Fun with James...

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Monger 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 06:51 pm
Monger wrote:
Fisherman wrote:
Actually Porcelain Doll, I am not a groupie, so I do overlook the fact that you are on a groupie board called NDN, and NO I didn't make any comments that were out of line ....... and we were talking about sexual health, so was on topic. But you got offended because of your religious non beliefs.
Fisherman, please keep in mind that this is a moderated forum intended as a place for civil exchange of information, and that personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Fisherman wrote:
No where did I attack Porcelain Doll above
[...]
I civillly responded to her with exact hyperlinks that I against INCEST and believe in Protecting the YOUNG. She asked I responded..I see nothing wrong with that.

I'm aware you did not attack her here. My concern was that personal attacks from other websites would be continued here. You were also banned on NDN and I'd personally hoped to avoid a debate here about the enforcement of other private forums' terms of service.

Fisherman wrote:
If James wrote and believes in Incest as Porcelain Doll suggested, I would suggest that James would need a warning not I.

She didn't say James was pro-incest. She said he defended Berg's incestuous relationship with Mene as loving. His comment in this regard can be found on MovingOn.

Fisherman wrote:
Monger, please explain why Porcelain Doll can say the folowing and you don't warn her.

"""""Jay, I was going to ignore all your rants on this board. I am still quite upset at you for your behavior and attacks at me personally on NDN when I thought we at least were some sort of friends, using a psuedonym and making those ridiculous comments and accusations sort just rubbed me the wrong way.""""

She attacking using the very pointed and inflamatory words like 'rants' 'rubbed' 'attacks' 'upset' and 'ridicul;ous'... why are her words deemed a civil exchange when they have no revelance to this board.

This board does not preclude disagreement on issues, even when said disagreements are strongly worded. There is a difference, however, between disagreeing with arguments, positions and actions, and engaging in ad hominem attacks.

Fisherman wrote:
Monger,

Can I ask if someone using the expression " Hey sh!t-stick. idiot. .... Eat sh!t." is accepatble civil discussion HERE, Because jusy yesterday it was used against me, on the other thread.
[...]
So do consider warning All if you warn some., and do use the same standard for ALL not just for some or one.

You are not privy to all moderator actions and discussion, I'd like to kindly request that you leave forum moderation to the moderators. As for the ad hominems against you, Jack has been called on this sort of thing in past.

This forum is not a free for all, and we do require that participants adhere to certain policies. Disregard for this can lead, for example, to temporary or permanent banning at the mods' discretion. However, disciplinary actions such as these are not typically discussed publicly for privacy reasons. If you have concerns about the moderation of these forums, we request that you send a private message with your concerns to the Moderator user account. Please note, however, that due to time constraints not all correspondence is responded to.

Fisherman wrote:
Walker, it seems you may not be speaking for ALL or all moderaters when you suggest that you only tolerate me and yet don't welcome me.

Moderators are allowed to speak for themselves. Wink Based on your interactions with some of the members here it is apparant that not all have welcomed you. Perhaps it would be worth considering why this is and what can be done to try to make exchanges here less caustic and more enjoyable for all.

Love in wittle baby Vandari sewer minions,
 
fisherman 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 06:59 pm
Thanks Walker, for explainig that Jack is sacrosanct here and does not have to follow the rules for civil discourse among lowly posters. Therefore he can call me all kinds of names and not be warned because he is a leader. Hmmm can you not see the exact parallel, with the Family in this case.

So Yes, as with other EXER boards, I may be discovering that the editors and moderaters or leaders Here have special priviledges that they don't extend to mere mortal posters. That does explain why Walker is so blatantly out of it in his rudeness about eating excrement.
 
fisherman 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 07:03 pm
Thanks Jack for showing your alignment, and that without me even asking you. Much appreciated. Your signature, says a lot about yourself.

This even though as I have mentioned I did not blame SGA for leaving the Family nor for being offended by Christianity. Why because there is no such thing as second generation Christians. Each person and individual has to choose the Lord and no one can force them into being missionaries. This the Family never learned. Choice choice chopice is the rule. even though eventually Jack even you are responsible for your choices, now that you are an adult, at least in the number of years you have lived.

And thanks as mentioned to Walker to explaining to me why you are without remorse and so brazen in your swearing and rude remarks.
 
WalkerJ 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 07:10 pm
fisherman wrote:
Thanks Walker, for explainig that Jack is sacrosanct here and does not have to follow the rules for civil discourse among lowly posters. Therefore he can call me all kinds of names and not be warned because he is a leader. Hmmm can you not see the exact parallel, with the Family in this case.

So Yes, as with other EXER boards, I may be discovering that the editors and moderaters or leaders Here have special priviledges that they don't extend to mere mortal posters. That does explain why Walker is so blatantly out of it in his rudeness about eating excrement.


Dude, whatever. Grow up, already. This isn't a kids' playground and people here are expected to react as mature adults regardless of opposing views. If you don't like something someone says, deal with it. Don't go complaining to the moderators like a sensitive toddler.

You're reading so much into this it's almost pathetic.

I mean, what do you want us to do? Wash Jack's mouth out with soap?

If you would have read (and comprehended) Monger's last post you might not have made your above comment. But then, that might be giving you way too much credit.
 
fisherman 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 07:26 pm
I'm aware you did not attack her here. My concern was that personal attacks from other websites would be continued here. (Yes, porcelain dDoll AScheick and others will bring their groupie friends here and cause a stir and trouble, and then you may be forced to supposedly kick me out because they will cause such a vile debate. This is their modus operandi, and alaways has been. They can't respond civilly so they start name calling and their group attack. They can;t stay on topic objectively so start a subjective attack and false accussations.) You were also banned on NDN (Thank the Lord, as that was why I could progress and make my own site., and the three BB and the two newsgroups... This even though I was respectful even aaginst the wrath and vile that was hurled against me.... see this board for the same sort of attacks.) and I would personally like to avoid a debate here about the enforcement of other private forums' terms of service. (Exactly, have some standards and follow civil discourse for ALL even ask Jack to get under control and be civil. I have done nothing wrong Here and yet they accuse me of supposed evils on other boards. tell them to reframe and be fair. But then again the majority of moderaters here might be anti-Christian, so it might be unlikely that a Christian poster could survive here via freedom of speech, as that seems reserved for others who have not the Christian faith. But we shall see... the choice and responsibility is yours. )



Fisherman wrote:
If James wrote and believes in Incest as Porcelain Doll suggested, I would suggest that James would need a warning not I.

She didn't say James was pro incest. (Yes she inferred James was pro incest because of a supposed email he wrote. This is a serious accussation. A very serious accussation made on a thread where apparrently Monger was having fun with James. If true, Porcelain Doll should have started a whole new threrad, about her accussation and verify it. If accused, James should be contasted and accused openly not secretly)

She said he defended Berg's incestuous relationship with Mene as loving. His comment in this regard can be found on MovingOn. (Yes and if true that is not as bad as being an incestor and yet backing incest is still a crime, just like a liar is to blame and those that believe a lie. Just like trouble makers can be offenders, just like to a lesser degree those that turn their backs and allow trouble makers to cause tyrouble)

Fisherman wrote:
Monger, please explain why Porcelain Doll can say the folowing and you don't warn her.

"""""Jay, I was going to ignore all your rants on this board. I am still quite upset at you for your behavior and attacks at me personally on NDN when I thought we at least were some sort of friends, using a psuedonym and making those ridiculous comments and accusations sort just rubbed me the wrong way.""""

She attacking using the very pointed and inflamatory words like 'rants' 'rubbed' 'attacks' 'upset' and 'ridicul;ous'... why are her words deemed a civil exchange when they have no revelance to this board.

This board certainly does not preclude disagreement on issues, even when said disagreements are strongly worded. There is a difference, however, between disagreeing with arguments, positions and actions, and engaging in ad hominem attacks. (Waht she can use such wording against me, and then I get in trouble and warned for responding with exact hyperlinks and that with respect irregardless of her disrespect. Hmm Strange moderation

Fisherman wrote:
Monger,

Can I ask if someone using the expression " Hey sh!t-stick. idiot. .... Eat sh!t." is accepatble civil discussion HERE, Because jusy yesterday it was used against me, on the other thread.
[...]
So do consider warning All if you warn some., and do use the same standard for ALL not just for some or one.

You are not privy to all moderator actions and discussion, I'd like to kindly request that you leave forum moderation to the moderators. As for the ad hominems against you, Jack has been called on this sort of thing in past.

This forum is not a free for all, and we do require that participants adhere to certain policies. (Does that go for Jack as well...) Disregard for this can lead, for example, to temporary or permanent banning at the mods' discretion. However, disciplinary actions such as these are not typically discussed publicly for privacy reasons. If you have concerns about the moderation of these forums, we request that you send a private message with your concerns to the Moderator user account. Please note, however, that due to time constraints not all correspondence is responded to.(SEE Jacks remarks. Do theyreflect moderaters standards. There it is Open and above Board. and you can respond above board and in the OPEN. I am not much into hidden secretive family type leadership meetings of excommunication. Been there having been done by them in this way. I like openness and honesty, as all have seen the problems of Jacks comments...and yet you still have not openly told himto reframe. Right ? Right. So I shall give you a chance .)

Fisherman wrote:
Walker, it seems you may not be speaking for ALL or all moderaters when you suggest that you only tolerate me and yet don't welcome me.

Moderators are allowed to speak for themselves. (And swear and call others names ???) Based on your interations with many of the members here it is apparant that not all have welcomed you. (Yes I am a Cgristian missionary and may not be welcome HERE...as most EXers boards are unChristian I realize that. Sio if you want to kick me out for being Christian oriented so be it. Just be honest and say so and admit to such. I can bring a lot to the table in explaining why the Family is the way they are. And have brought them down without any help from exers, so the choice is yours. You don;t get stronger by deleting good input. I and we have talked about Family werrors for years and could be a great help if you want help. the choice is yours, otherwise you might continue to just **** **** ******. ) it would be worth considering why this is and what can be done to try to make exchanges here less caustic and more enjoyable for all. (Yes ask Jack why he was so vile and that uncalled for and ubncivil. Jack is here, ask Him to reframe and get under control.)

Sincerely

david
 
Jack 2
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 07:33 pm
WalkerJ wrote:
I mean, what do you want us to do? Wash Jack's mouth out with soap?


I developed a taste for soap when I was kid and American soap tastes so much better than the crap we had in India so that sounds sligthly better than Fister's hell-n-damnation plan.

WalkerJ wrote:
But then, that might be giving you way too much credit.

Oh! Serve!

I vote that instead of banning or ignoring Fisterman here we start a new humour category in which he can post all his repetitive rants so I can try-out my grade-school level insults on him while we all find witty greetings to end our comments with.

What's really funny to me is I have owned the domain bullshit-fisherman.com and it's variants since the beginning of the month for a project I'm working on. Maybe I can save money by hiring this clown to write for me. After all, the intelligent creative types cost so much.
 
Monger 1
 
Reply Mon 24 Oct, 2005 07:39 pm
All, I'm going to lock this thread from further input, as I think it's run its course for useful dialog.

Fisherman, I'm not sure why you seem determined to make yourself into a martyr on these forums, but if you feel inclined to continue this discussion, you can take up your concerns with the mods privately as I've already requested.

Take it easy,
M.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/23/2019 at 06:09:08