe. Giving this site advertising by linking it is also silly, if it is as bad as you describe. Why would Stefan pay bandwidth to link someone to a site that does that stuff? That doesn't make sense either and it would be appropriate to delete it I would think.

You are right, I just deleted my OP post

They are well known to FDR. To be honest, they are mostly just a handful of malcontents and of no particular concern. Certainly on the surface it doesn't appear that they have grown much since their inception. Of course the more emotionally led critic is drawn to them, since they did a fine job of SEO on linking their content to FDR's. Which is why you always see 'cult' referenced in those Google searches. Stefan actually did address them around the time of the Guardian article in reference to a previous incarnation of the same website under a different name. However, these sites are particularly well known for their consistent slander of both members, Stefan and his family. Albeit that they have toned it down somewhat since Stefan's profile increased, which should tell you something about them. They are a poison well at best. Anyway who doesn't have critics though. I'm guessing Zeitgeist, Alex Jones, even political parties have their fervent (sometimes rational, sometimes irrational) critics. I think it's just a fact of life, at least for now. However, probably appropriate to at least remove reference to the names of those sites mind. After all, if I owned a forum I wouldn't want to advertise (inadvertently) a website that had made viscous attacks upon my family and friends character and continuous to do so.

The most controversial is centered around defooing, where can I find the podcast etc. About the subject? Haven't looked upon it.

[PatrickC]

Well, that topic is rather broad ranging of course, with lot's of podcasts regarding the family and relationships in general. Defoo is just a general term used to explain where some people have decided they no longer want to have a relationship with their family. However, you can find the first few related podcasts mostly amongst the first 200  or so in volume one.