why are you punishing so many for just a few ill mannered constituants

DISRAELI
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

I've already descibed the thread in the answer I gave to Wlidtimes.
i don't remember the exact title, so there's nothing i can add anyway.

I know it read the thread and will not name it as its too ugly to contemplate what the purpose is of this subject matter; to enhanse or detract from the intellect of all posters replying? Boobytrap.

vethumanbeing

Klassified
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

This one, and the one that sprang from it, probably didn't help matters any...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bo-xian thread "how to sucker punch jump the theist/anti thiest" (you name it Just For Fun) in the Relationships Forum?? This is just too funny. Like posting a thread to "Origins and Civilizations" regarding auto industry assembly line robots having dim scentience/awareness.

I am making a formal apology to BO XIAN; I misread the intent of your thread and jumped to conclusions in my rash observations. I see what you were attempting to accomplish, I completely misinterpreted your OP; looking instead at the respondees (or the free for all it generated). I will insert here an idea of an emoticon: it looks like me 'eating a dirt sandwich'.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


I'm mostly okay with this.

Have a cynical feeling that this will need to become an annual event. It appears to me that an energetic poster shows up in these forums from somewhere, post trolls 'religiously' (haha) for three to eight months, and then vanishes into the ether as if there was nothing before.

Just have a feeling religious posters are a bit more transient than 9/11 theorists.

Pinke
reply to post by SkepticOverlord

PinkeI'm mostly okay with this. Have a cynical feeling that this will need to become an annual event. It appears to me that an energetic poster shows up in these forums from somewhere, post trolls 'religiously' (haha) for three to eight months, and then vanishes into the ether as if there was nothing before.

A cleansing of the erratic posters (why not say so by moderators if is the intent); I can understand this re-modulation. I wonder why as well. Its mysterious and perplexing; perhaps is the 80 days around the world version of a Jules Verne balloon story.

PinkeJust have a feeling religious posters are a bit more transient than 9/11 theorists.

Naw, religious posters are just posing for a fight (that will not happen) as intrinsically some are ordained pacifists; others are trying to take a tithe (blood money). Religious posters are exposing themselves as what they persieve to be a genuine truth. We all have a perception of TRUTH and guess what everyone of them is individualized to the soul aspect seeking growth. I can see the problems with 9/11 thread theorists, last year the 2012 doomsday thread was removed; 74 pages into. The world did not end. Thankyou Pinke for responding to this thread; fresh ideas; future consequences. No good deed ever goes unpunished. Cynicism NEVER helps only fuels fires that someone is waiting to set a match to.

reply to post by vethumanbeingPOST REMOVED


Not sure what happened here; prior wisdom applies to future events. Gemwolf; why apply this action upon the one that generated the thread in the first place? If thread drift is not allowed why not let me by myself "as a grownup humanbeing" change it as the original poster 'OP'?

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Just to clarify, when I say 9/11 theorists or religious posters, atheists and anti-truthers are included in those statements.

One question regarding posting bans... On what basis are people going to be banned? Rft/cir were never picnic grounds as far as I remember. Threads are going to turn heated and users are going to assert their povs. The very nature of the subject called ''religion'' contains potential for statements that may be perceived as ''insulting'', though it may not be intended as such?

One question regarding posting bans... On what basis are people going to be banned? Rft/cir were never picnic grounds as far as I remember. Threads are going to turn heated and users are going to assert their povs. The very nature of the subject called ''religion'' contains potential for statements that may be perceived as ''insulting'', though it may not be intended as such?

sk0rpi0n
One question regarding posting bans... On what basis are people going to be banned? Rft/cir were never picnic grounds as far as I remember. Threads are going to turn heated and users are going to assert their povs. The very nature of the subject called ''religion'' contains potential for statements that may be perceived as ''insulting'', though it may not be intended as such?

Potencial heated debates in those forums are an understatement; for whatever reason EGO gets the best of one eventually (have not met a bulldog Buddhist on either one oddly). Rash gut responses in the result of someone becoming offended because their belief system is violated or threatenned. I suppose these arenas (forums) are by nature going to be contentious. Where is the line drawn? The Roman Senate vs Ceasar all over again.

vethumanbeing

sk0rpi0n
One question regarding posting bans... On what basis are people going to be banned? Rft/cir were never picnic grounds as far as I remember. Threads are going to turn heated and users are going to assert their povs. The very nature of the subject called ''religion'' contains potential for statements that may be perceived as ''insulting'', though it may not be intended as such?

Potencial heated debates in those forums are an understatement; for whatever reason EGO gets the best of one eventually (have not met a bulldog Buddhist on either one oddly). Rash gut responses in the result of someone becoming offended because their belief system is violated or threatenned. I suppose these arenas (forums) are by nature going to be contentious. Where is the line drawn? The Roman Senate vs Ceasar all over again.

Now that right there would be a rash gut response. Most of the offence comes from poor research passed off as sheading new light on a standing orthodoxy, thus the assumptions of positions defended out of orthodoxy alone, with the accompanying pejorative tone. One would assume and to some degree rightfully so, that there is going to be offence involved in challenging long held positions. However when these challenges are rebuffed and defended against is when the real offence comes.

reply to post by Logarock

One would assume and to some degree rightfully so, that there is going to be offence involved in challenging long held positions. However when these challenges are rebuffed and defended against is when the real offence comes.

The key phrase above: "long held positions." ( 'Long Held' does NOT = 'true and correct.")

"These challenges" are only 'rebuffed' and 'defended against' when the 'rebuffer' and 'defender' is a staunch "Apologetic."

It's not the fault of the more progressive scholars that the 'apologists' ' case is coming undone.

reply to post by wildtimes


The problem is, when people are wrong, they should know that they are wrong when they are told so! If people who are wrong would just admit they're wrong when they're told they're wrong, there wouldn't be any problems!

Ez Peasy!

wildtimes
reply to post by Logarock

 

One would assume and to some degree rightfully so, that there is going to be offence involved in challenging long held positions. However when these challenges are rebuffed and defended against is when the real offence comes.

The key phrase above: "long held positions." ( 'Long Held' does NOT = 'true and correct.")

"These challenges" are only 'rebuffed' and 'defended against' when the 'rebuffer' and 'defender' is a staunch "Apologetic."

It's not the fault of the more progressive scholars that the 'apologists' ' case is coming undone.

edit on 1/14/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

And now for the object lession. See how easy that was? Like chumming the waters. Can I get a witness? lol

reply to post by windword

The problem is, when people are wrong, they should know that they are wrong when they are told so! If people who are wrong would just admit they're wrong when they're told they're wrong, there wouldn't be any problems!

I KNOW! Right!??
Those stupid "wrongos"....
LOL

You know I jest, windy.

(For everyone The thing is, we need to be able to discuss the options and possibilities without all the panty-twisted spitting.
I know I am guilty, and responsible, for posts that are passionate. I know I probably have multiple 'enemies' on the 2 forums....

but, I'm really NOT a troll. I'm trying to make sense of things, at this point in my life (55 years old), and I only want to figure out how to achieve common ground.

reply to post by Logarock

And now for the object lesion.

What is an "object lesion"? Please?

wildtimes
reply to post by Logarock

 

And now for the object lesion.

What is an "object lesion"? Please?

I certainly apologize.

wildtimes


but, I'm really NOT a troll. I'm trying to make sense of things, at this point in my life (55 years old), and I only want to figure out how to achieve common ground.

On a religious debate thread?

reply to post by Logarock


Now you edited it. So I'm editing this one.

The Question Remains:

What is an 'object lesion'?



'Lession'?

NM, I don't care to continue this.

wildtimes
reply to post by Logarock

 

Now you edited it. So I'm editing this one.

The Question Remains:

What is an 'object lesion'?

edit on 1/14/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

'Lession'?

NM, I don't care to continue this.

edit on 1/14/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

Again I certainly apologize.