Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9, 10 ]

Subject: Re: the coral center Author: John [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 16:21:51 06/27/13 Thu In reply to: jimmy sefo 's message, "Re: the coral center" on 11:48:38 06/27/13 Thu Thank you Jimmy for your comment, but in actual fact the “Safe Guarding Officer” for this center does actually work in full time employment as such. But this “safe Guarding officer” had to as the “secretary” for this center send out a letter informing a person who suffers from “depression” that they are no longer welcome, could not attend any of the classes or events as they could be deemed as a “danger” to the public, so you are correct in as such as they have been “discriminated” over their disability. It was all decided by the actual committee of this center one being the “top” instigator for the decision made and all the rest had to follow orders, but what is so nonsensical for this action was this person was accused that during a séance (where may I add a 16 year old was a participant) that the “accused” were sending out “negative” vibes and was causing negativity in the séance enrgy I know I know laughable really, so this lovely person was accused that they could have put this “16 year old” in danger, now tell me Jimmy is this normal behaviour and for this “safe Guarding Officer” to act on this alone send out a letter explaining because of their “health issues” they would no longer be welcome in the center at classes or events, one does have to therefore question the “Safe Guarding Officer’s” motives and why a “Safe Guarding officer” would allow such actions to be taken, one also has to question during the séance other people where there so why pick on one person alone to accuse and use this lame idiotic excuse when one knows the instigator tells lies and is manipulative. My main concern is vulnerable members of the public might be using this center and if the “Safe Guarding officer” can act like this on hearsay because they are too frightened to question and just ban some one because of their disability their motives of this secretary have to be questioned, my opinion is this shouldn’t this officer be “Safe Guarding” the public, shouldn’t this be the other way around, whats your thoughts please [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date Re: the coral center name withheld 19:30:32 06/27/13 Thu Re: the coral center -- jimmy sefo, 20:31:40 07/06/13 Sat Re: the coral center -- name witheld, 18:16:21 07/17/13 Wed Re: the coral center -- Dan, 21:19:33 07/19/13 Fri