Please help me with the forum

by Simon 67 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Undecided

  Hi Simon,

  Like the other members of this board I feel you have the right to do whatever you feel is best for your board. Friday is the only one here that has tried to rile me with his comments. At first it made me mad, then I realized that it was just his character and I would just accept that as one of his faults. I didn't bother to read his insults to Joel, so I can't comment on that.

  I don't mind his negative comments, it gives me something to think about or ignore as I decide to do. It reveals his character, which I don't like, but he probably doesn't like me either, but I don't care when someone like him doesn't like me. It makes me feel better about myself.

  So whatever you choose to do I will support it, you have shown yourself to be a well balanced and fair person.

  Ken P.
• 

  Billygoat

  Simon,

  First of all thank you for even addressing this publicly! I've never been on a DB until I joined this one. It is still the only one. So I don't have much experience to go off of. But I'll give you my viewpoint:

  1. It's your house. I think you're doing a great job! But I don't envy you in the least!

  2. I don't like Friday. He's a weiner. But I do think he should have been warned directly about his actions before he was inactivated. Not for his benefit, but to protect yourself. This email probably would not even have been sent to you.

  3. I don't like the idea of "peer" blackballing. Dangerous!

  4. I think you should let Friday back. With conditions of course. I think the probation period is a great idea. But perhaps you could advise anyone to just ignore the trolls. If they don't? Well, that's they're battle from then on out.

  5. It's your house. Do what you feel is right!

  Just my $.02,

  Andi
• 

  AGuest

  Hello, dear Simon... and may you have peace!

  May I ofer my own humble suggestion? Thank you. Do nothing. Let us judge and condemn our own selves, if that is our inclination. We know cerain people are 'racy', certain ones are 'zealous', certain ones 'self-righteous', certain ones 'flaming', certain ones... well, you get the picture.

  Since we are all 'free-will' agents, we have the 'free-will' to read and respond... or NOT read and respond... to whatever we wish. I would feel that action only need be taken in the event of a 'real' threat of harm... or excessive porno (yeah, okay, who's to say what's excessive).

  We all run the risk of being offended... and offending... when we come here. Why? Because we are so diverse: members run the gamut from those who believe in God to those who don't; men to women; young to old; housewives to professionals, etc.

  We have been 'warned', both spiritually and secularly of the 'dangers' of the internet, so anyone who says they came here unaware, is not being completely truthful with you.

  C'mon, Simon... we all claim to possess some level of 'cahones'. Even Friday. I don't think we need a 'baby-sitter' perhaps as much as WE think we do. You are a 'special' man, Simon... in many ways.

  So, chill. Sit back, relax, take a load off... and let 'boyz and gurlz... be boyz and gurlz.' Let US see who is who... and what... is what.

  Only my opinion.

  I bid you peace.. and I am,

  YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

  SJ
• 

  Pathofthorns

  My opinion is that this sort of censorship is a slippery slope. If you can draw the lines and set the limits, can you be consistent in banning everyonethat crosses that line? And how are the limits defined? What was once simple, ends up complicated by rules and regulations.

  I believe most can moderate themselves. People need to stop being drawn to garbage and then complaining about what they read. It's very simple really. DON'T GIVE PEOPLE WHO ABUSE THEIR PRIVELEGE TO POST AN AUDIENCE.

  I don't really know what the fuss is about when it comes to Yardiff's postings because I haven't read lately what he has to say. If you don't like the music, then change the station.

  People like Yardiff serve a purpose. It shows that Witnesses are intollerant and predjudiced dispite whatever they may try to portray to the public.

  As for the member's voting against one another, that is definitely a devisive tool and counterproductive to working through the problems of understanding the differences in each of us. Some of these things just take time and communication, not people ganging up on others and restricting communication.

  I also don't care for the Membership list and the time listings of our last visits to this site on the new software you are working on. WOL has this and I think it is a breach of privacy, and on a site such as this, we all value our privacy. Other than that, the new look is great.

  (Basically keeping things up and running is a job well done. People will always work things out if you give them time.)

  Path
• 

  thinkers wife

  Joel,
  You are the sweetest!! Many hugs and kisses to you and Mitch!
  Simon,
  Just for what it is worth the voting ballot thing scares me too! Maybe left overs from shattered self-esteem.
  But this board is great as far as I'm concerned.
  TW
• 

  alirobbi

  At first, like most here, I thought oh just let Friday rant. it shows people exactly the kind of bigotry and hate the gay community has to put up with on a daily basis. In fact his rantings probably did more good for the gay community then harm. But then he made the following comments to Skeptic in reference to homosexuals....
  ______________________________________________________________________

  Neither would you succeed in being a homosexual in living next door to me, but I won’t tell you just why that would be so.

  I’ll have to ask my neighbor two blocks over how he found out about the two that lived across the street from him. Needless to say, they didn’t live there much longer once they were found out about. Again, I won’t disclose the details as to why.
  ______________________________________________________________________

  After that I felt something should be done. If you are gay or have a loved one that is, these words show that not only does he condone harming gays, he is proud of people he knows who have. These kind of words can and do incite others to do harm to gays.

  Even though I am a newbie when it comes to posting, I think in this instance Simon was right on the money. Should Friday be allowed to come back? That is up to Simon and I will support whatever he decides to do.

  Operating a board is tough. No matter what you do, you will be criticized. About the only thing you can do is what your conscience tells you to do. I think Simon has a great board and he does a great job in letting everyone have their say. Thanks Simon.

  Robbi
• 

  hillary_step

  Simon,

  It seems that two options are open to you, each with their own difficulties attached but it is the purpose of the Board that should eventually define your decisions.

  I use the term 'average JW' below a number of times and as you think of the use of this term imagine it being applied to the normal JW sitting in the centre of the hall many finding the Internet, perhaps for the first time. Not those disfellowshipped, or disgruntled, or perhaps like most here, of a questioning frame of mind.
  The attempt at controlling the use of the Internet by the WTS has without doubt failed. You can prove this Simon by noting the repeat IPS addresses of vistors to this site who do not post, or have not subscribed.

  1) If your desire is NOT to attract the 'average' JW to visit and post to this Board without reeling, then the the present model of self-moderation seems to work as well as can be expected given the diverse personalities. If this is the model that sits comfortably in your own mind then perhaps the controversial header, 'Discussion Forum For Jw's etc'. should be dropped as it is misleading.

  2) If your desire is to attract the 'average' JW to visit and post to this Board and learn in a more gentle manner the theological options open to them, then a firmer and more autocratic moderation might be needed.

  Either way, its your Board and your responsibility to make these choices. I echo the sentiments of many others in thanking you for providing a voice to the many previously silenced ones.

  My very best to you -- HS
• 

  alliwannadoislive

  loud, ugly and vile threats ... i wonder if brooklyn would approve of such a lack of self-control as well as outrageous and un-christian conduct - glad i now associate with people who wear their hearts on their sleeves ...

  plus ... perhaps my thinking is mixed up here - but in shakespeare's words "methinks the lady doth protest too much" ... like ex-smokers who condemn smokers the most virulently, does the massive rant suggest latent gay tendencies ?
• 

  waiting

  does the massive rant suggest latent gay tendencies ?

  Friday/Yardif does the massive ranting on a variety of issues. In this case, I think it's just *his way* - which is not saying much.

  waiting
• 

  AlanF

  I think, Simon, that you should continue to run your board any way you please. You don't have much of an FPP, and that's good. In any case, in the final analysis, what goes on and who posts is a matter of your personal opinion and level of comfortability. Do what feels right to you, since it's your 'house'.

  As for Friday, that disgusting, cowardly piece of filth is the epitome of hypocrisy. He's on these boards for nothing more than to try to tweak the noses of JW critics by picking out and harping on any mistakes he can find. In the two years I've watched him post on H2O and here, he's consistently avoided dealing with real issues and focused only on the real or imagined minor foibles of various posters. He's actually much like the Society's writers, except that they do a much slicker job in The Watchtower. I have mixed emotions about whether to let such a piece of trash continue posting. For those with thick skins and who can read his posts analytically, they serve as a warning about the extremes to which JWs can go and still claim to be serving WTS interests. On the other hand, for those who read just the surface message, he can sound reasonable at times. But this seeming reasonableness is much like the Society's hypocritical stance of demanding full freedom from governments to practice religion as they please, while totally denying freedom to members to practice even the smallest deviation from the consciences of the Governing Body. How best to handle this stuff is entirely up to you.

  AlanF