Booted! On the ship! Kicked off! Df'd!

by teejay 124 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  plmkrzy

  Farkel has feelings? Naaaa

  sing along "feelings...nothing more then feelings...trying to forget my...feelings of pain."

  JUST trying to kid.
• 

  teejay

  Farkel,

  It is comments like yours that threaten to elevate threads from the realm of the mundane to one of genuine meaning. Thank you.

  You said

  I've never been accused of being a troll.

  You haven't made the same impression.

  In saying this, you suggest that you have never, at any time, posted comments that could be deemed "trollish" in nature. On the other hand, while you didn't come right out and say it, you inferred that the reason I've been called a troll (or a spammer, or an idiot or a dimwit or lazy) is because I've actually acted in those ways, warranting those labels to be applied to me.

  On page one of this thread, Alan alleged:

  From the get-go you've posted mainly things to deliberately stir up trouble. Whether you do this out of malice or simple stupidity is not objectively clear.

  He not only said that the nature of my posts were mostly of a certain provocative and malicious nature, but that I, personally, was either malicious or stupid.

  I asked for documentation, proof supporting his assertion that I knew did not exist. Even as he made the above comment about me, *he* knew that such evidence supporting what he said has never been on display here. Online and off, I have always taken pride in leaving words behind that are honorable and true, the direct opposite of what Alan said. It has to do with the way I was raised. Since Alan knew he'd put himself out on, at best, a very flimsy limb, he quickly left this discussion, but not before calling me a troll.

  That's why I came back and posted links to some of the forty or so threads I've ACTUALLY posted here on JW.com. they are very representative of the types of threads/posts I regularly make. Honest and fair JW.com members know this about me.

  Months ago, in a thread far, far away, JanH accused me of "character assassination." He revealed in his use of that phrase in that particular instance that he didn't know the meaning of the expression. In my thread "avoiding arguments," even Alan said that sometimes you have to call someone what they are. What Jan accused me of back then is not the same as what Alan said is sometimes necessary. In that dialog with Jan, I simply forced him to acknowledge certain acts that were documentable. The difference between what *I* did THEN and what others have done to me SINCE in their insults is that I had proof. Evidence.

  kent would like to suggest – by booting me from his board – that I'm a spammer. Alan thinks I'm a malicious (or stupid) troll. Dave thinks I'm a dimwit. Six thinks I'm lazy. I ask: where's the proof?

  I submit: if there is no proof, those statements are indeed character assassinations. Someone like SEAKEN2001, a man that doesn't know me from adam, can come along and, simply because Alan says it about me – and since he DOES know Alan's "reputation" – may be persuaded to believe Alan. THAT is true character assassination. Which brings me to my point.

  I don't care what strangers think about me, Farkel. I really don't. I've made that clear many times here, most notably in the last meaningful interchange I had with GinnyT. I'm very secure with who I am, thanks in large part to being raised in a certain cultic religion and being forced to associate with classmates and relatives who didn't particularly care about that religion or the way I practiced it and didn't mind letting their feelings become known. I've been called names all my life, so dealing with them here is nothing new. But then, this thread was never about me, and those who thought it was never got the point.

  Then again, this thread was never about kent either or the folks that came along to defend him. This thread was always about how people are viewed based on either perceptions created by others or their own, actual behaviors, some of which are starkly hypocritical at times. Outside the scope of this little db out in the vast universe of cyberspace, we've seen the WTS use certain character assassinations in order to color the perception that people have of those they don't like and hope to silence.

  It's not use of this tactic that I find so compelling. Those with a certain agenda have been doing that since forever.

  That others who have seen it all before fall for it again... over and over, now THAT is what I find so intriguing.
• 

  SEAKEN2001

  Hey, Teejay.

  If it matters, I really haven't formed an opinion of you based on what anyone has said on this and related topics. I saw where you were going with this thing and it seems that no harm was done. I see some of what you write as rediculous banter seemingly designed to amuse yourself. I see some of the other stuff as fairly balanced and objective and worth consideration. That makes you like everyone else. I think the same about Alan or Kent, or me. All of us do and say some pretty foolish stuff sometimes but in the end it's how we come through it that matters. Personally, I enjoy the "game" of trying to actually hear, consider, and appreciate the words of someone who tends to grate on my nerves, without ending up exhibiting childish behavior myself. This forum is a great place to play that game! [g]

  Sean
• 

  Mommie Dark

  I've watched this thread with a combination of amusement and revulsion. For people who are so allegedly happy to have the 'riffraff' gone, some of you sure can't seem to quit obsessing on them and their current doings. Especially teejay.

  To set the record straight regarding his 'disfellowshipping' claim: teejay's post here where he promised to 'kick up some dust' was read by many of those who recently registered at Kent's board. The several threads dedicated to congratulating yourselves for getting rid of the unsavory types were all duly noted, and teejay's contempt (and that of several other smiling knife-wielders) for the new forum and its members was openly admitted. Need I really post tedious links to these posts? YOu all know what you said. You all know what his declared intent was in registering at the new board.

  Although his first post at Kent's new forum was not inflammatory, his intentions in registering and posting were admittedly for the purpose of stirring and mixing, rather than genuine communication. His participation on the board was discussed by all moderators, and moderators received emails from other board members expressing concern over this admitted fishing expedition. Kent's decision to boot teejay was not a unilateral dictatorial action. It was based on consensus. Kent's promised democratic process, that was so condescendingly discussed and dismissed here, was in fact working beautifully, as Kent knew it would given a chance.

  Of course we didn't bother to tell clueless teejay these facts, since he has previously proven himself to be impervious to any fact that disagrees with his preconceptions. Easier to just boot his ass, and let him come here to whinge and complain while pretending that all his words here are honorable and true.

  I'm appalled at the stunning hypocrisy of the Pharisaic moral one-upmanship displayed in some of the threads related to this board business. Why is it so hard for some of you to let go of your gripes against people who aren't even in your virtual social club any more? Why are you so eager to denigrate another forum where people you patently dislike anyway have gone to communicate?

  I tried to stay out of this entirely but I couldn't stand by and watch teejay get away with pretending to be an innocent victim of a bully's ego when in fact he is just peeved at being thwarted in a little mindgame he wanted to perpetrate for some malicious fun that he could use to amuse his other two-faced cronies (and you backbiters know who you are). He was booted at the sincere request of a majority of mods and posters because we, not being stupid, knew from experience what to expect from him.

  Simon's board will continue to change and reconfigure. That's the way it's always happened for as long as the medium has existed. I suppose it's too much to expect for folks to just mind their own business and let others do the same without a lot of gossip and mischief and stirring up of unnecessary melodrama while the changes are going on. Why? I don't know. Ask teejay, he's an expert on unnecessary stirring and mixing.
• 

  larc

  Sean,

  I think that you make some valid points regarding us infallible posters. I think there are several factors that contribute to very good commentators sometimes slipping into name calling, etc.

  1. Fierce loyalty for a friend that can cloud one's judgement.

  2. A bad first impression of someone. The newbie may change, but others may not accept it.

  3. Long term grudges that just don't get settled.

  4. A need to be "right" in the face of contradictory evidence.

  I guess life here isn't much different than life in the real world.
• 

  Simon

  Can we let this die now?

  Everyone has had "their say" (several times over I think) so I don't think it will go anywhere except downhill into mud-slinging.

  I think the reason people are so fired up about this MD is that it seemd that the posters here were being painted as troublemakers and guilty of spamming, harrassing etc... by those that it could be argued were the usual perpetrators. There is probably some fault and misunderstandings on both sides so maybe we should try to put all this behind us now and move on.

  Thanks
• 

  sf

  Actually Simon, I have something to say to Farkel on a comment in this thread. It took some nerve to do, so please, allow me.

  It isn't easy for me to confront men such as you "Farkel", yet I must eat this FEAR up and then spit out, for good in order to get the toxins out.

  You say here:

  "What Kismet said hurt my feelings, because he and I have been friendly and have shared private information for a goodly number of years."

  That sucked didn't it? It made you FEEL something inside you that was what? Emotional? You felt an emotion? You?

  And it hurt why? You FELT what? Betrayed? Why? Because you had become FRIENDLY over a goodley number of years and PRIVATE SHARED INFO was what? Revealed in public? How could anyone ("friendly for years") do such a thing, you say?

  Well Farkel, I'd like to ask you the very same thing when it came to DOING the very same thing to me, a few months back.

  We had become "friendly for a goodley number of months". And yes, I admit that I had become emotionally involved with you and some of your plight at the time. I even went so far as to have cops looking for you the night some here thought you were on a "suicidetrip".

  The next day I was on the phone with some of your friends in san diego county that knew who knew you. Yea, that was pretty emotional and scary.

  I wasn't aware of how you would react though to a person who'd you had become friendly with over the months/years. It shocked me actually. I felt embarrassed that I'd even went to the lengths I did that night.

  You hadme wondering though, after you're "you are so emotional" comment if we had truly even been friends for those months. Thus the "fuck off" I shot you with.

  Then I see the next thing you DO is post private things about our private conversation about my life. That scared me bad and me walls went straight up. I thought, holy krap, how much info do people here really privately reveal about one another? And what a fool I was.

  It hurt Farkel, just like it hurt you. If we were truly actually friendly, like i had thought, you would not have reacted to how i was reacting emotionally to what was going on with you that night in the chatroom. But the way YOU reacted betrayed and stunned me. And it will always hurt. It will keep confirming that revealing and sharing is the revealers and sharers risk on public forums and even privately.

  I mean honestly, how much time is spent gossiping about others here? How much do you know about me or someone else because I was the one who told you or because someone else revealed it to you?

  I wrote this not for cheerleaders to rah, rah or nah nah or to gain apologies by you. I wrote it because I needed to swallow this fear of speaking up to men like you that paralyze me with emotion. And grip with me with FEAR. It feels just like when I was young and I'd be told if I didn't this or that I'd have to go in front of the elders. FEAR and EMOTION would grip me and paralyze me.

  I'm tired of allowing mySELF to be gripped with fear (blackmailing personal info) and emotion (rage) by men such as you Farkel.

  There, I've chewed up that fear.

  sKally, spit:

  If man was supposedly created in gods image, then.....holy krap...we're all doomed.-sKallyWagger
• 

  waiting

  mommie dark,

  His participation on the board was discussed by all moderators, and moderators received emails from other board members expressing concern over this admitted fishing expedition. -md

  An honest question: How many moderators are there over at Kent's board, and are they only known secretly? If not a secret, what are the names of all the moderators over at Kent's board?

  waiting
• 

  WildHorses

  Julie,Farkel,Larc, teejay, I love all of you dearly. You are all very intelligent people.

  One thing I hate is seeing you all at each others throats.
  Is this all worth it? Larc didn't say anything bad in his last post. I thought what he said was (forgive me if I sound like a jw here) very heartfelt and sincere.

  Why not just let it end? If it is having the last word that matters, why not just post a simple............naner naner naner, and leave it at that. All I see here is people hurting others feelings.

  Lilacs, backing out now

  I don't want someone in my life I can live with. I want someone in my life I can't live without.
• 

  expatbrit

  Waiting:

  The moderators at Kent's board are Kent, Norm, Redhorsewoman, Mommie Dark and Debbie. Aside from Kent, their names appear next to the forums they moderate.

  edited coz i suk

  Expatbrit