Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Masonic Influence:

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
...So I say, that you (read: masons) are deliberately undermining the very fabric of ATS, by ridiculing any critical thinking, of course you would not admit to the fact that there could indeed be some situations where your ancient and accepted order does not come to par...



I will volunteer to be the first to admit that the Fraternity has not in its current manifestation or historically lived up to everyone one of its tenets at all times. The frailty and fallibilty of man makes this almost inevitable. I do not however offer up excuses for these shortcomings as we posit ourselves as virtuous and upright citizens and aspire to be above the base irregularities and intolerances of others.

Our journey through Masonry is one of ongoing and ever-bettering spiritual enlightenment. If on occasion we fail to achieve that lofty goal we should not be discouraged but should endeavor ever harder to scale the heights of true Masonic light.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]




posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by LightinDarkness
 


You are so of track, in theory you are completely right, but I am not making an argument here, I am stating something subjectively. Slow down read the whole thing again.

To summarize:
I make an opening post, which yes if looked at as an argument, would be a straw man argument, this however was not my intention, but I will budge here, and say I am sorry, I could have left the political bias out.

Next I try to explain to you that I did not make an argument, and that logically you would have to conclude that I was being sarcastic i.e. ironic, since I want to debate this, and would not have started the thread if I thought no mason would debate this. In this I do indeed out of frustration, because you are, AND YOU ARE, deliberately misinterpreting what I am writing.

I then out of plain stupidity explain it all again, which I know now, was a trap laid by you in the first place, where after you continue to argument that I am making an argument, which I tried in the first place to explain sincerely to you.

I will write it one last time, because deep down I am naïve.

Mate, I am not making an argument that says that masons will not admit nor debate if there might be anything, I am saying that my subjective experience is telling me this is so. So far you have done nothing to whim me in the direction that you have a pure agenda.

You made the mistake in my humble opinion to assume that I made a rhetorical question when in fact I made a hypothetical one, with out backing it up with an argument.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:46 PM
link   
if I may ask what are the 5 languages you speak?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Here´s something that I posted elswhere today which may have inspired your thread



A little problem I see with this Forum is that there are more freemasons than anti-masons posting here. A paranoid could easily get the impression of us "policing" these threads, as 7 of us gang up on one single anti-mason with fervent immediacy, without giving the anti-mason room to breathe. The ATS-member stompk got Banned yesterday, which adds to the paranoia. In short: Attacking anti-masons is no way to soften them up but only to strengthen their misguided belief. Religious-Fanatics posting here, therefore SERVE us to practice one of the virtues of Freemasonry: TOLERANCE.


You will have a difficult time grouping me into the category of mason you adress.

Anyway....I like the overall attitude of your thread.

And dont forget the possibility: There may be people here who are only posing as members of freemasonry.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


stompk did NOT get banned for anything he posted. He got a warning and then proceeded to impload. It was his dealings with STAFF that got him banned. And only 1 staff member is a Mason and I haven't seen him on the board for a few days. So it had nothing to do with Masons.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


yes, yes. Thats understood. I read the other thread.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:06 PM
link   
To the OP: Is there some rule of logic that states subjective statements are not to be questioned? You used them to form a straw man fallacy. This would suggest you have an agenda.

All I will do is again point out the irony of using logical fallacies to accuse others of using logical fallacies. I clearly outline them in the Anti-Mason Influence thread.


[edit on 11-12-2007 by LightinDarkness]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   
i love the terminology being used in this thread


i am not here to argue, though i suppose my adding my thoughts is adding to the debate...so anyway...

i do have to agree with Tet's point. i have felt the fury of the masons on this board. sure, i am not the smartest and i have a lot to learn and many of the points made towards me i should listen to, i wont claim to be what i am not.

but at the same time, the fervor with which groups of masons can take after a person can be overwhelming. one of the first threads i participated in was in the SS forum. i said something(s), and i am sure there were plenty of faults in my thoughts and logic, but the way i was treated i feel was overly harsh.

sure this treatment put me in my place and i assure you that i learned from the experience, and it opened up my mind but this could all still be achieved with another set of standards for interaction.

now in this post rather than having a debate on the obvious theme of this thread i am reading a back and forth of 'ad hominim , straw man, red herring, etc...into infinity

maybe i am too simple to play here. though i really do enjoy the ideas, writing, and conversations that take place so i would really hate to have to go. but i really do think that the many of the people here can have real conversations with out all the games.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:12 PM
link   
When I came on here, it seemed that anti-Masonic was the flavour of that moment. I think what's happened over the last year or so is that certain ATS posters who happen to be Masons have happened by this particular forum and have stayed to try to correct grievous fallacies, myths and legends that repeatedly pop-up.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that Masons-to-a-man are upright and the image of societal perfection. However, I don't think drawing the line at being called a know-nothing, blood-drinking, goat-riding Satanist is too much. I'm always game for intelligent discussion on things Masonic and secret societies in general. I tend to be more often an observer than participant in those cases but that's usually because others have already addressed a certain misconception or asked of the other poster what I would have asked.

My two bits Canuck FWIW



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal
i do have to agree with Tet's point. i have felt the fury of the masons on this board. sure, i am not the smartest and i have a lot to learn and many of the points made towards me i should listen to, i wont claim to be what i am not.


I think the same can be said of most people on this forum; in general, we all have our strengths and weaknesses when it comes to knowledge. I try to be of the 'better to stay silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt' school of thought (most of the time
).


Originally posted by Animal
but at the same time, the fervor with which groups of masons can take after a person can be overwhelming. one of the first threads i participated in was in the SS forum. i said something(s), and i am sure there were plenty of faults in my thoughts and logic, but the way i was treated i feel was overly harsh.


I can't say that I recall the thread you're referring to but I wonder how much of the sense of being taken after is a shortcoming of internet boards such as this where there isn't an equivalent to vocal loudness or inflection as a way to mediate or moderate what might otherwise appear to be a strong counterposition. I think I can honestly say that nobody wants discussion about secret societies and/or Masonry to disappear as then no greater good is served. However, there must be an agreed understanding that nominal civility is a minimum for discourse.


Originally posted by Animal
sure this treatment put me in my place and i assure you that i learned from the experience, and it opened up my mind but this could all still be achieved with another set of standards for interaction.


Again, I can't say for certain but I don't think putting anybody in their place was what was intended. By the same token however, there is a tendency for anti-Masonic screeds to be drawn from the same shallow well and honestly it gets tiresome repeating the same points over and over and over again to some fresh face who's recently "discovered" them anew. Hence a certain weariness when they're resurrected for the umteenth time like the villain in some B-grade zombie flick.


Originally posted by Animal
maybe i am too simple to play here. though i really do enjoy the ideas, writing, and conversations that take place so i would really hate to have to go. but i really do think that the many of the people here can have real conversations with out all the games.


Simple? Doubt it. To paraphrase, simple is as simple does. An open mind is one that's constantly refreshing itself. As for the games, certainly can be done. But it takes two to tango.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
5.0 Empiricism:
A philosophical discussion of this thread will follow shortly.

Well ill start with a confession, I do have my own agenda, and as I have mentioned before in this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... I am however not Anti-Masonic, and if it wasn’t for the Danish freemasonry demand that you are a Christian (I am baptized but adhere to the pagan (Asatrue) belief system) I am sure I would be one myself. I was however once many years ago here on Above Top Secret a Anti-Masonic tinfoil madman, storming in here with my masonrywatch.com propaganda spewing ignorance all over the place. The masons here at that time, did not do a particular good job in convincing me that there weren’t anything sinister going on, they did however debunk a lot of the disinformation I had scooped up over my short time researching these topics, and for that I owe them my thanks.

...


I do have a small concern about the above statement. On your profile you list under 'Things I Dislike', Masons and Reptiles. I, not being a Reptilian, do not take any umbrage at the latter party, however, in light of your statement I do question your inclusion of the former. It may be a trivial matter or perhaps you are being tounge in cheek. Care to expound on this?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


Animal, I think I recall the thread in question and believe I particpated in it. Your assesment of the critisism may indeed be correct but by your own addmission your post was not a very well founded one. Since which time I do believe you have had a reproachment with many of the Masons who reponded to that thread and a general accord of goodwill was reached by all. I for one hold no ill sentiment to you and judging by your removal of me as a foe I feel I may assume the same for you.

I am glad to see you approaching the forum in the spirit of knowledge and understanding. I look forward to answering any and all questions that you may have regarding Masonry that I am capable of answering.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 

You have some excellent points there, of course you should not waver, and holding a steady course with high ideals is something I completely agree on. And indeed true Masonic light, or just enlightenment for us uninitiated.

reply to post by corsig
 

The five languages I speak/write/read are Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, English and German, also I speak a little Japanese and Faeroe, but not enough to say that I actually master the language.

reply to post by Skyfloating
 

Well, first thanks for sharing that. I had no idea you wrote that, but I can see why you think that you sparked my thread, I think you have some valid arguments that I indeed would have taken into account when writing the post, for example the fact that we might see an all time height in mason members and an all time low in anti-masons, which I personally like, since most masons here do in fact provide a solid debate with respect for the poster. I am not trying to group you, there are masons here I respect very much like Masonic Light, I have followed him here on ATS for more than 4 years now, and not once have he not himself walked the walk he talked.

Yes I was considering some time ago, about the possibility that there may in fact be Masonic impostors here, the reason that thought sparked in my brain, was a series of incidents where so called masons acted very un-masonry like.

reply to post by intrepid
 

Thank you for sharing that piece of information, that was very useful. I would not dare say that a mason took part in a banning I knew nothing about, in addition, I know I have launched a few, well lets just call them stupid remarks at the Mirth, and I would like to state that they where not fair against him, since I have seen no evidence what so ever of him not doing an excellent job moderating, my grievance with him goes back to the time before he was a moderator.

reply to post by LightinDarkness
 

You can question me all you want, that was not the hurdle I had with your posts, my problem was your deliberate misinterpretation of the essence of my post. As I stated, if you would bother to read it, you are right, in theory at least. I would still say I made an opening statement, meant to start the discussion, and not a biased statement claiming that no mason would participate in this thread.
I have debated many times with other masons here; actually I have done nothing else since I have started coming here along time ago.

reply to post by Animal
 

Animal, please you are more than welcome to participate in this discussion, do not let the rhetoric intimidate you, if you would assist me in re-railing this thread I would be in your debt.

reply to post by Fitzgibbon
 

Mate, no one in this thread said anything about you being devil worshippers, this is off topic, but in my humble opinion, devil worship is a form of Christian Judeo belief, since you have to acknowledge the fact that god exist and made man etc. etc. before you can believe in the existence of the devil. I once thought the inverted star was Baphomet, and that Baphomet was Satan, and Satan the Devil, and the Devil was Lucifer and Lucifer the Morning Lord and so fourth, I now know how wrong I was, though if I hadn’t asked those questions I would never have been enlightened today.

Lastly your two cents are always welcome, would you care to comment on the essence of the OP?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Point taken and edited, I actually forgot I wrote that (could I have been stoned?) but it was humour. Since the reptilian agenda is something I cannot find any truth to. And at the time of writing there was some serious (as always) Masonic debates.
I was simply trying to make a stereotypical characterization, but I can see that it will not help the overall health on this board, so the criticism is received, reviewed and acted upon.
Thank you for pointing that out.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
... the majority of masons here choose the forward and offensive victim tactic, when the argumentum ad hominem fails. They claim that they have always been hunted game, and that (using ad hominem) the tinfoil loon is just picking on these pure hearted men with good souls, that does nothing but sacrifice themselves, for the greater good of humanity.


First off, good thread. It's high time someone decided to focus on behaviors rather than parroted information and out-of-context Albert Pike quotes to form their theories/opinions.

I don't know if I would go so far as to say we're "hunted game," but we do get alot of flak that is undeserved and unearned. I liken it to a dog's behavior, so bear with my analogy.

There is this dog. It's a good, friendly dog that likes people and has a good disposition. He plays with the neighborhood kids, etc. Then a kid moves into the neighborhood that hates dogs, and kicks the nice dog every time he sees it. As time goes on, other kids start kicking the dog, because the first guy had to have a reason, right? Pretty soon this sweet-natured dog is going to be a little defensive. He'll still be nice to adults, but he growls and snaps at kids, because the kids are the ones doing the kicking. As time goes on, the kicking continues to the point where the dog feels threatened by all people and he will growl and bark at anyone who gets near him.

I'm not to the end of that little scenario yet, and I don't think any Masons here are, but a lot of us are keeping our eyes on the kids, and growling and snapping when they come close.

Fair?


What needs to be emphasized here is the fact that no matter what argument or factual evidence is presented, they will use this excuse to ridicule the writer further.


Equally true is the fact that when we try to honestly answer a question or address a comment, no matter what sources we use or personal experiences we draw upon to reply, it is always "tainted" in the eyes of our "adversaries" (for lack of a better term), simply because we are Masons.

On the one hand, we are in the best position to provide information about Masonry, due to the fact that we are members; but on the other hand, we can't be trusted because we are members, and we must be hiding something, because everything is secret. Either that, or they assume we are complete idiots and try to tell us that we know nothing about our own fraternity... but they do.


It's a catch-22 and it is one of the more frustrating things I have dealt with.

"Of course you would say that, you're a Mason," is their bread and butter and it's worthless to even try arguing once that comment escapes the keyboard. Sometimes we still try, and that is where the more heated and ad hominem attacks come into play. It's a problem with letting our opponents drag us into a slugfest when we should call a spade a spade and just chalk it up to talking to a brick wall.

Usually it only makes us look bad, because in the eyes of the masses, we are supposed to be held to a "higher standard" due to our virtuous and morally-based fraternity; like when you become a Mason you are just automatically a saint or something. Well, that's not the way it is. We are just people and we face the same problems and challenges and tempers that all men face.


2.3 Straw Man Tactic:
This is the masons last line of defence, when the two other tactics have failed they will use this.
They will normally resort to this in a subliminal way, either swaying the focus of the discussion or data in a irrelevant way, or just plain out hide behind the fact that they as an organization do charity.


This is probably the most common thing I see from Masons here, and I don't even think they realize it half the time. Sometimes I have seen arguments be stuck right in someone's proverbial mouth and then blasted right back out. It rarely matters, because in most cases, we (some of us) have been doing this for so long that we can see what's coming and just get it out from the jump, and often we're right, and it works. Once the poster is shown to be arguing for argument's sake, the thread peters out.

The problem is when it happens to people with genuine questions or concerns, due to the dog psychology presented above. Is it the dog's fault he's been kicked so much? No. I'm not trying to say it's not our fault; we're not dogs, we are men and should be better than that. At least, that's what we're supposed to be doing as Masons -- building ourselves into better men. No one said it was going to be easy, and not all achieve the success that some do. But so long as we are laboring, there will be those waiting to tear down our work.

Being able to keep the kickers from tearing down what we have built is the really challenging part and one that most are not adept at.


2.4 Summary:
What we have here is a clear manoeuvre used by any guilty party, whether or not they actually are guilty, they clearly feel guilty.


About what? All this about logical fallacies and you have generalized that we all feel guilty for something, hence the behavior. That is ridiculous, first of all. Second, your definition of "clear" and mine must have some nuances.


The ridiculing and subliminal arrogant attacks are undisputed, over and over again we see that the masons on this site is above the rules of all other normal users. As we see it in the capitalistic western civilization.


Where? There have been several Masons banned from this board for less than you might think. Hell I was even banned myself for over a year due to an argument between myself and certain site staff at the time that the "conspiracy posts only" caveat was introduced to the forum.

And let's not bring "Capitalistic Western Civilization" into it; when you started this thread you said we wee talking about ATS Masons -- if we're gonna play, let's play by the rules.



3.0 Investigation:
We clearly see a pattern here, masons defending masons, masons attacking any criticism or scepticism.


Of course we will defend one another. Of course we will attack ideas and "facts" that we believe/know to be untrue. How could you possibly expect us not to? As far as criticism/skepticism, if it's legit, it is treated as such. If it's the same out-of-context quotes or standard anti-Masonic rhetoric found on freemasonrywatch.org and sites of that kind, it is likely to be dismissed out of hand.

Unfortunately, some people post those things out of a sincere curiosity, and are berated and made to look stupid for believing it. This should not happen and I'm sure I'm just as guilty of it as anyone else. It doesn't help, and only makes people feel bad, or worse, feel like we really are the enemy. Sad, when you consider that a different response from us could have made the difference.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Masons ganging up on others, back padding each other and bending the system to their own favour. For example when we look at stars etc. awarded to the average user and compare them to the stars that masons get for controversial (borderline) comments etc.


There are several of us here, so it's not hard to see our responding to posts as "ganging up" on someone. And for the record, I give stars to any post I think is a good one, regardless of if I agree or not. Case in point: two of the stars you received on your first posts in this thread came from me.


Also the fact that several masons have penetrated the administration of Above Top Secret, only further leads to the conclusion that in fact they (read: administration) are not impartial.


FYI: There is only one (1) ATS staff member who is a Mason, to the best of my knowledge. We Masons get warnings, etc. just like everyone else. We even get banned -- there are several who have been banned. It doesn't seem so partial to me; perhaps there is just a greater concentration of Mason in the SS forum, so it can seem that way?

I dunno but I don't see it.


An observation: the new star system seems to work in an unintentional way, they are rarely used, which is a good thing, but you can clearly see that the Masonic group on Above Top Secret, uses these to promote a false sense of confirmation to outside or new users, since a new user will automatically assume that a post with many stars is a good post, when in fact it only shows (most of the time, in the case of the secret society forum) that it is a post, published by a mason.


I have not seen this to be the case. Perhaps I've not paid attention, but I haven't seen it. I have seen stars for well-timed snide comments, and I have seen stars given to posts trying to bring levity to a degenerating discussion, but what you describe seems to take it a bit far. See my above comment regarding stars.


3.1 Summary:
All in all there is a clear argument here, masons are indeed as they have pledged in secret, protecting each other in here, even when a mason steps over board the “enlightened” ones just remain silent, presumably under the excuse of ignorance.


Perhaps to you there is silence, but I have had more than a couple conversations in private dealing with this very issue. If you think I (or any Mason) will call my brothers out in public and berate them, or vice-versa, you're crazy. Don't think that we do not offer counsel to one another when it is called for. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.


They also claim ignorance of any facts presented that does not fit with their reality or as in chapter 2 the attack the person presenting the facts.


Define "facts." One can only claim ignorance to a fact until he is made aware of said fact. This, of course, is meaningless if the "facts" are not facts, and if someone is making stuff up or cannot credibly back up their claim, then it is not "fact" and that person may be ridiculed, and his sources and "facts" may be attacked.

This is not rocket surgery, and I mean no offense by that comment. Facts are not facts until proven to be true.


4.0 Conclusion:
From my long time on ATS, do not let the join date fool you; I have seen this problem escalating, from tolerable to intolerable. Masons have indeed literally taken over control of the secret societies forum.


While I can see how you would think so, I disagree. We're just here on our free time like everyone else.


What I propose is a cease fire...


All I can say is good luck. I'm out of time for today, but I will respond to the rest later. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.


Again, good thread.


[edit on 12/11/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by The Axeman
 


Thank you for that reply, I will answer it fully tomorrow...



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
reply to post by Fitzgibbon
 

Mate, no one in this thread said anything about you being devil worshippers, this is off topic, but in my humble opinion,


Granted in this thread, no. My point in the second paragraph of that post was intended more as way of explaining a certain…..shall we say weariness and tartness of response to new posters who’ve “discovered” the evils of Masonry and come to impart this wisdom. Hence the less than warm reception they receive (which Animal referred to in his post and to which I responded) which then gets interpreted as a Masonic cabal on ATS determined to put down anything negative about Masonry.


Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
devil worship is a form of Christian Judeo belief, since you have to acknowledge the fact that god exist and made man etc. etc. before you can believe in the existence of the devil.


Therein we’re starting to veer OT though I‘d posit that the devil is an excuse for selfish, negative human behaviours. But I digress.


Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
Lastly your two cents are always welcome, would you care to comment on the essence of the OP?


Hypothesis:
The masons hereunder Blue Lodge and Scottish Rite masons on the Above Top Secret forums, are deliberately manipulating any criticism directed at their secret society structure.
In addition they are also continually ridiculing and undermining any critical thinking produced, using the argumentum ad hominem, victim and/or straw man tactic repeatedly.

4.0 Conclusion:
From my long time on ATS, do not let the join date fool you; I have seen this problem escalating, from tolerable to intolerable. Masons have indeed literally taken over control of the secret societies forum.

Quite simply, I would disagree with both your hypothesis and conclusion. There aren’t many occasions when someone such as yourself with an apparently anti-Masonic (or at least neutral) stance has been inclined to debate with any degree of civility as opposed to loosing a drive-by smear as is more typical. Ergo, a perusal of the threads over a given time will give an appearance of an organised Masonic oversight that doesn’t, in fact, exist.

We are, ultimately, just a group of men who share but one connection. But by being an identifiable group, we then are left open to suggestions such as you’re positing.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:44 PM
link   
While Axeman undertakes the daunting and unenvied task of rebutting your post in toto I hope you do not mind if I continue to extract sections of it for quicker consumption and reply?


Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
The Masonic Influence: Part 2 of 3

[4.0 Conclusion:
From my long time on ATS, do not let the join date fool you; I have seen this problem escalating, from tolerable to intolerable. Masons have indeed literally taken over control of the secret societies forum.


I do not myself see how the Brethern have 'taken over control' of the Secret Societies forum here on Above Top Secret. Out of the many forums here I feel that this forum is one of the best moderated and run. There seems to be very little moderator 'direction' applied to the threads and fewer still reprimands for the members-the recent incident with Stompk not withstanding.

By your own addmission you have moderated your own view of Masons by the conduct they exhibited towards you which enabled you to view the Fraternity in a more favorable light. As the recent posts by Animal also show, civility can be reciprocal and the majority of the Masons here want nothing more then to have intellectual discourse and instill a favorable opinion of the Craft on all who inquire.

I for one am of the opinion that information gleaned from the internet has run its course in regards its use as 'ammunition'. As you admit, all of the specious claims posited by the anti-Masonic sites you mentioned have, one by one, been disproved. Numerous Brothers before me have stated, more eloquently I might add, the tedious nature of rebutting every Mason-basher who happens to emerge with what he feels is 'newly found' information detailing the sinister dealings of Ancient Free Masonry. Once again, I make no excuses for anyones behavior, but if they appear harsh this may be the reason.

I would like to pose to you a question. Since you feel the situation is 'intolerable' what do you propose is the solution for when these types of people or posts arise?

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tetragrammaton
An observation: the new star system seems to work in an unintentional way, they are rarely used, which is a good thing, but you can clearly see that the Masonic group on Above Top Secret, uses these to promote a false sense of confirmation to outside or new users, since a new user will automatically assume that a post with many stars is a good post, when in fact it only shows (most of the time, in the case of the secret society forum) that it is a post, published by a mason.


I second Axemans assertion that this is untrue. I also starred your first post because I felt it would insite an intellectual discourse which is the reason for particpating in any forum. Not that I am expecting you to do the same but there are several excellent posts made by my fellow Brothers which warrant much more then a star but might not receive even that from members who view them as sinister simply because of their affiliation.


3.1 Summary:
All in all there is a clear argument here, masons are indeed as they have pledged in secret, protecting each other in here, even when a mason steps over board the “enlightened” ones just remain silent, presumably under the excuse of ignorance. They also claim ignorance of any facts presented that does not fit with their reality or as in chapter 2 the attack the person presenting the facts.


I can personally attest to the fact that some of the more senior Masons one the board have personally contacted me on U2U about a post or response that they might have felt needed some personal 'moderation'. I did not view this critisism with disdain but with appreciation that they felt it would help me to further improve myself in the public eye and present a more favorable view of Masonry. There is much happening 'behind the scenes' to counsel 'wayward' Brothers when their behavior warrants it. I would add, "Trust me.", but do you?

I further offer the analogy of correcting ones friends or family in public. Is it not more tactful to perform this duty in private? Do you know of anyone who enjoys being critiqued in public? I for one do not and would rather be addmonished privately. Thank you to all the Brethern who did pro-offer advice.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]

[edit on 11-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join