I would echo similar thoughts elsewhere that John Armstrong's article be taken with a grain of salt. He mentioned a twelve-month acquaintance with Ron Ward supposedly as evidence of getting to know one top UBF leader, but most people know it can take quite a while longer to see and experience the dangers in UBF. The phrase "personally gracious almost to a fault" doesn't say anything beyond the fact that John Armstrong had a good time talking with Ron Ward. He also uses the word "errors that the group made in the past", referring to UBF behavior, which obviously minimizes them. The same behaviors referred to as "error" in the leadership, when seen in junior members, were often referred to much more strongly. Leaders apparently commit "errors" which will "likely....need further correction in the future." Everyone knows the same language was not used with junior members. The language used to describe the mistakes of UBF is obviously far more toned down than the language used within UBF when junior members commit mistakes, who rather are "sinful" and need "repentance" and quite strong corrections, often involving public humiliation. The article by John Armstrong is obviously not complete, and even biased, so take it with a grain of salt, for what it is only, which is a weak attempt by UBF to counter claims made against UBF.