StopSylvia email "Be gone!" (with replies)

Late May? A month later? This is late May now Robert. Did you receive this email last year?
Do you remember that Sylvia Browne has died? People that message you things regarding her don't matter anymore.
She is dead and all things related died with her.
 
"Be gone!"? Thanks, but I have no plan on going anywhere.

If you love a religion founded by a totally-discredited "psychic medium" who apparently never had a single meaningfully-correct prediction to her name, that is certainly your right.

Best regards,

Robert S. Lancaster
Click to expand...

I honestly have no idea what this response was supposed to achieve. I very much doubt that any fan of Brown or devotee of the religion who read this would feel in any way inclined to read this as a well meaning explanation of your view. It is more likely you have convinced them you are the villain. From their point of view your existence is now trolling. That their response seemed to be that they were now ignoring you on their search engine seems to be the best outcome you could hope for.

I certainly do not believe the above missive would convince to question their belief, or to make them wonder if you might be right. It would probably be better to have said nothing.

Perhaps in future a slightly different response might serve better, and cut to the meat of your later arguments from a slightly different angle:

{name}
I am sorry you wish I were gone. I would like to remind you that I did not solicit your message. There is an awful lot on the internet that we all wish was not there, but can instead choose not to read. If in future you wish to discuss what it is with my work you disagree with, or anything on my site that is factually inaccurate, please feel free to contact me again.

In the mean time I will continue to discuss openly my disagreements with Miss Brown, as she was free to support her own claims. If you wish me to be gone then I am happy to be ignored, but you will always be welcome to contact me for a more meaningful discussion should you ever decide to read my site.
Click to expand...
 
Tomtomkent said:
I honestly have no idea what this response was supposed to achieve. I very much doubt that any fan of Brown or devotee of the religion who read this would feel in any way inclined to read this as a well meaning explanation of your view. It is more likely you have convinced them you are the villain.
Click to expand...


Well, I have been sending emails worded very much like that to fans of Browne, for coming up on eight years now.

Have some of the recipients read those emails and decided that I was a villain? Probably, although I would think that most of those had already formed that opinion.

But some of the recipients reacted positively to those emails.

In short: While I appreciate your concern, I think that I will continue responding the way that I have been.

ETA: The link in your sigline does not work for me.
 
Last edited:
RSLancastr said:
Asked and answered many, many times, Akh.

I cannot update the site at the present time.

I post what I post here NOT for Sylvia's followers. I post it here because MANY here have expressed an interest in seeing these emails.
Click to expand...

I'll add my vote to that Robert. I would note, that since Sylvia is dead, e-mails generated by her followers are likely the most interesting things about her legacy.
 
Last edited:
Brattus said:
Late May? A month later? This is late May now Robert. Did you receive this email last year?
Do you remember that Sylvia Browne has died? People that message you things regarding her don't matter anymore.
She is dead and all things related died with her.
Click to expand...

Jesus is long dead and I would suggest that things related to his ideology are still very much with us. (unfortunately) While Sylvia is not in the same category, the residual effects are of interest to some of us.
 
Last edited:
The StopSylvia-related threads are clearly marked. If you're not interested, it's easy enough to not read them. (There are hundreds of threads on JREF I ignore completely.) Personally, I think it's fascinating to see how people continue to defend this woman's nonsense, and more generally, how people respond to a very public, very prominent debunking site.
 
I got this reply:

Look, I am a firm believer in Sylvia Browne and her organization and m pretty sure that there are many more people than not who have get this faith in her as well. I'm not sure what you are gaining from this and I don't care either way mister, i love novus spiritus and nothing but nothing will deter that. So in conclusion, bottom line I will not waste any time looking at your site I have not as yet and I am done responding to the emails. So good luck with that and I don't need to prove anything to you this is the last response I am giving.
Thanks for your input, have a good one, over and out.:)

Sent from my iPad
Click to expand...

So, my site is "devoid of truth", yet He/She admits to having not looked at it yet.
 
I personally enjoy these posts of Robert and I admire his stamina and guts to standing up to that fraud despite his personal setbacks. I also believe that he's right to keep the site up to serve as a warning and a guide for those searching out psychics.
Rock on mate.
 
Thanks, padego.

My latest to the recipient:

[name 1]/[name 2]/whoever: (Note: the correspondent had signed the emails with two different names on various occasions).

Thank you for admitting that you have not even looked at my site, even though you had already told me that it (and I) are "devoid of truth".

This clearly shows that you are not interested in the truth, you are only interested in bolstering your existing beliefs, regardless of whether or not they have any merit.

To paraphrase Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men: You don't want the truth. you can't handle the truth!

Thanks also for your correspondence. I wish you well.

Robert S. Lancaster

Founder & Webmaster,
www.StopSylvia.com
Click to expand...
 
rjh01 said:
I call troll. Someone who does not use the same name in correspondence is not very honest.
Click to expand...


Possibly, rj, but I do not think so.

Let me clarify my statement about the correspondent "using two different names":

You know how an email client can show an actual name of an email's author next to the email on your "in box", rather than the author's email address?

Well, the first email I received from this person had a man's name next to it in my SSB email Inbox, but within the body of the email, the author never mentioned their name.

Therere was no "Hi, my name is so-and so", nor was there a "signature" ("Best regards, So-and-so") at the end.

The same was true of the second and third email, IIRC. There was a "signature" at the end of the next email, but it was a woman's first name!

I chose to see nothing nefarious in this, as it could have been due to something totally innocent, such as one person composing an email on another person's computer without remembering to change the name that the computer's email client associates with all emails it sends.

I only made brief mention of it ("name1/name2") as a hint of sorts, giving the correspondent an opening to clarify, should they choose to do so, but he/she either did not catch the hint, or chose not to respond to it.

I saw (and still see) no need to read any "intent to deceive" into any of this.

YMMV, of course.
 
Thread reopened. Any further breaches of the rules will be dealt with harshly. Please do not personalize your arguments, and remain civil and polite. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163
 
Didn't Sylvia Browne make her living by purportedly speaking with the dead? It seems her current circumstances would make that task easier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom