Modding conflict of interest.

keu

justhalf..go ahead and post my orginial posts.(understanding that you dont have the first one)..and go and put them back in the order they were posted or they wont make sense, considering they were in response to other posts.

monkeyfudge

JustHalf wrote:

So did I, but I wasn't a Christian. I didn't really believe the stuff, I just accepted it as fact and didn't care less about it.

It's amazing the stuff you find out when you actually have an interest

Fair enough.

I returned to the bible in later life too. Not that I have any faith, just a love for old books.

on topic:

Might I suggest that one of the people who was suscribed to the thread could find the original text in their email inbox to post it up? I certainly see no point in condemning JustHalf without seeing the exactly what the whole argument is about. I was actually reading through the tread in question before it was brought up here, but the split had already happened before I got there.

PcP

JustHalf wrote:

Of course, it's difficult to talk about them now since my reference material has been blanked. If it had simply been deleted, I could have restored it or referred to it. I can't now.

JustHalf wrote:

(actually, just from being visible; I and any admin can still see them)

Can ye not just copy and paste them?

PcP

No, it's an interesting thread (the one in Christianity that is) but I didn't see the posts that were moved. I was just curious why they couldn't be referenced if they are still visible to the mod, seemed somewhat contradictory.
It would be interesting to read the entire thread though, from all perspectives.


[edit] post I was replying to was deleted :rolleyes:

Winters

A religious board should have a mod that gives no **** about religion therefor allowing a discussion about a certain religion to take place without their own beliefes/views getting in the way tbh. Im amazed people still believe tbh.....

my 2c.

keu

[edit] post I was replying to was deleted

this is how it is when a mod rips your responses which you have taken the time to reply to and dumps them under a thread titled crazy talk.

understand yet?

billy the squid

JustHalf wrote:

I think it's time to get back on topic. Rozabeez and syke are on topic. Thread split, so look elsewhere for the crazy talk

Why not just replace this with "Thread split as posts were going off topic These posts have been moved to (whatever URL)."

If something I had posted was classed as "crazy talk" I would have complained, but it was not Keu who started this thread so it would be wrong of people to go jumping down her throat.

JustHalf

PcP wrote:

Can ye not just copy and paste them?

PcP wrote:

No, it's an interesting thread (the one in Christianity that is) but I didn't see the posts that were moved. I was just curious why they couldn't be referenced if they are still visible to the mod, seemed somewhat contradictory.
It would be interesting to read the entire thread though, from all perspectives.

Most of the posts are still accessible to me, but the first post, the post where Keu made most her points, was blanked. Before anyone says anything, it was blanked by Keu.

billy the squid: yeah, that's definitely what I should have done, but it's too late now.

Keu wrote:

this is how it is when a mod rips your responses which you have taken the time to reply to and dumps them under a thread titled crazy talk.

understand yet?

I don't have moderator access to this board. It doesn't follow me around wherever I go, like.

---

In short, we all agree I was out of order with the crazy talk line. That's not in question. I have apologised for this, more than once. I've admitted that this was a mistake, more than once.

Keu, you're not doing yourself any favours. When someone does something wrong, admits to it and apologises, what point is there in continually pointing out that I did something wrong?

I've handed out a couple of bannings this morning. Keu is banned for obvious reasons (check her last post on the homosexuality thread) until she can tell me why she was banned. Apparently she's sticking with Buddhism. Yoda, I wish you a better experience with her than I've had.

MadsL banned too.

Zero tolerance for crap now. Any criticism of my decisions as mod can, and should, go here. Not on my board.

Tusky

Winters wrote:

A religious board should have a mod that gives no **** about religion therefor allowing a discussion about a certain religion to take place without their own beliefes/views getting in the way tbh. Im amazed people still believe tbh.....

my 2c.

I know - its idiotic really... Its like believing "James and the giant peach" actually happened. They dont only believe it they base their life around it !!!! rediculous if you ask me.

keu

I've handed out a couple of bannings this morning. Keu is banned for obvious reasons (check her last post on the homosexuality thread) until she can tell me why she was banned

I was banned because I professed my faith. Basically I described what my faith means to me and I used this quote to best describe it..

"Faith is the centerpiece of a connected life. It allows us to live by the grace of invisible strands. It is a belief in a wisdom superior to our own. Faith becomes a teacher in the absence of fact"
-Terry Tempest Williams.

in this context I understand that most religions are spiritual paths and that the bible is a book to guide people on a spiritual path. I spoke about how the bible tries to discern or distinguish between the material and the spiritual and how homosexuality was viewed in those terms.
I spoke about how Jesus said to love one another. I added to someone elses suggestion of "and to love God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind", I interpreted this to mean to love someone in a spiritual sense and not in the material sense. (which is how the bible translates) and in this way (esoterically speaking) you become closer to *God

I had already used my defintion of *God as ~faith in a wisdom superior to my own..and not as a guy sitting on a cloud throwing thunderbolts. (justhalf didin't agree, which to be quite honest I have no problem with)

I spoke about how Paul who wrote about homosexuality and was referring to the corinthians, who were biblically (and historically) aknowledged as "Godless people". (they were wealthy merchants, sailors who were considered spiritually devoid by Paul) and tried to give a perspective of how he determined such "uncleanliness" (which is how homosexuality is described in the bible) to be devoid of a connection with *God.
I used the bible in context. (and not my own personal opinion of homosexuality)

Someone asked a question about how Jesus was considered as someone who anyone could call on when they were lost on their spiritual path and take them to the "middle planes"...
I used a correlation between buddhism and christianity to desribe how the words "I am the way the truth and the light, and no one comes unto the father except through me" could be understood in such a capacity.
I said in such an instance "the father" could be referred to as God and the destination heaven.
I related this with the idea of *God as the self and the destination as oneness with the self, or nirvana..to mean living in the ever present.

at which point justhalf questioned my understanding of nirvana and what it had to do with christianity (considering Jesus studied in India for many years..I would say lots)
I did explain..but he did not agree and then split the thread and labelled mine "crazy talk".

Now..you admit you were wrong in calling the thread crazy and then you ban me, if you had an issue with my opinions, why didn't you just question them instead of taking the thread apart and labelling them crazy talk.

ban me..I don't give a monkeys.

would an admin please discard this thread.

Hobbes

You can't have a valid discussion unless you have people in that dicussion who question your beliefs. If your belief is strong enough it shouldn't matter.

my 2c.

keu

This is the thing. I didnt have any problem with Justhalf questioning my belleifs..I answered those questions.,.but after answering my posts were removed.
I'm not the one with the issue here.
and for the record, other people were discussing the topic , it was a case of questioning and answering, no one else seemed to mind my opinion at all..just refer to the original thread. (there was no argument, just a pulling of posts, which is probably why others decided it was unfair and brought the issue here to feedback)
It was a valid discussion. Justhalf claims my posts were off topic and unitarian, which is why he removed them. ?? There was no argument prior to that.
(Hobbes I dunno if that post was referring to me but I answered it all the same)

Hobbes

No it wasn't referring to you.

I was referring to all forums in general. Take paranormal for example. It has set rules which I don't agree with (although abide -_- ). It would be better suited to have paranormals+sceptics together but are some factions in both sides that couldn't handle it.

amp

amp: who doesn't remember posting to Christianity but I may have been posessed at the time :eek:

HAIL IKTHOR!

GuanYin

JustHalf wrote:

billy the squid: yeah, that's definitely what I should have done, but it's too late now.

No its not too late, you should edit the post now.

The only reason you won't is because you're too stubborn.

You are possibly the worst mod on boards and in every action you have taken on this subject you've showed why and if the admins have any sense they'll replace you. I'd go with mags or excelsior.

Oh and incidently crash, before you go lumping me in with anyone else, I've posted reasonably and rationally at all times, to the point where the mod of the christianity forum has admitted ridiculling the beliefs of one of his posters and admitting that he should have edited out the abuse he posted (but for some strange reason won't). You are the last person that can go around and accuse someone of ganging up on people and the like. Try mature a little, eh?

PcP

keu wrote:

this is how it is when a mod rips your responses which you have taken the time to reply to and dumps them under a thread titled crazy talk.

understand yet?

How does that help anything? You deleted two posts from this thread last night, you're saying that was just to prove a point? What a complete waste of time.

koneko

While I definitely don't agree with Keu on a lot of things she has posted, I understand why she deleted her posts on the original thread. Her posts were sectioned off and marked as Crazy Talk. Why should she leave them up after being ridiculed like that?

I'm sure she would have left her posts there if they had stayed the way she intended. They were taken away and marked as something else, they were taken out of the context they were in.

keu

pcp..I'm reallly not trying to p!ss you off..I just had enough of the bs last night. It's difficult enough to understand the situation as it is because of the unavailability of information and even harder to explain. So at the minute posts from people who havent witnessed the original threads make the whole thing more confusing.

GuanYin

koneko wrote:

While I definitely don't agree with Keu on a lot of things she has posted, I understand why she deleted her posts on the original thread. Her posts were sectioned off and marked as Crazy Talk. Why should she leave them up after being ridiculed like that?

I'm sure she would have left her posts there if they had stayed the way she intended. They were taken away and marked as something else, they were taken out of the context they were in.

Spot on. And Justhalf gives a half hearted apology yet acts (which are louder than words) totally unrepentant.

Then he bans the user for...I can't see what.

So NOW he's oppressing other christian beliefs aswell as ridiculing them.

So basically Justhalf takes the line that there is no christian faith other than what he, in his authority as two and a half years as christianity mod, says is christian.

You shoulda gone up northa few years back, you could teach the religious oppressors up there a thing or two.

JustHalf

syke wrote:

No its not too late, you should edit the post now.

The only reason you won't is because you're too stubborn.

I said I'd think about it. By the way, are you implying that not doing whatever you demand of me is being stubborn?

syke wrote:

You are possibly the worst mod on boards and in every action you have taken on this subject you've showed why and if the admins have any sense they'll replace you. I'd go with mags or excelsior.

Glad I have a fan.

syke wrote:

Oh and incidently crash, before you go lumping me in with anyone else, I've posted reasonably and rationally at all times, to the point where the mod of the christianity forum has admitted ridiculling the beliefs of one of his posters and admitting that he should have edited out the abuse he posted (but for some strange reason won't).

I didn't say I should have edited out the abuse. I said I'd think about it. I'm wary of taking actions that could be perceived as covering up my mistakes by rewriting the past.

I did say I should have never posted it in the first place, I admitted I was wrong in the very first post I made on this thread. You certainly didn't drive me to admitting I was wrong, which you seem to implying. From the very start, I said I was in the wrong.

Keu, saying things like "I was banned because I professed my faith" just shows that you haven't a fiddlers why you were really banned.

Keu wrote:

This is the thing. I didnt have any problem with Justhalf questioning my belleifs..I answered those questions.,.but after answering my posts were removed.

That's true. After answering, your posts were removed, by you.

Quit acting like you're not responsible for this.

Keu wrote:

Now..you admit you were wrong in calling the thread crazy and then you ban me

I didn't ban you because I thought your opinions were crazy.

It's fairly easy to figure out why you were banned. I refer you to your last post on Christianity. Don't make me join the dots for you.

I've made a copy of your most recent large post in case you decide to blank that one, but to be honest I don't think you actually want to have a discussion of your beliefs half as much as you claim. I offer you that opportunity (as this is why I split the thread in the first place, not just delete the posts), and your second and third reply are to throw insults at me.

I'm also happy to talk to anyone who has not been persistantly antagonistic to me about why your beliefs aren't Christian beliefs. As I have a copy of your large post here explaining what you believe, that's relatively easy.

You are entitled to your beliefs, but that doesn't mean they're Christian. The difference between what you believe and what Christians believe are far more than the differences between sects of Christianity. Any admin who questions this claim is asked to PM me.

To put it another way, I was being extremely charitable to refer to your beliefs as "vaguely unitarian"; and though they certainly are a "radical interpretation of Christianity", it's certainly not a Christian interpretation.

I've apologised for my mistake, which was to dismissively label your beliefs as crazy talk. I'm not going to apologise for calling a non-Christian belief a non-Christian belief.

Syke, this post? Cop on.

GuanYin

JustHalf wrote:

I didn't say I should have edited out the abuse. I said I'd think about it. I'm wary of taking actions that could be perceived as covering up my mistakes by rewriting the past.

Yes you did.

billythesquid wrote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustHalf
I think it's time to get back on topic. Rozabeez and syke are on topic. Thread split, so look elsewhere for the crazy talk





Why not just replace this with "Thread split as posts were going off topic These posts have been moved to (whatever URL)."

Justhalf wrote:

billy the squid: yeah, that's definitely what I should have done, but it's too late now.

How much more dodging and backtracking do you plan on doing. You said take it here and now you want admins to not give their opinion to the users who have posted rich.

Incidently, you didn't follow any of the banning protocols, such as announcing the ban in the mod forum, so I took the liberty of doing it for you.

I don't think I've seen any post here supporting your actions in anyway, so I'm not the only one who think you are blatantly and unrepentantly oppressing someones religious beliefs.

keu

That's true. After answering, your posts were removed, by you

I answered and you split the thread, then I removed them. ffs.
(why dont you just post the originals again so we can all see)

I offer you that opportunity (as this is why I split the thread in the first place, not just delete the posts), and your second and third reply are to throw insults at me.

can you quote those replys please. I don't recall insulting you at all during the thread, I answered your questions about nirvana which was in no means insulting to anybody, I just answered the question plain and simple..i said something like ~yes. it means living in the ever present~
and i answered this "Saying that early Christian leaders were worried about those "not on the spiritual path", I responded by saying "why do you think they went around preaching" to my best recollection. I never insulted you. and if i did would you please show them here?
My views are a radical version of christianity. I am a christian (I think) and they are my views.

as far as I can see your banning me because I mentioned nirvana.
if this is true..fine.

wish Amp would say something stupid and totally irrelevant now.

Hobbes

You are entitled to your beliefs, but that doesn't mean they're Christian. The difference between what you believe and what Christians believe are far more than the differences between sects of Christianity. Any admin who questions this claim is asked to PM me.

However you shouldn't call peoples beliefs crazy just because they don't agree with yours. If I was you I would chalk it up as "One of those stupid things everyone does and wishes they had done it differently", and then learn from it and move on. Oh and remove the crazy remark if you haven't already done so (put in a comment if you want why you edited it).

Continuing the argument on for 5 pages just makes baby jesus cry.

Incidently, you didn't follow any of the banning protocols, such as announcing the ban in the mod forum, so I took the liberty of doing it for you.

There are no mod protocols. The mod forum is for more where you give a heads of up a possible muppet attack or to get a ruling on a possible change you plan to make. After that each forum has its rules laid out by the moderators. Beyond Admin rules superceeding them, anything goes.

People may not like it, they may complain about it and get it changed but it is still the mods rules.

keu

want to see a pic of my dad with the pope?

heh

amp

keu wrote:

wish Amp would say something stupid and totally irrelevant now.

What are you wearing?












Be carefull what you wish for

HAIL IKTHOR!

ecksor

syke wrote:

Keu, your not helping your case by being abusive or slagging him off (which is just tit-for-tat).

Good point. keu, You complain about how the mods are out to get you, but often when I see you get into a disagreement you become quite offensive, which is bound to cause a mod to ban or censure you.

ecksor

Since this is making my eyes bleed and the person who had grounds for complaint didn't actually start it I'm closing it.

Please don't post things like

ban me..I don't give a monkeys.

would an admin please discard this thread.

strikes me as throwing toys out of a pram and really doesn't inspire me to want to help. As for moderation of the christianity forum, it's specifically a hosted public forum and therefore not something we're inclined to meddle in as much. Considering how often accusations of people picking in the recognisably christian elements of boards have cropped up here it seems ironic that the tables have turned somewhat. Perhaps a discussion on what exactly will and won't be subject to moderation on the forum would be a useful thread to sticky there. If bonkey and JustHalf actually get to the root of the suitability and use of the definition of "vaguely unitarian" and how it excludes christianity then it might serve as a basis for defining what is and isn't on topic on the forum, but I'm certainly not going to attempt to do so.