A&A Feedback

MrPudding

J C wrote: »

Why am I banned from posting in this thread (the thread about the vandalised cross in Kerry)?

I'm merely the messenger ... it is unacceptable for you guys to allow posters to condone and support illegality and the destruction of Christian symbols.
Such support for intolerance is also counter-productive to any cause that Atheism may espouse,
Please don't shoot the messenger ... and by muzzling me and my views as a Christian ... indicate to all Christians what will happen to their opinions, if atheists with similar views, ever gain control over our schools, hospitals, or any other institution where respect for individual opinion and religious outlook is important.

Indeed, on a forum whose members seem to pride themselves on offering 'alternative' opinions on just about everything, why am I confined to the mega-thread, simply because I espouse Christian views?
I'm not the one advocating vandalising the symbols of other faiths and none ... I'm advocating respect for them ... yet I'm the one banned ... and nobody else has been taken to task.

That is OK if this is how Atheism wishes to have itself perceived ... but I would suggest that an approach that involves supporting those who desecrate crosses and suppressing Christians who object, isn't going to win you many friends or influence anybody other than yourselves, when it comes to the respectful inter-religious dialogue that is required in any multi-cultural pluralist society worthy of the name.
... and if you think that this is the way to take over Christian-run schools, hospitals, etc., (by suppressing Christian opinions before you have even taken them over) then I'd suggest that ye need to think again on this one.

You are not confined to the mega thread because you espouse christian views, this should be evident by the fact that there are numerous other posters espousing christian views on numerous threads. You are confined to the mega thread because of the manner in which you post. You continued ignoring of evidence and rebuttal and you general soap-boxing are the reason for your confinement.

Personally, I don't think you should be confined to the mega thread. I think you should be banned from the forum completely as your usefulness to atheism no longer outweighs the frustration and annoyance of your posts.

In addition, whilst perhaps there may be some on that thread that are happy with the support the act of cutting down the cross that does not mean that wanton vandalism is something that is supported by atheism or atheists in general, this is similar, I guess to, I presume, you not supporting the murdering of abortion doctors by christians...?

So, in summary, your being confined to the mega thread is not a muzzling of christians or their views, it is the muzzling of an view that offers nothing at all of any substance to any discussion it is involved in. In your entire time here in A&A I can think of only one thread (and I can't even remember the details) where I genuinely believe that you added any value at all. One. Every other thread you post on you poison with your medieval views and opinion and destroy any useful conversation or debate that might actually develop.

MrP

Absolam

I think a contrarian view has a value; J C adds a certain perspective to the discussions on A&A. Granted, it's a perspective that infuriates some posters, but I think if A&A can't tolerate one or two infuriating opinions it's just going to become an endless yawnfest of backslapping 'look at those eejits over there, don't we all agree on our mutual superiority' type posts.
For what it's worth, I thought J Cs comments in the thread were (largely, or mostly) on topic, and generally addressed posts rather than posters. He added at least as much substance to the discussion as other posters.

Turtwig

-Whether by intention or design any thread JC got involved in get's dragged all over the place. There is far too much material published by him that could be considering baiting the other side. In any thread he got involved in you'd have at least 3 or 4 four topics running. Often on some really tedious pedantic shtye that got discussed at nauseum in the origins thread.
-For this and other reasons the mods decided that we would be forum banning JC from all threads in A&A bar the origins thread.
-JC broke that forum ban. He's lucky we didn't just delete his post. My intention was to move the posts back to the origins thread. Where if anyone wishes they can thread through the discussion with him. I will do this later.


Contrarians have utility up to a point, anyone who had access to the moderators forum knows I espoused the view of mods protecting them as much as is reasonably possible. JC was far beyond any protection long before I came a mod. Simply put I don't believe him to be capable of a constructive dialectic and he's had more than ample opportunity to show otherwise. The access to the origins thread is still there as a lifeline to prove otherwise. Thus far the argument can only be made for considering banning him permanently.

A point we haven't yet reached though.

J C

MrPudding wrote: »

You are not confined to the mega thread because you espouse christian views, this should be evident by the fact that there are numerous other posters espousing christian views on numerous threads. You are confined to the mega thread because of the manner in which you post. You continued ignoring of evidence and rebuttal and you general soap-boxing are the reason for your confinement.

I am confined to the mega-thread because nobody has any argument against what I say on other threads ... and ye therefore use the blunt instrument of banning me, because ye have no answer to my points.
I don't soap-box ... I respond directly with quotes to every post.

MrPudding wrote: »

Personally, I don't think you should be confined to the mega thread. I think you should be banned from the forum completely as your usefulness to atheism no longer outweighs the frustration and annoyance of your posts.

I didn't know that 'usefulness to atheism' was the yardstick by which decisions to ban posters on the A & A were made. I thought that it was based on whether somebody complied with your forum charter or not.
By definition no Christian post will be 'useful to atheism' ... so such a yardstick would ban all Christians to some mega-thread on your forum, if it were to be applied to all Christian posters.
Indeed, if 'usefulness to atheism' is to be your forum yardstick, then many posts by atheists themselves on this forum, that disrespect and denigrate various aspects of Christianity should be banned, on the basis of the enormous damage that such needless antagonism and gratuitous insults are causing to any dialogue that Atheists may wish to engage in with Christians ... who are by far the dominant religion and culture on this island ... and key members of your communities as well as your next-door neighbours.

MrPudding wrote: »

In addition, whilst perhaps there may be some on that thread that are happy with the support the act of cutting down the cross that does not mean that wanton vandalism is something that is supported by atheism or atheists in general, this is similar, I guess to, I presume, you not supporting the murdering of abortion doctors by christians...?

Christians don't support the killing of anybody ... including abortionists or unborn children. This issue could form a mega thread in itself.
Anyway, your point is without any foundation, as nobody has advocated murdering anybody on your forum ... but numerous postings were made, with little dissent, advocating the destruction of Christian crosses on private lands on Carrauntoohill, in particular, and in all public spaces, in general.
... and I'm glad you support the rule of law and condemn religiously motivated damage to Christian artifacts.

MrPudding wrote: »

So, in summary, your being confined to the mega thread is not a muzzling of christians or their views, it is the muzzling of an view that offers nothing at all of any substance to any discussion it is involved in. In your entire time here in A&A I can think of only one thread (and I can't even remember the details) where I genuinely believe that you added any value at all. One. Every other thread you post on you poison with your medieval views and opinion and destroy any useful conversation or debate that might actually develop.
MrP

... you are quite entitled to your opinion.
... but it is objectively untrue, as I post civilly and to the point in accordance with your forum charter.
The fact that you may not like what I say or that you have no effective rebuttals, isn't a valid reason to engage in censorship of the Christian viewpoint, as expressed by me on your forum.

Shrap

J C wrote: »

I am confined to the mega-thread because nobody has any argument against what I say on other threads ...

The only argument against you (since you perpetually circumvent discussion with your genius obfuscation - gotta hand it to ya) is "life is too short". It is a valid argument though, and widely upheld by those who value their time.

J C

Shrap wrote: »

The only argument against you (since you perpetually circumvent discussion with your genius obfuscation - gotta hand it to ya) is "life is too short". It is a valid argument though, and widely upheld by those who value their time.

Life is short ... and eternal life is very long indeed, something that we should all remember, allright.

Ironically, I was content to stay confined to the mega thread ... but it was the suggestion that all Christian crosses on public display should become fair game for cutting down, that moved me to post ... as much out of concern for the serious damage that such comments could make to good Atheist - Christian community relations as it was to defend Christians and Christianity.

I would like to apologize to Turtwig for breaking my forum ban and I would like to thank the Mods for allowing me to do so ... but I genuinely felt that enough was enough ... when talk of wholesale cross destruction started on the forum, because of the undoubted and obvious effect that this action could have on good community relations in this country.
... and this is still going on ... on the Carrauntoohill thread ... this was posted at 15.55 today:-

whats newxt wrote: »

Anyone want to donate a con saw to me i know of a few crosses near me that need taking down.

Guys, Christians and Atheists can be friends ... but ye all need to start respecting me and my fellow Christians' rights to our views (and to our property) ... just like I respect the positive things about pluralism and secularism ... and the right of Atheists to not believe in God (and to publicly express this) ... or anything else, for that matter.

Turtwig

JC I haven't much time this weekend. I'll move the posts back into the origins thread and you can discuss them to your heart's content there.

kylith

Complete change of topic, I know; Solstice Drinkies anyone?

shruikan2553

kylith wrote: »

Complete change of topic, I know; Solstice Drinkies anyone?

Will we be waking up the following morning with cut down crosses instead of traffic cones or trollies?

J C

Turtwig wrote: »

JC I haven't much time this weekend. I'll move the posts back into the origins thread and you can discuss them to your heart's content there.

I think that would be a pity ... and would mess-up the Carrauntoohill thread.

I have said what I wanted to say ... and I'm happy to stay confined to the mega-thread ... unless some other outrageous anti-christian suggestion is made on your forum ... and nobody challenges it.

Atheists and Christians need to live harmoniously and respectfully together ... and supporting the desecration of Christians artefacts (and the derogatory comments against Christianity that are sometimes made on this forum by apparent Atheists) is a sure-fire way of preventing this.

... and moving about posts and issuing arbitrary bans on Christians, who respectfully and civilly draw this to attention, isn't a solution either.

With thanks and loving respect.

J C

kylith

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Will we be waking up the following morning with cut down crosses instead of traffic cones or trollies?

Only if it's a very, very good night.

Pherekydes

kylith wrote: »

Complete change of topic, I know; Solstice Drinkies anyone?

I presume it's at sunrise? :pac:

drkpower

Turtwig wrote: »

Contrarians have utility up to a point, anyone who had access to the moderators forum knows I espoused the view of mods protecting them as much as is reasonably possible. JC was far beyond any protection long before I came a mod. Simply put I don't believe him to be capable of a constructive dialectic and he's had more than ample opportunity to show otherwise. The access to the origins thread is still there as a lifeline to prove otherwise. Thus far the argument can only be made for considering banning him permanently.

A point we haven't yet reached though.

If all that is true, then just ban him, rather than this 'look at the dancing monkey; let's see if we can tame him' stuff that seems to be going on here.

I'm not sure which is worse; the way he is being patronised, or his acceptance of it (by continuing to post in the thread).

kylith

Pherekydes wrote: »

I presume it's at sunrise? :pac:

The dawn will shine directly on the empty bottles.

robindch

kylith wrote: »

The dawn will shine directly on the empty bottles.

Any chance of moonshine?

kylith

robindch wrote: »

Any chance of moonshine?

I don't see any reason why not

J C

drkpower wrote: »

If all that is true, then just ban him, rather than this 'look at the dancing monkey; let's see if we can tame him' stuff that seems to be going on here.

I'm not sure which is worse; the way he is being patronised, or his acceptance of it (by continuing to post in the thread).

... and thus would end freedom of expression and respect for diversity and pluralism on the A & A, if you had your way.

I'm not actually a contrarian BTW ... I'm a Christian giving the orthodox Christian point of view.
... and if the A & A cannot accept this, and bans me fully, then it will say something very profound about any claims that they may make about pluralism and their acceptance of diversity.

BTW, just out of interest, why do you call yourself drkpower?
You don't have to answer, but I like to know where posters are coming from, so to speak.

pH

J C wrote: »

BTW, just out of interest, why do you call yourself drkpower?
You don't have to answer, but I like to know where posters are coming from, so to speak.

I'm guessing his name is Kevin Power and he's a doctor.

legspin

pH wrote: »

I'm guessing his name is Kevin Power and he's a doctor.

Again, a bit of an aside but there is a Urologist in Beaumont called Dr Dick Power.
Might be related.

Gordon

Are you angling at prejudging him due to it potentially standing for "dark"?

MrPudding

J C wrote: »

I am confined to the mega-thread because nobody has any argument against what I say on other threads ... and ye therefore use the blunt instrument of banning me, because ye have no answer to my points.
I don't soap-box ... I respond directly with quotes to every post.

I didn't know that 'usefulness to atheism' was the yardstick by which decisions to ban posters on the A & A were made. I thought that it was based on whether somebody complied with your forum charter or not.
By definition no Christian post will be 'useful to atheism' ... so such a yardstick would ban all Christians to some mega-thread on your forum, if it were to be applied to all Christian posters.
Indeed, if 'usefulness to atheism' is to be your forum yardstick, then many posts by atheists themselves on this forum, that disrespect and denigrate various aspects of Christianity should be banned, on the basis of the enormous damage that such needless antagonism and gratuitous insults are causing to any dialogue that Atheists may wish to engage in with Christians ... who are by far the dominant religion and culture on this island ... and key members of your communities as well as your next-door neighbours.

Christians don't support the killing of anybody ... including abortionists or unborn children. This issue could form a mega thread in itself.
Anyway, your point is without any foundation, as nobody has advocated murdering anybody on your forum ... but numerous postings were made, with little dissent, advocating the destruction of Christian crosses on private lands on Carrauntoohill, in particular, and in all public spaces, in general.
... and I'm glad you support the rule of law and condemn religiously motivated damage to Christian artifacts.

... you are quite entitled to your opinion.
... but it is objectively untrue, as I post civilly and to the point in accordance with your forum charter.
The fact that you may not like what I say or that you have no effective rebuttals, isn't a valid reason to engage in censorship of the Christian viewpoint, as expressed by me on your forum.

But you don't comply with the charter, that is the point. and look at the first paragraph of this post I have quoted. Not sure it is is delusional or just another attempt to wind people up.

I have enormous respect for the mods on the A&A board. I reckon they do a good job, but they are wrong on this one. You need banning.

MrP

J C

MrPudding wrote: »

But you don't comply with the charter, that is the point. and look at the first paragraph of this post I have quoted. Not sure it is is delusional or just another attempt to wind people up.

... exactly how is the first paragraph against the charter?
... and how am I delusional in my claim that nobody has a winning argument against what I post?
... quite obviously, you guys would drag up any argument that I lost, if you could ... the fact that you can't proves my point.

I courteously post and I win practically all arguments that I choose to debate by attacking the point and not the person ... and by choosing my ground carefully and then providing unassailable evidence to back up my posts.

I have never found a bad winner in my time ... but I've encountered many bad losers ... who sometimes claim to be 'wound up' or any other excuse for their inabilities ... when defeat stares them in the face.

MrPudding wrote: »

I have enormous respect for the mods on the A&A board. I reckon they do a good job, but they are wrong on this one. You need banning.

I too respect the Mods and I accept that they have a difficult job to do.
... but, I don't make their jobs any more difficult than they already are, by back seat modding and telling them who they should ban.

Winners are cool-headed, logical and courteous ... losers are hot-headed, emotional and discourteous.
Have an objective look over any thread I have posted in and spot the losers and winners for yourself.

I have offered the hand of friendship to you and you have spurned it ... I have told you that I respected you and could empathize with your viewpoint, as an Atheist ... and you told me that you disrespected me as a person and everything I stood for as a Creationist.
I said that I loved you (in a Christian way) ... and you said that I was insane and medieval in my outlook, despite being eminently and conventionally qualified in a number of scientific disciplines.

Anyway, I'm only a guest here, like everybody else, on a privately owned and managed forum ... and if I'm asked to leave I will, of course, comply.
... but I would point out that asking me to leave, in exasperation, because you cannot defeat my arguments would actually be throwing in the towel altogether, on your part.

I'm happy enough confined the the mega thread (with the occasional release for good behaviour) ... as I can see that you guys need your space to congregate and discuss things as Atheists ... without a Christian, like me popping up on every thread to offer my opinions.:)

J C

Gordon wrote: »

Are you angling at prejudging him due to it potentially standing for "dark"?

You may say that Drkpower may stand for Dark Power ... I couldn't possibly comment!!!:)
I have asked a question ... I may/may not get an answer.
I judge nobody ... but I always listen to how they describe themselves as I find that most people are quite frank in their descriptions of themselves ... and I like to know where people are coming from when I'm talking to them.

It's a 'nice to know' rather than a 'need to know' kind of thing.

Shrap

J C wrote: »

... but I would point out that asking me to leave, in exasperation, because you cannot defeat my arguments would actually be throwing in the towel altogether, on your part.

JC, we cannot FIND your arguments amongst all the subversive babble and blather. Or I can't anyway. Nothing to do with you being Christian - more to do with you being unintelligible.

J C

Shrap wrote: »

JC, we cannot FIND your arguments amongst all the subversive babble and blather. Or I can't anyway. Nothing to do with you being Christian - more to do with you being unintelligible.

Seek and ye shall FIND ... knock and the door to Salvation will OPEN.;)

Turtwig

Mod:

Discussions relating to the poster JC are to cease. Current conversations are going in circles. The feedback matter on this thread is finished.

jank

Given we have finally seen the GOP fruitcake thread emerge into the 'right wing are evil' thread, can we also create a left-wing fruitcake thread?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90995447&postcount=574

Fair is fair

Turtwig

As I said before in this thread (somewhere) by all means create a lefty fruitcake thread.

Edit: Perhaps we could have a trial of both in the same thread? Loopers are loopers whatever way you look at it.

shruikan2553

I would say throw it all in together. With the right wing being more traditionally religious there is a lot more stuff there while left wing would still have some similar elements, I doubt it would be enough for its own thread. If it turns out it does it can always be separated.

Mods might have a different idea though.

jank

Would rather have a separate one to see how it goes.
Wouldn't one fruitcake thread just be another 'danger of religion' thread anyway?