posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 10:57 AM
Here is my question, and I mean it in a respectful manner (I know it is hard to read intent in words at times, where in person you would have verbal
and non verbal cues to ascertain the emotion behind the words), and I will try my best to get my point across to the best of my limited
eloquence.Note that this does not reference any particular post,question or querant.
Situation and or Claim A is invalid.Assume this is one hundred percent factual, and many know from first hand experience that this is a claim and or
situation is invalid.
Poster A posts situation or claim A.Claim A may have been posted out of good intent,the poster may have just had faulty information that he believed
to be factual.(We will go with the best case scenario,and assume that the post was not blatant misnformation/trolling...I always tend to believe the
best of people until the repeatedly and unequivocally give me reason not to)
Posters B through H know for a fact that poster A has posted something inaccurate so they all post informatively why this post is untrue and invalid,
and they cite outside resources to the best of their abilities ( since we are already being utopian,every poster B through H has cited accurate
material, that strengthens their position and informs and educates all who read it)
All posters B through H have their own unique histories (what we experience make us who we are) and though all disproving theory A to the best of
their ability, all have unique perspectives, and post slightly different information.
This is great and how forums are supposed to operate, an exchange of ideas where people try to use KNOWN FACTUAL sources to help others learn more
about the world about them, and the mystery that we all share called life.
Now take a look at the above scenario and suspend your belief that something is being posted that is untrue about Freemasonry by poster A.
Posters B through H all come along, of their own free will, with no prompting from one and other, and (as is natural instinct) defend truthfully
something that they have a common interest in and love of.(Suppose that I posted a nasty rumor about a loved one, that you knew was not factual, would
you not defend that person, and try to dispel the lies?)These posters all are of the same thesis, that the statement is invalid, but they all bring a
little something different to the table,and all post the truth.
Should these posters have to worry that just because B through H ( 7 of them) posted, someone will misconstrue it as "pack behavior" or someone who
is venomously against Freemasonry who just hates masons will report it as so maliciously in an attempt to get posting priveleges revoked, or users
This is a huge concern to me.I collaborate with nobody to post on any thread.I am here because I enjoy history,philosophy,learning,and I am a
conspiracy theorist at heart on certain subjects.I was not always a Freemason, and I weighed both sides before I put an application in.The only motive
I have to refute something that I know is not factual is to educate others.Likewise I also am here to humbly learn.There is a stake in defending
outright lies against Freemasonry that can be documented and proven false, and that stake is, people are far to fast to believe something as fact,
simply because it was posted on the internet.I would like people to know the truth, as many good men that are sincerely trying to be
righteous,ethical, and moral can be slandered by lies.
If you don't mind me asking how was it determined that the banned posters were intentionally involved in pack like behavior, or trying to run others