Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI  🔗 **Source:** [Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [ywam, ywam-kona, survivor-testimony, spiritual-abuse, high-control-groups, institutional-retaliation] > author: Janna Harris and Jay Coyle (The Bodies Behind The Bus) > source: The Bodies Behind The Bus (YouTube) > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4 > date created: 2026-09-25 14:40 > > > [!info] Generated analysis — not the author's words. Sections below are machine-written > > from the captured source. Only text inside `> [!quote]` blocks is verbatim from the author. > > Do not quote or attribute any other line to the named author. > > # 🏷️ Title: Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## 🧭 Table of contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning styles assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO analysis](#️-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) - [🔄 Refactor appendix](#-refactor-appendix--skylas-story--ywam-kona-hi) ## 📝 Summary - **What happened.** The Bodies Behind The Bus, a podcast that records first-person accounts from people harmed in Western faith organizations, published a 1 h 40 min interview on 2026-09-17 with Skyla, the second storyteller in its YWAM (Youth With a Mission) series. Hosts Janna Harris (00:01:24) and Jay Coyle (01:39:24) interview her about roughly two years on the End Bible Poverty Now (EBPN) team at the YWAM Kona base on the Big Island of Hawaii, starting in 2020 (00:06:30). The auto-captions mangle "YWAM" into WWAM, YOM, YM, Wyom, WWIM, Yona, Bioam, Wom, Wim and YWIN, render Loren Cunningham as "Lauren," and render EBPN as EVPN, "NBible Poverty Now" and "Ed Bible Poverty Now." Quotes below preserve the transcript spelling. - **The account.** Skyla joined EBPN to build deaf-community and sign-language Bible-access work (00:05:02). After she cried during a disagreement with a leader she calls D, she reports being told the next day that the leaders had withheld the meeting's purpose "to test your reaction" (00:20:58), that crying was rude and showed she lacked discipleship (00:21:40), and being asked "Are you committed to me?" (00:24:32). Over the following year she reports: a senior leader (A) who promised to address it and later admitted he never did (00:30:17); a mediator whose first step was a one-on-one with D (00:37:40); a team briefing that reframed a clergy sexual abuse allegation against another team leader (X) as an "inappropriate relationship" and told staff not to engage the complainant because she'd gone to the "government sphere" (00:45:39, 00:47:08); her removal from the team one hour before co-founder Darlene Cunningham arrived to address the team (00:58:49); a campus-wide Workplace post saying she'd refused to leave campus (01:19:44); and a security chief who asked for her PTSD diagnosis before he'd consider taking it down (01:21:55). - **The organizational claims worth checking.** Staff are self-funded and labeled volunteers (01:14:42); Skyla reports Loren Cunningham telling a staff meeting of several hundred that volunteer status means the organization doesn't have to follow laws that protect employees, and that lawsuits are "the attacks of the enemy" (01:06:03, 01:06:45). Team leadership was informal enough that she didn't know D was her leader for about a year (00:12:59). An abuse response team formed after the allegation and took 6 months to reply to her substantively (01:27:45). - **Why it matters.** The account supplies concrete, checkable mechanisms for how a decentralized mission agency can absorb a complaint without acting on it: route the complainant to the accused, reframe the harm, remove the complainant from the unit (not the organization), and let geography finish the job, since most staff leave the island when they leave YWAM (01:37:15). Skyla, who's from the island, is the counterexample that made this recording possible. - **Key stakeholders.** Skyla; the anonymized leaders A, D, X, K, DH, SO, LL, S and C; Loren and Darlene Cunningham as named founders; the unnamed woman who alleged clergy sexual abuse and pursued legal action; deaf communities who were the object of Skyla's work; the hosts and Sacred Wilderness, the nonprofit that funds the show (00:00:00). - **Risks and tradeoffs.** This is a single-witness account with anonymized counterparties who don't respond in the recording. The hosts apply diagnostic labels ("narcissistic abuse," "textbook DARVO") the guest doesn't use herself. Several timeline points are approximate by Skyla's own statement ("maybe a couple weeks or a month or so later," 01:24:52). None of that makes the account false; it does set what the file can and can't establish. - **Bottom line.** Treat the interpersonal specifics as one person's sworn-tone testimony and the structural claims (self-funding, volunteer labeling, informal leadership, complaint routing, spheres doctrine used to cut off a complainant) as pattern claims to cross-check against the Shelby and Jenny McGrath YWAM episodes already in the vault. ## 📖 Main content **Who's talking and how.** The show opens with a donation ask for sacredwilderness.org and a standing invitation to listeners who feel defensive to "see that discomfort as an invitation to be curious" (00:00:42). The Mars Hill "bodies behind the bus" clip that gives the podcast its name plays at 00:01:24. Janna Harris hosts; Jay Coyle signs off at 01:39:24. The guest is identified only as Skyla. Every leader she describes is a letter: A (internal EBPN leader, 40s or 50s, married with an 8-year-old), D (about 30, roughly 4 to 5 years older than her, off-island often), X (external-partnerships leader, later accused of clergy sexual abuse), K (present at the removal meeting), DH (acting leader of YWAM Kona as Loren Cunningham aged, and D's childhood host-family figure), SO (campus representative who briefed the team), LL (member of the 3-person internal investigation), S (head of campus security) and C (the abuse-response-team contact who reached her 6 months later). Skyla was 22 to 24 when she joined (00:13:43). **How she got there.** Skyla grew up on the Big Island in a church where YWAM staff spoke regularly (00:02:08). After her second year of college she did a Discipleship Training School (DTS) called Voice for the Voiceless in Germany, focused on media advocacy for refugees and trafficking survivors, and calls it a good experience she'd repeat (00:02:52, 00:03:36). Harris notes that nearly every YWAM storyteller on the show names one base that "had it together," and reads the base-to-base variance as an oversight problem (00:03:36, 00:04:19). Skyla later served at another base for under a year, then spent time with family learning American Sign Language and developing a focus on deaf people groups who have no Bible in a sign language (00:04:19, 00:05:02). Back in Kona 2 to 3 months before COVID, working at an Office Max, she met a local pastor who introduced her to A, who told her "this sounds like exactly what we need on our team" and asked her to join and lead that focus (00:05:46, 00:06:30). **What EBPN is.** By Skyla's description, End Bible Poverty Now was one of Loren Cunningham's late initiatives, pushed across all of YWAM with a short book from YWAM Publishing (00:09:21). The goal: Scripture in every person's "heart language," even languages with about 100 speakers (00:10:04). In practice the Kona team supplied Bible resources (paper, tracts, SD cards) to short-term teams, with an intent to grow into translation training (00:10:48). Skyla says she joined explicitly to push the team toward deaf communities and was told "Come push us, challenge us" (00:12:16). She learned only about a year later, in the confrontation itself, that D was one of her leaders; she calls the roles "loosey goosey" (00:12:59, 00:26:40). **The precipitating incident.** At a morning team meeting Skyla arrived early to find the team discussing that A had created an internal leadership group without telling everyone. Its membership: all the men on the team plus two new male members and D's wife, and no other women (00:15:57). In the meeting D pitched a new YWAM-wide initiative; afterward Skyla asked him to sit down and plan deaf-community resources into it from the start (00:16:39, 00:17:23). She reports he became defensive, listed reasons not to meet, and she cried, which she says she rarely did before this period (00:18:06). A joined, both men talked, and she said "I'm done with this conversation. I'm going to go" and drove home (00:19:33, 00:20:17). At 5 p.m. they asked to meet the next morning; she asked what the agenda was and got no reply (00:20:17). **The "test."** The next morning, at a picnic table in public, D opened with "We didn't want to tell you why we were meeting because we needed to test your reaction" (00:20:58). He then called the crying and leaving rude, questioned whether partners could trust her, said she "clearly need[ed] to be discipled" and offered to do it himself (00:21:40, 00:22:23). She notes he'd never worked with her one-on-one. A said nothing while D repeatedly claimed A agreed, then A left to pick up his car from the shop (00:23:05). Coyle names the consequence: no witness (00:23:05). D raised her upcoming speaking slot at a gathering and her position in YWAM, and closed with "Are you committed to me?" She answered that she was committed to what God had for her (00:23:48, 00:24:32, 00:25:14). **The non-resolution.** Her pastor advised bringing a woman to any follow-up because "women are more emotional sometimes" (00:27:22). A teammate independently reported that D talked over her in meetings and described a "male-centered atmosphere" (00:28:05). Together they met A, who agreed it was wrong, committed to speak to D and to all the men, and cried (00:28:50). Two weeks later A asked whether D had improved; six months later, when she asked twice, A admitted he'd never spoken to D: "I didn't think it was that serious" (00:30:17, 00:31:00). She sought a mediator: a woman she'd met 2 or 3 times who described conflict-resolution experience and was known within YWAM (00:33:58). The mediator's first instruction was a one-on-one with D (00:37:40). Skyla describes PTSD-type symptoms around him for the first time in her life: chest tightness, shaking, trouble breathing (00:38:23). In mediation D accepted no wrongdoing and, asked who he was accountable to, named only DH, in whose house he'd grown up (00:36:53, 00:37:40). **The pattern she names among women leaders.** Skyla says nearly every female YWAM leader she raised abuse concerns with responded by describing her own mistreatment by a male leader and saying she didn't act on it, and that's why she holds her position today (00:35:26). This is her generalization from her own conversations; the file records it as such. **The clergy sexual abuse briefing.** A woman on the team alleged clergy sexual abuse by X (00:43:29). Skyla, who already knew part of the woman's account, watched SO brief the team: about five minutes praising X's service, then forgiveness and restoration, then "allegations" with stress on the word (00:44:13, 00:44:56). SO invoked YWAM's "spheres" (education, entertainment, government, family and so on; the Seven Mountain framework the series opener covers) to say the woman had taken the matter into the "government sphere" by pursuing legal action, and staff therefore didn't need to engage her (00:45:39, 00:46:23). X remained in the office for two weeks meeting women one-on-one; a teammate asked why (00:46:23, 00:47:08). SO called it an "inappropriate relationship," and Skyla says teammates left believing it was an affair (00:47:08, 00:47:51). X had already addressed A's internal leadership group, saying he'd "made some compromises with his family during co[vid]" (00:48:35). Skyla's reading: "They're not afraid of staff members being abused. They're afraid of staff members talking about the abuse" (00:50:04). When she asked in that meeting for more support for women on an all-male-led team, SO answered "No one forced you to be here... there are a lot of other ministries" (00:50:49). **Removal.** Skyla told A she might leave; he asked her to stay, praising her work rate (00:51:34, 00:52:16). She requested a meeting to make a formal statement and walked into 6 or 7 male leaders who each critiqued her: "offended against YWAM," poor communication, "still very young" (00:53:44, 00:54:26, 00:55:10). When she asked to raise her concerns, A said "Why?" (00:56:37). Darlene Cunningham was then scheduled to address the team about the allegations; A texted that Skyla must meet at 8 a.m. before the 9 a.m. session or not attend (00:57:22). At 8 a.m., with an older woman as witness, A and K told her to "take a break," which by the end of the meeting meant: off the team, no email, no office access, no team gatherings, off the chats (00:58:05). A said "Skyla, I know it's not right, but it's what's best for the team" and "it's not really up to me. My arms being twisted" (00:58:49). They denied any link to Darlene's visit (00:59:31). She counts 5 or 6 different reasons given over time (01:00:13). She was not removed from YWAM, only from EBPN; she was invited to join or start another ministry (01:00:56, 01:14:00). **What "staff" means financially.** Coyle establishes that YWAM staff raise their own support (01:14:00). Skyla worked part-time throughout, received exactly one donation through YWAM ($50) around this time, and says YWAM kept it because she was technically off the team (01:14:42). Separately, she reports Loren Cunningham addressing the weekly campus staff meeting (several hundred of a roughly 700-person campus) with a story about county and state officials asking whether YWAMers were employees or volunteers, and coaching everyone to answer "I'm a volunteer," which she says mattered for the pending legal action (01:04:32, 01:05:17, 01:06:03). He then said the coming years' "attacks" would come as lawsuits and legal action (01:06:45). Only the roughly 25-person EBPN team knew a case was pending, by her account (01:05:17). **Aftermath.** LL, on the 3-person internal investigation, told Skyla in a required 45-minute call that she didn't know how the complainant "could have let herself be put in that situation," and that "God qualifies the called" (01:02:22, 01:03:04). A YWAM LA translation seminar hosted Skyla; someone from Kona called its leaders to warn them and asserted she had refused to meet Darlene Cunningham, which Skyla says is the reverse of what happened; the LA leader told her "That's not true" and wouldn't name the source (01:10:23, 01:11:06, 01:12:33). Back on campus for a lunch she'd cleared with a teammate, D waved her car down near the exit gate; she stopped in case he wanted to apologize; he told her he'd called campus security and she wasn't allowed there (01:16:06, 01:17:33, 01:19:00). A post on the YWAM Kona Workplace (a private Facebook for students and staff) said she'd been disruptive and refused to leave campus when asked; she says no one asked her to leave (01:19:44, 01:20:29). Security head S told her it was a personal issue with EBPN and asked her to send her PTSD diagnosis before he'd consider removing the post; about a dozen people called or emailed on her behalf; the post aged out rather than being removed (01:21:13, 01:21:55, 01:24:07). A female leader told her not to worry because "no one really checks the security page" (01:24:07). Her email to the new abuse response team, DH, Darlene Cunningham and A got a one-line acknowledgment, then silence for 6 months, then contact from C, then a draft post saying she was allowed back on campus, which was dropped when D's roommate (who also lived with DH) objected (01:25:36, 01:27:03, 01:27:45, 01:29:09). Last she heard, X was no longer permitted to lead in YWAM and had left the island (01:29:09). **Her own conclusions.** She wishes she'd believed the people who warned her and left when she felt she should (01:30:40). She still loves her former teammates (01:31:23). Outside YWAM she says she hears validation constantly from islanders whose relatives were harmed, spanning the base's whole history (01:32:53, 01:35:50, 01:36:33). Her structural point: because most staff move to Kona to join and move away to leave, their voices leave with them; she's from the island, so hers didn't (01:37:15, 01:37:59). She notes Loren has died and new leadership structures exist, and says she still hears of ongoing harm (01:36:33). **What the transcript can't establish.** The counterparties' accounts; whether "test your reaction" was said in those words; the outcome of the legal action; the content of the Workplace post beyond Skyla's paraphrase; how many people saw it; and whether the "volunteer" framing was legal advice or Loren's own framing. The hosts' clinical labels (00:39:51, 00:40:34) are the hosts' interpretation. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=0) Show framing and the invitation to discomfort - Donation ask for Sacred Wilderness; the podcast describes itself as a digital record giving "the counternarrative" to leaders and organizations who "perpetrated, enabled, or covered up abuse." - Listeners are invited to notice defensiveness and ask "Who or what are you feeling defensive of?" (00:00:42). - Janna Harris introduces herself; the Mars Hill bus clip plays (00:01:24). #### ⏱️ [00:02:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=128) Skyla's path to YWAM - Raised on the Big Island; YWAM staff spoke at her church; she'd never visited the campus. - After second year of college: Voice for the Voiceless DTS in Germany, media advocacy for refugees and trafficking survivors. She calls it a good experience and remains in touch with those leaders (00:02:52, 00:03:36). #### ⏱️ [00:04:19](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=259) Deaf communities become the mission - Served at another base under a year; learned ASL with family; met deaf communities during DTS; focus on sign-language Bible access for people groups without a translation (00:05:02). - Back in Kona 2 to 3 months before COVID; working at Office Max; a local pastor connected her to A (00:05:46). > [!quote] [00:05:46] > That sounds like exactly what we need on our team. This is what we do. Would you come share with our team and consider meeting with me? #### ⏱️ [00:06:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=390) Three words for YWAM Kona - 2020 start. Her words: like a college campus, contradictory, joyful. She compares it to the Lotus casino in Percy Jackson: a bubble where nothing outside registers (00:07:13, 00:07:55). - Contradictions surfaced over time: leaders' one-on-one behavior didn't match their public teaching (00:07:55, 00:08:39). > [!quote] [00:07:13] > the words we say don't match the actions we take. The way that we use money doesn't match the values we say we have. #### ⏱️ [00:08:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=519) What End Bible Poverty Now is - One of Loren Cunningham's late initiatives, backed by a short YWAM Publishing book distributed to her German DTS (00:09:21). - Goal: Scripture in "heart language" or mother tongue, even for languages of about 100 speakers (00:10:04). - Kona team's work: Bible resources (paper, tracts, SD cards) for outgoing teams; intended growth into translation training (00:10:48). #### ⏱️ [00:12:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=736) Joining, and not knowing who led - She joined for deaf communities, "not about YWAM for me"; A: "Come push us, challenge us" (00:12:16). - Known leaders: A (internal) and X (off-island partnerships). She didn't know D was a leader (00:12:59). - Ages: Skyla 22 to 24; A 40s or 50s; D about 30 (00:13:43). Harris notes young leaders recur across YWAM stories; Skyla says this team skewed older (00:14:25). #### ⏱️ [00:14:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=865) The morning meeting - Arrived early; team already discussing A's undisclosed internal leadership group (00:15:11, 00:15:57). - Group membership: all men on the team, two brand-new male members, D's wife, no other women (00:15:57). - D pitched a YWAM-wide initiative; Skyla asked afterward to plan deaf resources in from the start (00:16:39, 00:17:23). #### ⏱️ [00:18:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=1086) Defensiveness, tears, exit - D: "that's not important," "I don't have time to meet." She cried, which she says she rarely did before this (00:18:06). - A joined; both defended not engaging deaf communities; she felt "unheard or unseen" (00:18:49, 00:19:33). - She ended the conversation and drove home; 5 p.m. message to meet next morning; her request for an agenda went unanswered (00:20:17). #### ⏱️ [00:20:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=1258) "We needed to test your reaction" - Public picnic table, both leaders across from her. > [!quote] [00:20:58] > We didn't want to tell you why we were meeting because we needed to test your reaction. > [!quote] [00:21:40] > you were so rude yesterday. If you cry like that and you get emotional like that, how can we trust you with all of the other organizations we're trying to work with? - Crying and leaving framed as showing she "didn't have any discipleship"; D offered to disciple her (00:21:40, 00:22:23). #### ⏱️ [00:23:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=1385) No witness, then "Are you committed to me?" - A left to collect his car; Coyle: "now you don't have a witness." Skyla: felt trapped in a public space (00:23:05). - D raised her gathering speaking slot and her job in YWAM (00:23:48). - Closing question: "Are you committed to me?" She answered "committed to what God has for me"; he "didn't like that response" (00:24:32, 00:25:14). - Host summary: all of this stemmed from asking for collaboration on an underserved community (00:25:14). #### ⏱️ [00:26:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=1600) Pastor's advice and a teammate's parallel account - Waited 1 to 2 months, until after the gathering D had said she couldn't do (00:27:22). - Pastor: "women are more emotional sometimes"; bring a woman (00:27:22). - Teammate: felt misogyny since joining; D talks over her; wanted to see A too (00:28:05). #### ⏱️ [00:28:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=1730) A's promise and the six-month reveal - A: "That is wrong and we can't act like that"; committed to speak to D and all the men; cried (00:28:50). - Hosts note the asymmetry: her tears rude, his authentic (00:29:34). - About two weeks later A asked if D had improved. Six months later, asked twice, A said he never spoke to D: "I didn't think it was that serious" (00:30:17, 00:31:00). - Skyla: "you are not who you say you are" was the moment trust broke (00:31:45). Coyle: nowhere to "fall in line" (00:32:28). #### ⏱️ [00:33:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2038) Mediation - Mediator: a woman met 2 or 3 times at community events, self-described conflict-resolution experience, known in YWAM, chosen for neutrality (00:33:58, 00:34:41). - Skyla's generalization about female YWAM leaders: > [!quote] [00:35:26] > I didn't do anything about it and that's why I have my position of power and authority today. - Mediation outcome: D accepted no wrongdoing; no progress (00:36:10). #### ⏱️ [00:36:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2213) Accountability runs to one man - Asked who he's accountable to, D named only DH, the acting leader of YWAM Kona as Loren aged (00:36:53). - D grew up at DH's base and lived in his house; "Hanai uncle" (00:37:40). - Coyle flags: the mediator's first instruction was a one-on-one with D (00:37:40). #### ⏱️ [00:39:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2348) The body's response and the hosts' labels - Skyla: first PTSD-type symptoms of her life around D; chest, breathing, shaking; not fearing physical harm but "about to be bashed in the head" (00:38:23, 00:39:51). - Coyle applies "narcissistic abuse," "gaslighting," and "textbook Darvo" (00:39:51, 00:40:34). These are the host's terms. - Coyle: her whole ministry was on the line; Skyla: one group in Jamaica serves deaf communities in YWAM; Kona is the hub, so "if I'm not here doing this, then no one's going to do it" (00:41:18, 00:42:00). #### ⏱️ [00:42:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2564) The clergy sexual abuse allegation - A woman on the team alleged abuse by X, the off-campus EBPN leader (00:43:29). - SO briefed the team: about five minutes on X's contributions, then forgiveness and restoration, then "allegations" with emphasis (00:44:13, 00:44:56). #### ⏱️ [00:45:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2739) The "government sphere" argument - YWAM's spheres of society invoked: by pursuing legal action the woman had moved into the government sphere, so staff needn't engage her (00:45:39, 00:46:23). - X stayed in the office two weeks meeting women one-on-one; a teammate asked why she'd been allowed (00:46:23, 00:47:08). - SO's term throughout: "inappropriate relationship." Teammates concluded it was an affair (00:47:08, 00:47:51). #### ⏱️ [00:48:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=2915) Whose narrative gets a platform - X had addressed A's internal leadership group and framed it as family compromises during COVID (00:48:35, 00:49:19). - Skyla: the accused controlled his narrative; the complainant's voice was cut off; so was hers (00:49:19). > [!quote] [00:50:04] > They're not afraid of staff members being abused. They're afraid of staff members talking about the abuse. #### ⏱️ [00:51:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3094) "No one forced you to be here" - Her request for support for women on an all-male-led team: > [!quote] [00:50:49] > No one forced you to be here. If you don't like it, there are a lot of other ministries in WWAM. You can go join one of those ministries. - She told A she might leave; he asked her to stay, praising her work rate and the campus-wide awareness of deaf culture she'd built (00:52:16). She wishes she'd left then (00:52:58). #### ⏱️ [00:53:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3224) The meeting that became a critique of her - Expected a one-on-one with A to make a formal statement; found 6 or 7 male leaders (00:54:26). - Critiques: "offended against YWAM," poor communication, "still very young" (00:54:26, 00:55:10). - Harris: listeners have heard her communicate clearly for nearly an hour (00:55:10). - They complimented her on taking feedback; when she asked to raise her concerns, A said "Why?" (00:55:54, 00:56:37). #### ⏱️ [00:56:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3397) Darlene's visit and the 8 a.m. ultimatum - Told Darlene Cunningham would address the team about the allegations; Skyla felt heard (00:56:37, 00:57:22). - Weekend text: meet at 8 a.m. before the 9 a.m. meeting or don't attend (00:57:22). - 8 a.m., with an older woman as witness: "take a break" became removal by the end of the meeting: no email, office, gatherings or chats (00:58:05). #### ⏱️ [00:58:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3529) "I know it's not right" - Leaders present: A and K; K sterner (00:58:49). > [!quote] [00:58:49] > Skyla, I know it's not right, but it's what's best for the team. - A also said "it's not really up to me. My arms being twisted." Removal came one hour before Darlene's arrival; leaders denied any connection (00:58:49, 00:59:31). - Stated reason: communication and "more discipleship"; return possible "when you're better." She didn't attend the meeting (00:59:31). - Reasons changed 5 or 6 times: offended, communication, passion no longer aligned, no capacity for deaf work (01:00:13, 01:00:56). - Not removed from YWAM; told to join or start another ministry; "hope to see you around" (01:00:56). #### ⏱️ [01:01:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3699) The investigator's call - LL, one of 3 on the internal investigation; A required the call before any meeting with Darlene; about 45 minutes (01:01:39, 01:02:22). - LL on the complainant: didn't know how she "could have let herself be put in that situation" (01:02:22, 01:03:04). > [!quote] [01:03:04] > well, God qualifies the called. - Skyla reads the phrase as a standing justification for leaders regardless of character or qualifications (01:03:49, 01:04:32). #### ⏱️ [01:04:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=3872) Loren Cunningham's staff-meeting talk - Campus about 700 people; several hundred staff at the weekly meeting; Loren rarely attends and was older and ill (01:04:32, 01:05:17). - Only the roughly 25-person EBPN team knew of the legal action, by her account (01:05:17). > [!quote] [01:06:03] > oh we're just volunteers so we don't have to follow the same laws rules regulations that protect employees, right? - Staff coached to answer "I'm a volunteer"; she calls it "blatant coaching" tied to the pending case (01:06:03). - He said the enemy's attacks would come as lawsuits; Skyla's reading: anyone taking legal action is cast as working for the enemy (01:06:45). Timing: days to a week after her removal (01:07:28). #### ⏱️ [01:08:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4092) Barred from the visit she arranged - A sign-language Bible translation organization she'd connected was coming to campus; she wasn't allowed to participate; she recruited a friend from Germany to host (01:08:56, 01:09:38). - YWAM LA invited her to a translation seminar and paid travel, food and housing for 1 to 2 weeks (01:10:23). #### ⏱️ [01:11:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4266) The warning call and the Darlene claim - D's assistant appeared at the seminar; someone in Kona then called LA leaders to warn them (01:10:23, 01:11:06). - The claim relayed: Skyla refused to meet Darlene Cunningham. Skyla: she was removed before she could; she'd take the meeting if offered (01:11:49, 01:12:33). - LA leader: "That's not true," and wouldn't say who she'd spoken to (01:12:33). #### ⏱️ [01:14:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4440) Lunch on campus, and how staff are paid - Cleared the lunch with a teammate; one EBPN leader hugged her (01:13:17, 01:14:00). - Coyle: staff raise their own money and were never expelled from YWAM. Skyla: worked part-time throughout; one $50 donation, kept by YWAM because she was off the team (01:14:42). - Coyle's megachurch analogy: removed from the hospitality team, still allowed in the building (01:15:23). #### ⏱️ [01:16:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4566) The exit gate - Walked past D without acknowledging him; waited in her car so she wouldn't cross him in the lot (01:16:50). - 10 to 15 feet from the gate, D waved her down; she stopped: "what if he wants to apologize?" (01:17:33). - She asked a teammate to pray with her while waiting (01:18:18). > [!quote] [01:19:00] > I've called campus security. You're not allowed to be here and you need to wait here. - She drove out and went to her mother's (01:19:00). #### ⏱️ [01:19:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4784) The Workplace post - A friend sent a screenshot from the YWAM Kona Workplace (private Facebook for students and staff): she wasn't allowed on campus, was disruptive, and refused to leave when asked (01:19:44, 01:20:29). - Skyla: no one asked her to leave; she wouldn't have come if she'd known (01:20:29). - Effect: public shaming; fear of being seen at Target (01:20:29, 01:21:13). #### ⏱️ [01:21:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=4915) Security's terms - S, head of security: "a personal issue with the EBPN team"; asked her to send her PTSD diagnosis; refused removal repeatedly despite about a dozen callers and emails (01:21:13, 01:21:55, 01:22:40). - Island scale: a teacher at her mother's school had seen the post (01:22:40). - Friend: "Leader D is just being a big baby" (01:23:24). Post aged out; a female leader said no one checks the security page anyway (01:24:07). #### ⏱️ [01:24:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5092) The abuse response team - Formed after the allegation, alongside other allegations involving children (01:25:36). - She emailed DH, Darlene Cunningham, A, the team, and her pastor: don't approach me in public; take down the post (01:25:36, 01:27:03). - A leader approaching her from behind at church made her legs give out (01:26:20). - Reply after a week: "we will send it to the appropriate people." Then nothing for 6 months (01:27:03, 01:27:45). #### ⏱️ [01:27:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5265) C, the draft letter, and the roommate veto - After 6 months, C reached out and seemed to understand abuse (01:27:45, 01:28:28). - Leadership drafted a post saying she was allowed back on campus; not an apology but "wasn't terrible" (01:28:28). - Dropped after D's roommate, who lived with D and DH, said he wouldn't want her on campus (01:29:09). - X: no longer permitted to lead in YWAM; left the island with his family (01:29:09). #### ⏱️ [01:29:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5393) What she wants listeners to take - Anticipates YWAM-minded listeners picking out details that fit their prior (01:30:40). > [!quote] [01:30:40] > I really wish that back then I would have believed the people who told me that they had had bad experiences with WWAM - Still loves her teammates; purpose is to help someone else recognize it's time to leave (01:31:23). - More freedom outside; ethical duty versus staying silent (01:32:08). - Validation outside is constant; inside, bad experiences are demonized (01:32:53). #### ⏱️ [01:33:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5616) Coyle's closing address to current staff - "The God of the Bible is not going to ask you... to be silent in the face of injustice" (01:33:36). - Reframes "God is not a god of confusion": confusion about leaders' character signals a problem with the ministry, not the person (01:35:06). #### ⏱️ [01:35:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5750) Skyla's final thought on geography - Islanders' stories span the base's history; Loren has died; new structures exist; she still hears of harm (01:36:33). > [!quote] [01:37:15] > It's not isolated incidents, but it's so well hidden and it's so well covered up and anyone who does not fall in line is kicked out. - Most staff leave the island when they leave YWAM, so their voices go with them; she stayed because she's from there (01:37:15, 01:37:59). #### ⏱️ [01:38:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4&t=5922) Close - Coyle: structural change requires investigating and listening rather than shunning those who speak (01:38:42). - Next week: another YWAM storyteller. Jay Coyle signs off "for Ja[nna] Harris" (01:39:24). Disclaimer: views are the speakers' own; fair-use commentary; corrections welcome (01:39:24, 01:40:08). ## 📚 References The transcript itself contains one link; the rest come from the video description or are primary sources for named entities. - [Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI, The Bodies Behind The Bus](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4): the source video, 1 h 40 min, uploaded 2026-09-17. - [Sacred Wilderness](https://sacredwilderness.org): the nonprofit the show asks listeners to support at 00:00:00; the only URL spoken in the transcript. - Series opener: "Intro To Stories From YWAM: Loren Cunningham And The Seven Mountain Mandate" (same channel; analyzed separately). Relevant because the "spheres" argument at 00:45:39 is that framework in use. - Series siblings: "Shelby's Story Pt. 1" and "Pt. 2" (YWAM Switzerland; analyzed separately). - [Youth With A Mission](https://ywam.org): the organization; Skyla's account concerns the Kona, Hawaii base, which she describes as the largest by membership and Loren Cunningham's home base (00:42:00). - End Bible Poverty Now: the YWAM initiative and team Skyla joined (00:08:39). The transcript doesn't name the short YWAM Publishing book she mentions at 00:09:21; check YWAM Publishing's Cunningham titles before citing one. - Mars Hill Church: source of the "bodies behind the bus" clip at 00:01:24 that names the podcast. The speaker isn't named in the transcript. - Vault cross-references: `Youth With a Mission's Culture of Giving Examined YWAM Jenny & Shelby Podcast Episode 697`, `YWAM vs. Stanford Prison Experiment Jenny McGrath 566`, `YWAM, Decentralization, and the Problem of Accountability Jenny McGrath & Shelby Hofer 674`, `Behind the Smiles YWAM Branding vs. Reality Jenny McGrath Podcast Episode 589`, and `How Did IHOPKC Get Here Tracing the Spiritual Family Tree` under `3. Resources/Readwise/Articles/`. ## 🗣️ Paraphrase Skyla joined a YWAM Kona team in 2020 because its leader told her the deaf-community work she cared about was exactly what they lacked, and told her to push them. A year in, she asked a second leader to plan that work into a new initiative up front. He refused, she cried, she left. The next morning the two leaders told her the meeting's purpose had been withheld to test her reaction, that crying was rude, that she needed discipleship, and asked whether she was committed to him personally. From there the account runs on a single track: every channel she tried returned her to the person she was complaining about. The senior leader promised to intervene and didn't. The mediator sent her to a one-on-one. The accountability chain ended at one man who'd raised the accused in his house. When a teammate alleged clergy sexual abuse against a third leader, the team was told it was an "inappropriate relationship" and that the complainant, having gone to court, had left the sphere where Christian obligations applied. Skyla was removed from the team one hour before the co-founder came to hear from it, by a leader who told her he knew it wasn't right. She was still, technically, in YWAM. That distinction matters because YWAM staff raise their own money; removing her cost the organization nothing and cost her the work. A campus security post later said she'd refused to leave campus; the security chief wanted her PTSD paperwork before he'd consider taking it down. Her final observation is the most transferable one: most people who leave YWAM Kona also leave the island, so their stories leave with them. She didn't, and this recording is what that looks like. ## 📰 Newsletter **A complaint that gets routed back to the accused isn't a process; it's a filter.** This week's long listen is off our usual beat: a 100-minute survivor interview from The Bodies Behind The Bus about a YWAM base in Hawaii. Skip it if you need to. But if you run a community, moderate a project, or sit on a code-of-conduct committee, the mechanics in this account are worth an hour. A volunteer asks a leader for a planning conversation, gets refused, cries, leaves. Next morning she's told the meeting's purpose was hidden "to test your reaction" (00:20:58). Her escalation goes to a senior leader who promises to act and later admits he didn't (00:30:17). A mediator's first step is a one-on-one with the person she's afraid of (00:37:40). Her formal statement meeting turns into six men critiquing her communication (00:54:26). She's removed from the team an hour before the co-founder arrives to listen (00:58:49). None of those steps is exotic. Each one is what happens by default when a project has informal leadership (she didn't know who her leader was for a year, 00:12:59), self-funded contributors who can be dropped at zero cost (01:14:42), and no incident channel that bypasses the people involved. WordPress teams have written CoC and incident-response docs precisely to avoid this shape. Reading a case where none of that existed is a decent way to check whether ours would hold. One more line for anyone who manages people: the leader who removed her said "I know it's not right, but it's what's best for the team" (00:58:49). If you've ever said the first half of that sentence, the second half is the part to interrogate. [Video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4) · [Sacred Wilderness](https://sacredwilderness.org). ## ✅ Action items #### DevRel - Developer advocacy: no direct action from this source; nearest relevance is the incident-handling pattern, which belongs in community programs rather than developer programs. - Education: use the "test your reaction" meeting (00:20:58) and the six-leader critique session (00:54:26) as anonymized case studies in any moderator or team-lead training on how not to receive a complaint. - Developer experience: none from this source. - Developer marketing: none from this source. - Community management: audit whether any escalation path in programs Courtney runs requires the complainant to first confront the subject one-on-one (00:37:40). If one does, add a bypass. - Internal/external: no direct action; nearest relevance is the "leadership roles you can't identify" problem (00:12:59), which maps onto any program without a published org chart. #### OSPO - Policy and governance: write down who a contributor complains to when the problem is the team lead, and confirm that person isn't the lead's housemate, sponsor or appointee. The account's accountability chain ended at one man who raised the accused (00:36:53). - License compliance: none from this source. - Security management: none from this source. - Software inventory: none from this source. - Developer support: none from this source. - Community engagement: when a partner organization calls to "warn" you about a former contributor (01:11:06), require the caller's name and the specific claim in writing before acting on it. - Strategic alignment: track time-to-substantive-response on incident reports as a KPI. The account's abuse response team took about 6 months (01:27:45). #### Community - Maintainers: a removal from a team that leaves someone "in the project" but without email, office or chat access (00:58:05) is a removal. Name it as one in governance docs so the person can appeal it as one. - Contributors: document a "bring a witness" right for any meeting called without an agenda (00:20:17, 00:58:05). - Sponsors: if contributors are self-funded, the project bears no cost when it drops them (01:14:42). Sponsors funding community roles should ask what protects the funded person from that. - Ecosystem: the geography point (01:37:15) generalizes: contributors who leave a project also leave its channels, so exit interviews need to happen before access is revoked. #### WordPress - Core: no direct action from this source; nearest relevance: none. - Core Performance: none from this source. - Core AI: none from this source. - **Core Program Team:** cross-team incident retrospectives should include the "was the complainant routed back to the subject" check; the account shows three separate channels doing exactly that (00:30:17, 00:37:40, 01:21:55). - Mobile: none from this source. - Playground: none from this source. - Community: the Community team's incident response docs already require reports to go to a team that excludes involved parties. This account is a worked example of why; use it in deputy training without the religious specifics if needed. - Training: none from this source. - Marketing: none from this source. - Support: none from this source. - Design: none from this source. - Documentation: none from this source. - Photos: none from this source. - TV: none from this source; nearest relevance is caption quality, since auto-captions on this video garble the organization's name 10 different ways. - Polyglots: none from this source; nearest relevance is the deaf-language Bible access framing (00:05:02), which is a reminder that sign languages are languages in any localization scope. - Accessibility: the deaf-community thread (00:05:02, 00:41:18) is the only accessibility content; no WordPress action follows from it. - Meta: none from this source. - CLI: none from this source. - Hosting: none from this source. - Tide: none from this source. - Openverse: none from this source. - Themes: none from this source. - Plugins: none from this source. #### The WPOCC - Programs: if The WP Open Community Collective funds stipends, write the removal and appeal terms into the stipend agreement before the first payment. The account's "you're off the team by the end of this meeting" (00:58:05) is what an unwritten term looks like when exercised. - Projects: none from this source. - Funding experiments: a transparent ledger should show what happens to funds designated for a person who's removed. The account's kept $50 (01:14:42) is trivial in amount and not trivial as a rule. ### FAIR - Technical independence: none from this source. - Policies and covenants: anti-capture clauses should cover the "accountability runs to one person" failure (00:36:53), not just financial capture. - Productized governance artifacts: an operator scorecard row for "complaint path excludes the subject and their appointees" is the single check this account most clearly motivates. ## 🧪 Hypotheses 1. In YWAM survivor accounts collected by this podcast series, the first formal step offered to a complainant is a meeting with the accused in more than half of cases. This account shows it three times (00:30:17 promised, 00:37:40 instructed, 01:21:55 required). 2. Removal-from-team-but-not-from-organization is the modal disciplinary outcome for YWAM staff who raise concerns, because it costs the organization nothing when staff are self-funded (01:14:42) and leaves no expulsion record. 3. Ex-members who are local to a base's host community produce public accounts at a higher rate than ex-members who relocated to join, holding years of service constant. Skyla's own explanation at 01:37:15 predicts this. 4. Where the "spheres" or Seven Mountain framework is taught, leaders use "government sphere" language to justify non-engagement with complainants who pursue legal remedies. One instance here (00:45:39); the series opener may hold more. 5. Female leaders in the organization who report their own past mistreatment while advising a complainant to stay quiet (00:35:26) are describing the selection filter that produced their positions, not a coincidence. 6. Reasons given for a removal that change across retellings (Skyla counts 5 or 6, 01:00:13) indicate the stated reasons are post hoc and the operative reason is the one denied (here, timing relative to Darlene Cunningham's visit, 00:58:49). ## 📊 Methodology - **H1 and H2.** Code every episode in the podcast's YWAM series plus the Jenny McGrath and Shelby Hofer episodes already in the vault (697, 674, 589, 566) for: first formal step offered; whether a third party was present; whether the outcome was team removal, base removal, or organizational expulsion; whether the person was self-funded. Report counts, not impressions. - **H3.** From the same corpus, record whether each storyteller was local to the base's region before joining. Compare the local-to-total ratio against what you'd expect if locals are a small minority of staff at international bases. A local overrepresentation supports the geography mechanism. - **H4.** Search transcripts for "sphere," "government sphere," "mountain," and "legal" within 60 seconds of a complaint or lawsuit mention. Tabulate co-occurrence. - **H5.** Code each advisor interaction in the corpus by the advisor's gender, whether they disclosed their own past mistreatment, and whether the advice was to escalate or to endure. This tests a pattern Skyla asserts from her own sample. - **H6.** For each removal in the corpus, list the distinct reasons given and the number of retellings. Correlate reason count with whether the storyteller reports a denied contextual trigger. - **Controls.** All sources are survivor-side; state that in every result. Where an organization has published a response, code it alongside. Pre-register the coding scheme before listening. ## ❓ Questions - Who, if anyone, is the designated recipient of a complaint against a team leader at YWAM Kona, and is that role published anywhere staff can find it? Skyla didn't know who her leaders were for a year (00:12:59). - Was "we needed to test your reaction" (00:20:58) an individual improvisation or a practice with a name in YWAM discipleship culture? The Shelby episodes may answer this. - What did the YWAM Kona Workplace post actually say, how many people saw it, and does the platform's retention policy explain the "aged out" outcome (01:24:07)? - What is the legal status of YWAM Kona staff under Hawaii law, and did the "I'm a volunteer" coaching Skyla describes (01:06:03) come from counsel or from the founder alone? - Did the abuse response team publish a charter, and does it explain a 6-month silence (01:27:45)? - How did the complainant's legal action against YWAM resolve? The transcript doesn't say. - Is "God qualifies the called" (01:03:04) a stock phrase in YWAM teaching, and if so where does it originate? - What proportion of YWAM Kona staff are from Hawaii, and does YWAM track why people leave? ## 🔮 Future research - **Complaint routing as a measurable property.** Across the vault's religious-abuse sources, no note yet counts how often the first formal step is a meeting with the accused. This account and the Grievance Process Permanent note give the hypothesis; the series gives a corpus. - **The self-funded staff model and disciplinary cost.** Skyla's $50 (01:14:42) and the "volunteer" coaching (01:06:03) point at a structural feature: an organization whose workers fund themselves can remove them for free. The Culture of Giving episode (697) covers the money side; nobody has yet joined it to the discipline side. - **Geography as a silencing mechanism.** Skyla's claim at 01:37:15 that departing staff take their stories off the island is testable against where the podcast's storytellers now live, and generalizes to any residential program (seminaries, ships, campuses). - **Spheres doctrine in operational use.** The Seven Mountain framework is usually analyzed as political theology. Its use here (00:45:39) to define a complainant as outside the community's obligations is a governance use, and a distinct research question. - **Informal leadership as a risk factor.** "Loosey goosey" roles (00:12:59) meant Skyla couldn't identify her accountability chain until confrontation. Whether ambiguous org charts predict worse complaint outcomes is checkable across the corpus. ## 💡 Implications - **Practice.** Any organization with volunteer or self-funded workers should write the removal, appeal and access-revocation procedure before it's needed, because the default procedure is "you're off by the end of this meeting" (00:58:05). Complaint intake must exclude the subject and the subject's appointees, or it's a filter (00:37:40). - **Policy.** The "volunteer" label doesn't decide legal status; the working relationship does. Skyla's account of a founder coaching staff to self-identify as volunteers during pending litigation (01:06:03) is a policy question for any state where mission bases operate. - **Security.** A private campus social network used to post an unverified "not allowed on campus" notice about a named individual (01:19:44) is a safety tool turned reputational weapon. Posting rules, review, and takedown authority should sit outside the team in conflict; here they sat with a security chief who deferred to that team (01:21:55). - **Education.** The phrase "God qualifies the called" (01:03:04) and the "government sphere" argument (00:45:39) are both teachable specimens of theology used to exempt an institution from ordinary accountability. Skyla and the hosts supply the counter-reading at 01:35:06. - **Funding models.** Self-funded staff bear the full cost of their own removal. Donors who give "through" an organization to a person should ask what happens to designated gifts when that person is dropped; the account says the gift stays (01:14:42). - **Documentation.** Skyla kept a list of the reasons given for her removal (01:00:13). That list is what let her show the reasons changed. Contributors in any hierarchy should keep one. ## 🧠 Learning styles assessment - **Reading level estimate.** Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level on the transcript body: approximately grade 6 to 7, with Flesch Reading Ease near 80. Conversational, short clauses, few polysyllables. The effective comprehension load comes from the cast of single-letter leaders (A, D, X, K, DH, SO, LL, S, C) and undefined insider terms (DTS, base, spheres, discipleship), not from sentence structure. #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: nothing beyond two talking heads. The Workplace post is described but not shown. - Improve: a timeline graphic of the roughly two years, and a one-slide org chart of who Skyla thought her leaders were versus who they were (00:12:59), would carry most of the structural content. #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: full conversational audio; the show is a podcast first. Emotional register is audible and the hosts let silences sit. - Improve: music beds overlap speech at 00:00:42 and 00:01:24; duck them. A 5-minute audio recap of the timeline would help a listener who loses the letter-coded cast. #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Skyla's own analogies do real work: the Percy Jackson bubble (00:07:13), the mega-church hospitality team (01:15:23, Coyle's). - Improve: DTS, base, spheres, "discipleship" as a corrective practice, and Hanai are never defined for an outside listener. One clause each. #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: none; this is testimony, not instruction. - Improve: Coyle's closing (01:33:36) gestures at an action ("go to people outside YWAM"). A checklist for someone currently inside a similar situation, drawn from what Skyla wishes she'd done (01:30:40), would convert the episode into something usable. #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: the hosts periodically restate the causal chain ("all of this stems from...", 00:25:14; "these two things happen leading up to you being let go," 01:07:28) and Skyla corrects the ordering when it's wrong (01:07:28). - Improve: the timeline is approximate at several points by Skyla's own account. A dated sequence, even to the month, would let a logical listener test the "removed one hour before Darlene" inference (00:58:49) against the denial. #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: the show is a series; listeners are addressed directly at open and close; Sacred Wilderness is named as a community. - Improve: no discussion venue is named in the transcript. Survivors of the same base could use a moderated one. #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: the opening invitation to notice defensiveness (00:00:42) is a reflection prompt. Coyle's "if you're not allowed to ask questions... pause and investigate" (01:34:21) is another. - Improve: turn both into written prompts in the description. #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: the island setting is load-bearing, not decorative: Skyla's argument about who stays and who leaves (01:37:15) is about place. Geckos and the ocean appear at 01:16:06. - Improve: the ecosystem framing is there implicitly; naming the base as an enclave within a small island community would make it explicit. ## 📊 Accessibility assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: YouTube's player and page landmarks; a machine-readable auto-transcript. - Improve: no on-screen text is described in the transcript, so nothing to flag under WCAG 2.2 AA 1.1.1. The description should carry the anonymization key (who A, D, X, K, DH, SO, LL, S, C are) as text. #### Keyboard navigation - Present: platform default; 2.1.1 and 2.4.7 pass via YouTube. - Improve: nothing in the video adds barriers. #### Contrast and readability - Present: unverifiable from the transcript; standard two-speaker video layout is likely. - Improve: if lower-third name cards exist, check them against 1.4.3 (Contrast Minimum). No other on-screen text is implied. #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: player scales; captions resize independently. - Improve: any burned-in title card fails 1.4.4 and 1.4.10 by definition. Keep names and timestamps in the description. #### Media and captions - Present: auto-captions exist and are how this analysis was produced. - Improve: they render "YWAM" at least 10 different ways (WWAM, YOM, YM, Wyom, WWIM, Yona, Bioam, Wom, Wim, YWIN), "Loren" as "Lauren," "EBPN" as "EVPN," and "Skyla" once as "Skyler." For a survivor account where the organization's name is the point, that's a 1.2.2 (Captions, Prerecorded) failure in substance. Human-corrected captions are the single highest-value fix; at 100 minutes it's a few hours of work. No audio description is needed (1.2.5) because the content is speech. #### Forms and interactions - Present: none in the video. The donation URL is spoken once (00:00:00). - Improve: put sacredwilderness.org as a link in the description; 3.3.2 applies to the donation page it leads to, not to the video. #### Standards reference - Primary gap against WCAG 2.2 AA: **1.2.2** (inaccurate captions on the central proper noun). Secondary: **1.4.4 / 1.4.10** for any burned-in text. Content is otherwise speech-only and platform-served. ## 🌍 DEIB assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: the account is grounded in a specific place (Big Island, Hawaii) with a local guest; Hawaiian kinship language ("Hanai uncle," 00:37:40) appears; the deaf-communities thread treats sign languages as first languages (00:05:02); a Jamaican YWAM team gets credited by name for prior work (00:41:18). - Improve: the Germany DTS and the LA seminar are named but not compared; a listener can't tell what made those contexts safer. One sentence from Skyla on the difference would help. #### Inclusive language - Present: the hosts use the guest's terms and correct their own framing when she corrects the timeline (01:07:28). "Clergy sexual abuse" is used deliberately over "inappropriate relationship," and the reason is stated (00:47:08). - Improve: hosts' clinical labels ("narcissistic abuse," 00:39:51; "textbook Darvo," 00:40:34) and "clearly the devil" (01:08:12, sarcastic) go beyond the guest's own language. Coyle's "when men cry, it's from a place of being authentic" (00:29:34) is sarcasm that could land as sincere on a cold listen. #### Neurodiversity support - Present: the hosts recap and re-order the timeline at intervals (00:25:14, 00:51:34, 01:07:28), which helps a listener who's lost the thread. - Improve: nine single-letter leaders with no on-screen key is a high working-memory load. Chapter markers and a description key would fix most of it. #### Representation - Present: a woman survivor speaks at length; two hosts of different genders; the guest credits other women (the teammate at 00:28:05, the German colleague at 01:09:38, the older witness at 00:58:05) as actors rather than background. - Improve: the deaf communities at the center of Skyla's work never speak. The episode is about her access to serve them, not about them. That's honest scoping, and worth a sentence acknowledging it. #### Psychological safety - Present: the opening frames defensiveness as normal and invites curiosity (00:00:42); hosts affirm crying as acceptable (00:29:34); Skyla states she still loves her former teammates (01:31:23); the disclaimer invites corrections (01:40:08). - Improve: no content warning precedes the clergy sexual abuse segment (00:42:44) or the campus-security confrontation (01:19:00). A timestamped warning in the description costs nothing. ## ✅ Logical validity #### Strong reasoning - **Mechanism, 01:37:15 to 01:37:59.** Skyla's argument that departing staff take their stories off the island because they came from elsewhere is a clear causal mechanism with a stated exception (herself) that explains why this account exists at all. It's the most transferable claim in the episode. Clarify by estimating what share of Kona staff are local. - **Contradiction test, 00:07:55 and 00:08:39.** Her standard for "contradictory" is observable: compare a leader's public teaching with their one-on-one conduct. That's a falsifiable test any member can run, not a mood. - **Inference from timing, 00:58:49.** Removal one hour before Darlene Cunningham's visit, after a weekend ultimatum to meet before or not attend, supports the inference that the two were linked despite the denial. It's inductive and stated as such ("So I don't get to share my side"). Strengthen by dating both events. - **Inference from changing reasons, 01:00:13.** She kept a list of the 5 or 6 reasons given. Reasons that change across retellings are weak evidence for any of them and moderate evidence for an unstated one. Valid as far as it goes. - **Coyle's witness point, 00:23:05.** "Now you don't have a witness" identifies the concrete consequence of A's exit rather than characterizing his motive. That's the right level of claim for the evidence. - **Harris's variance observation, 00:03:36 to 00:04:19.** Nearly every storyteller names one good base, so the variance is by leadership, so the fix is oversight. Inductive from a self-selected sample, but the conclusion (oversight) is the modest one the premise supports. #### Fallacies - **Hasty generalization, 00:35:26.** "almost every female leader that I have spoken to within WWAM" responds by describing their own mistreatment and inaction. This is Skyla's own sample, of unstated size, and she says so ("that I have spoken to"). *Fix:* count the conversations; the claim is testable and the H5 design above does it. - **Diagnostic labeling of an absent party, 00:39:51 and 00:40:34.** Coyle applies "narcissistic abuse" and "textbook Darvo" to D based on Skyla's account. The pattern description is fair; the clinical term is a diagnosis of someone not present. *Fix:* describe the behavior ("he reframed your tears as your offense") and drop the label, which the description already supports better. - **Sarcasm as assertion, 01:08:12.** "she's clearly the devil according to Lauren" attributes to Loren Cunningham a specific claim about a specific person that Skyla's account doesn't contain; he spoke generally about lawsuits (01:06:45). *Fix:* keep the general claim, which is damaging enough on its own terms. - **Reported special pleading, 00:45:39.** SO's argument, as Skyla reports it: the complainant entered the "government sphere," so Christian obligations toward her lapse. That's an exemption carved for the institution's benefit with no principle offered for why legal action changes moral duties. *Fix:* the fallacy belongs to the reported speaker; the analysis should name it as reported, which the transcript does. - **Reported appeal to divine authority, 01:03:04.** "God qualifies the called," as LL used it, replaces a character assessment with an unfalsifiable claim about calling. Skyla identifies the move herself (01:03:49). *Fix:* same as above; this is a specimen, not a flaw in the episode's reasoning. - **Single-source limitation, throughout.** Not a fallacy, but a limit: no counterparty responds, the Workplace post isn't shown, and several dates are approximate. The disclaimer at 01:40:08 acknowledges this in general terms. *Fix:* a description note listing what was and wasn't independently confirmed. #### Tone of voice - Skyla is measured, specific, and self-correcting: she qualifies her own claims ("that I have spoken to," 00:35:26; "I don't remember exactly," 01:24:52), corrects the hosts' timeline (01:07:28), credits people who treated her well (the Jamaica team, 00:41:18; the German colleague, 01:09:38; friends who called security, 01:22:40), and says twice that she still loves her former teammates (01:31:23). Harris is quiet and precise, mostly restating and checking sequence. Coyle is the emotional register of the show: profane at moments ("Bro cried," 00:31:00), sarcastic ("clearly the devil," 01:08:12), and the one who supplies clinical vocabulary. The hosts' heat sits mostly in reaction lines; the guest's cool sits in the narrative. That split is worth knowing when deciding which sentences to cite: the checkable material is almost all in her voice. ## 🛡️ DARVO analysis Applicable. Coyle names DARVO explicitly at 00:40:34, and the account contains several reported responses to a complaint that fit the pattern. Everything below analyzes statements as Skyla reports them; the speakers aren't present to respond. - **Deny.** Leaders A and K deny that the removal has anything to do with Darlene Cunningham's visit, the abuse allegations, or her concerns about D, in Skyla's account repeating "It has nothing to do with that" (00:59:31), while A simultaneously says "I know it's not right" (00:58:49). Security head S denies authority over the post ("I'm not in charge of that," 01:21:13). The clergy sexual abuse allegation is minimized to an "inappropriate relationship," which Skyla notes assigns blame to both parties (00:47:51). A's "I didn't think it was that serious" (00:31:00) minimizes after promising action. - **Attack.** The complainant's character becomes the subject: rude, lacking discipleship (00:21:40, 00:22:23); "offended against YWAM," poor communicator, too young (00:54:26, 00:55:10); "disruptive" and refusing to leave campus, in a post to the whole campus community (01:20:29); a warning call to YWAM LA (01:11:06). Loren Cunningham's reported framing of lawsuits as "the attacks of the enemy" (01:06:45) attacks a class of complainants without naming one. LL's "I don't know how that woman could have let herself be put in that situation" (01:02:22) attacks the sexual abuse complainant's judgment. - **Reverse victim and offender.** Skyla's crying becomes the offense and the leaders' trust becomes the injury: "how can we trust you" (00:21:40). The accused in the sexual abuse matter is presented as "in a really good place... very repentant and we're really rooting for him" (00:48:35), with his own platform to frame events (00:49:19), while the complainant is placed outside the community's obligations (00:46:23). The institution casts itself as the party under attack in litigation (01:06:45). The Darlene claim reverses Skyla's exclusion into her refusal (01:11:49). - **Emotional cues and related fallacies.** The "we needed to test your reaction" opener (00:20:58) reframes the meeting as an evaluation of her before she speaks, which is the setup for the reversal. The "Are you committed to me?" question (00:24:32) converts a work disagreement into a loyalty test, which is the shift-from-claims-to-character move the vault already tracks. Coyle's own use of DARVO as a label is apt for the reported pattern but, as noted under Fallacies, is applied to people who don't speak in the recording. ## 🎯 Conclusion Skyla's account describes an organization in which every channel a complainant tries returns her to the person she's complaining about: the senior leader who promises to intervene and doesn't (00:30:17), the mediator whose first step is a one-on-one (00:37:40), the accountability chain that ends at one man who raised the accused (00:36:53), the security chief who says work it out with the team (01:21:55). The structural facts that make this cheap for the institution are checkable against the vault's other YWAM sources: staff are self-funded and labeled volunteers (01:14:42, 01:06:03), leadership roles are informal enough that a team member can't name her leaders (00:12:59), and most staff leave the island when they leave (01:37:15). The interpersonal specifics are one witness's account, told carefully, with her own qualifications and corrections, and without a response from the people she describes. The hosts add clinical labels the guest doesn't use. Neither fact weakens the structural claims, which don't depend on anyone's intent. **Next steps for readers:** cross-read this with the Culture of Giving episode (697) for the money mechanism and the Decentralization and Accountability episode (674) for the oversight mechanism; both are in the vault. Then run the audit this account motivates on any community you're responsible for: does your complaint path, at any step, require the complainant to meet the subject or the subject's appointees? If yes, that step is a filter, and the account shows what it filters out. ## 🔄 Refactor Appendix — Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI > Density: 2–5 Literature atoms (H3 pad), 0–3 Permanent candidates (H4 pad). > Emitted: 5 Literature, 3 Permanent. Resonance filter applied: the hosts' clinical > labels and the sarcastic asides were dropped; only the guest's checkable claims survive. > > Konik claim-header rules: present tense, declarative, ≤10 words, searchable, unique. > > Atomicity: one declarative sentence per atom. "and"/"also" → split. > > Tag pool: #bmf · #addendum · #xref · #articleseed · #storystem · #share · #aphorisms ### 📚 Literature Split Pad #### [H1] Institutions fear disclosure of abuse more than abuse > [!quote] [00:50:04] > They're not afraid of staff members being abused. They're afraid of staff members talking about the abuse. **Context & use**: - 00:50:04, after describing the accused leader's platform to frame events while the complainant was cut off. - Skyla's own thesis statement for the episode. It's an inference from behavior (who got a platform, who got told not to engage), not a mind-reading claim, and the preceding five minutes supply the evidence. **Tags**: #xref #share <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H2] A concealed meeting agenda converts the meeting into a test > [!quote] [00:20:58] > We didn't want to tell you why we were meeting because we needed to test your reaction. **Context & use**: - 00:20:58, the opening line of the follow-up meeting, as Skyla reports it; she'd asked for an agenda the night before and got none. - The mechanism: withholding purpose means any reaction can be scored as failure. Pair with the "bring a witness" action item; an agenda request that goes unanswered is the tell. **Tags**: #xref #articleseed <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H3] A leader who names the wrong still executes it > [!quote] [00:58:49] > Skyla, I know it's not right, but it's what's best for the team. **Context & use**: - 00:58:49, during the removal meeting, alongside "it's not really up to me. My arms being twisted." - The sentence separates moral judgment from action and assigns the action to an unnamed "team." Keep as the cleanest specimen in the vault of an authority disowning its own decision while making it. **Tags**: #xref #aphorisms <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H4] Volunteer status is invoked to escape employee protections > [!quote] [01:06:03] > oh we're just volunteers so we don't have to follow the same laws rules regulations that protect employees, right? **Context & use**: - 01:06:03, Skyla's account of Loren Cunningham's talk to several hundred staff, days after her removal, while litigation was pending. - This is her paraphrase of his story, reported in his voice; the transcript can't confirm his exact words. Its value is the claimed function: coaching staff to self-label in a way that bears on a legal case. Cross-read with the Culture of Giving episode (697). **Tags**: #xref #addendum <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H5] Silence about mistreatment is the price of promotion > [!quote] [00:35:26] > I didn't do anything about it and that's why I have my position of power and authority today. **Context & use**: - 00:35:26, Skyla's composite of what female YWAM leaders told her when she raised abuse concerns; she frames it as "almost every" one she spoke to. - Read as a selection effect: the women who advanced are the ones who didn't report, so the advice to endure is the filter describing itself. Her sample size is unstated; H5 in Methodology tests it. **Tags**: #xref <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### 🧠 Atomic Split Pad #### [P1] A complaint routed to the accused tests the complainant **Claim** (one sentence, Courtney's voice): When the first formal response to a complaint is a meeting between the complainant and the subject with no independent party, the process measures the complainant's compliance rather than the complaint. **Evidence pointer**: [[#H2]] · [[#H1]] **Scope & conditions**: Holds when the subject outranks the complainant or controls their access, funding or role. Doesn't apply to peer disputes with a real third party present from the start. Breaks if the "meeting" is one step of a documented process the complainant can skip without penalty. **Links**: - [[A Grievance Process That Routes Complaints to the Accused Is a Concealment Mechanism]] — because extends it with the "we needed to test your reaction" mechanism: the routing doesn't just warn the accused, it turns the meeting itself into an evaluation of the complainant - [[A Shift From Claims to Character Signals a Conversation Left the Facts]] — because evidence-for: the six-leader meeting at 00:54:26 moved from her concerns to her communication, age and loyalty within minutes - [[Charismatic Damage Control Runs on DARVO That Recasts Victims as Biased Outsiders]] — because applies-in the "government sphere" reframing at 00:45:39, where legal action redefines the complainant as outside the community's obligations <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [P2] Self-funded staff make removal free for the institution **Claim** (one sentence, Courtney's voice): An organization whose workers raise their own support can remove any of them at zero cost to itself, so "if you don't like it, you can leave" is a structurally cheap answer to every complaint. **Evidence pointer**: [[#H4]] · 00:50:49 · 01:14:42 **Scope & conditions**: Holds for mission agencies, volunteer-run projects and any role where the worker's livelihood comes from third parties who give "through" the organization. Weakens where the worker's departure costs the organization a capability it can't replace, or where a stipend agreement names removal terms. The $50 retained at 01:14:42 is the edge case: designated gifts don't follow the person out. **Links**: - [[An Unreachable Standard Converts Devotion Into Extractable Labor]] — because extends: that note explains how devotion funds unbounded effort; this adds that the same funding structure makes the effort disposable - [[A Volunteer Label Does Not Remove a Sponsorship Conflict]] — because contrasts on what the label hides: there a conflict of interest, here (as Skyla reports the founder framing it) the protections an employment relationship would carry - [[A Norm Against Public Criticism Converts Non-Exposure Into a Virtue]] — because applies-in the female leaders' "I didn't do anything and that's why I have my position" at 00:35:26, where silence is the price of the only paid roles <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [P3] Relocation-based membership exports the critics **Claim** (one sentence, Courtney's voice): A community whose members move in to join and move out to leave loses its critics from the local information environment by default, so a locally rooted ex-member is a disproportionately durable witness. **Evidence pointer**: 01:37:15 · 01:37:59 **Scope & conditions**: Holds for residential mission bases, campuses, ships, communes and any program with high geographic churn. Doesn't hold where ex-members stay local (a neighborhood church) or where online channels give departed members equal reach. Predicts that survivor podcasts will overrepresent locals relative to their share of staff. **Links**: - [[Absence of Testimony Indicates Absence of Invitation]] — because contrasts: there the absence is produced by nobody asking; here it's produced by nobody being left in town to ask - [[Authority Concentration Is the Fastest High-Control-Group Tell]] — because extends the one-visit checklist with a second observable: what share of members came from elsewhere, and where the departed went <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue - [F1] Confirm the anonymization key holds across the series: do the Shelby episodes use the same letter scheme, and does the series opener name the Kona leadership structure Skyla describes (DH as acting leader)? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NV6_SoZmg4 #fleeting #inbox - [F2] Find the YWAM Publishing book Skyla says backed End Bible Poverty Now (00:09:21); the transcript doesn't name it #fleeting #inbox - [F3] Open question: is "test your reaction" (00:20:58) a named practice in YWAM discipleship culture or one leader's improvisation? Check against Shelby Pt. 1 and Pt. 2 #fleeting #inbox - [F4] Cross-read 01:06:03 (volunteer coaching) against the Culture of Giving episode 697 highlights on how staff funding works; the two together are the money-and-discipline mechanism #fleeting #inbox - [F5] Article seed: "The complaint path is a filter": three channels in one account (senior leader, mediator, security) each returned the complainant to the subject; what an intake path that doesn't do this looks like #fleeting #inbox #articleseed - [F6] Skyla's list of 5 or 6 changing reasons (01:00:13) is a reusable evidence practice: keep the list of reasons you're given, dated. Candidate for a personal-context-os prompt #fleeting #inbox ### → Things 3 (max 2 actions) - [ ] Cross-read this analysis against the vault's YWAM Readwise notes (697, 674, 589, 566) and log which structural claims (self-funding, volunteer label, informal leadership, complaint routing) each one corroborates — YWAM series synthesis, 30 min #things - [ ] Audit the complaint paths in communities Courtney moderates for any step that routes the complainant to the subject or the subject's appointees — community governance, 20 min #things <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** [[Full Document Contents/Articles/Skyla's Story YWAM Kona, HI.md|Skyla's Story / YWAM Kona, HI by Janna Harris and Jay Coyle (The Bodies Behind The Bus)]] ## Highlights - [00:20:17] conversation. I'm going to go. And they don't say anything. And I just wait a second and then I just turn and I walk away and I go to my car and I just kind of drive home and for the rest of the day and just, you know, get out of that space and I get a message at like 5:00 that evening being from leader A and leader D saying, "Hey, let's meet tomorrow morning at such and such time." Right? And I kind of send them a message back and I'm like, "Okay, that sounds like a good idea. Can you clarify with me what kind of are we going to cover in this meeting? I assume we're going to be talking about what happened, but can we just talk about a little bit more? What [00:20:58] are you thinking? And I just don't get a response back from them. So, they just kind of like give me no information. So, I show up the next day and I end up meeting with both of them and we're actually outside on a picnic table in a public space and we're sitting down and I have both of them across from me and the first thing leader D says to me, he says, he says, "We didn't want to tell you why we were meeting because we needed to test your reaction." And so I get there and immediately they're like, "We're testing you. We want to see how you react." Right? So, it sets the whole stage of like, okay, well, if I cry again, what does that mean for you guys? Do I fail the test? What are you ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01m3cyc0n66ts1f43k7kq5w3kv)) - Note: [H2] A concealed meeting agenda converts the meeting into a test - Tags: atom/literature/h2 - [00:34:41] friend to be our mediator and so I had tried to think like okay well who could I reach out to that maybe would be a leader not a leader but like someone who's known and respected within YWAM knows YWAM but also someone maybe who is a woman who could you know see my perspective a little bit better or help with maybe some of the misogyny that I was experiencing or feeling but also had experience with conflict resolution and so I had reached out to her thinking that she would be kind of a neutral party for all of us. She was kind but her help was not helpful I would say and mostly because no fault to her just the sense that almost every female leader that I have spoken to within WWAM most [00:35:26] almost all of them when I express concerns of abuse or especially like male abuse abuse from male leaders and things like that or even just like poor communication or just being mean or like bullying or just like poor or communication things like that their response is often always to share their own experience of being hurt or abused by a male leader and saying I didn't do anything about it and that's why I have my position of power and authority today. If I had done something about it I probably wouldn't have my position. So she goes on to share her own experience within a a church circle where she was her story was kind of like whoa that's a ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01m3cyc80w6sj79vq3je1gdg4t)) - Note: [H5] Silence about mistreatment is the price of promotion - Tags: atom/literature/h3 - [00:49:19] he had made some compromises with his family during co he needed to take a break to focus on his family. And I I can reflect back now on that and just say, "Wow, how absurd is it that leader X was given the platform to control his narrative to that extent where he got to say what he wanted to say in the way he wanted to say it and present it. Whereas the victim, her voice was effectively like cut off, right? And then I can just like feel for myself too and be like in so many ways my voice has been and was cut off as well. And so I think it kind [00:50:04] of points to this idea of like what is why I'm afraid of? You know, they're not afraid of staff members being abused. They're afraid of staff members talking about the abuse. They're afraid of their reputation being harmed. They're afraid of people speaking out. They're not af they're not worried about keeping their staff safe. They're really not. And that's also devastating to kind of come to that conclusion as well. And I think just like to re-emphasize that point of how much they are not concerned about keeping us safe. In that same meeting, I basically brought up this thing of like, hey, I've been asking and I've been wanting and I've been pushing for there ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01m3cyby2h7gdamra8fvsmabe9)) - Note: [H1] Institutions fear disclosure of abuse more than abuse - Tags: atom/literature/h1 - [00:58:05] with me as well to be witnessed. We get there and essentially they're like, "Hey, uh, we think you need to take a break." And then it turns into like, "Hey, you're off the team by the end of this meeting or whatever. You're not going to have access to your email. You're not going to have access to the office anymore. You can come get your stuff after office hours. you can't come to any of our EVPN like gathering groups that we're doing like the one that you have planned in a couple months or whatever and they're they say and you're going to be off the team chats and like all that kind of stuff. So by the end of that meeting and I kind of push back a little bit and I'm like hey can I have my emails until the end of the week? I'm actively in conversations with people actively doing trainings and video calls [00:58:49] and all of my files and resources are in that email. And so leader A is like yes you can. I think it's important to mention like during that conversation there were two leaders. There was leader A and leader K. Leader K was there too. Leader K was definitely a bit more stern about all those things than leader A. Leader A at one point says to me, Skyla, I know it's not right, but it's what's best for the team. And then another point he says, it's not really up to me. My arms being twisted. I bring up this whole concept of like, hey, so you're kicking me off the team genuinely one hour before Darlene comes into the conversation. And so I don't get to share my side of the story with Darlene. I don't get to talk to her about my experience at all. And they're like, ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01m3cyc34qmces0dgd9nszd4yh)) - Note: [H3] A leader who names the wrong still executes it - Tags: atom/literature/h3 - [01:05:17] meetings. He does, but it's not very often. Like I said, he at this time he was much older and sick. So, it was kind of a rare moment. He basically comes to the staff meeting and at this time I think the mostly the only people on the campus who know that there is some sort of legal action happening against WWIM because because of this and that there's been an issue of clergy sexual abuse accusations or claims and stuff like that would be our internal team for the most part the EVPN team and we were a smaller group of maybe 25 people or something. Yeah, about 25 people. And so Lauren comes out and the conversation is very much so him sharing a story how they started Ywin back in the day and [01:06:03] people from the county people from the state came to the campus and they were like oh are you guys what are you guys are you guys volunteers are you employees like things like that and Lauren was like oh we're just volunteers so we don't have to follow the same laws rules regulations that protect employees, right? Because they're just volunteers. And they were like, "So, if we want to get rid of you at any time, we can get rid of you." You know, basically, they come and they coach everyone to be like, "What are you a volunteer? If anyone asks you what are you, I'm a volunteer." And this was this was significant for some of the legal action that was happening. And it was just blatant coaching of the entire community, right, without them realizing ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01m3cyc5kbeman5rh6he7zf3sj)) - Note: [H4] Volunteer status is invoked to escape employee protections - Tags: atom/literature/h3