Big Ray on Disfellowshipped Members

by truth_hurts 33 Replies latest jw friends

  • truth_hurts
    truth_hurts

    From: Big Ray
    Date: Mon Apr 17, 2000 8:44am
    Subject: Re: inactive publishers who post

    I would say that it is not for us to conduct a witch hunt for individuals who are inactive or disfellowshipped. There simply is not much of a way to determine that without getting mired in the personal lives of peple who will not welcome that. The point is, are they behaving on the board?

    Now...
    If it comes to light that a disfellowshipped person is associating with us, we then investigate to authenticate, and then inform the poster by email that their posting priviledges will be revoked and a brief announcement on WOL will be made that this individual has been disfellowshipped, and in accord with Bible principles, we uphold the disciplining technique of avoiding contact with this person. That's the part that we have in upholding that principle.

    As far as an inactive one is concerned, they aren't disfellowshipped, so we should not treat them as such. We encourage them to get as much help as possible, or if we have time, we encourage them as much as we can. As long as they behave in posting, there isn't much hard administration that we could do without having to go ona witch hunt for all manner of inactive ones and to tell the truth, there may be quite a few. Some are using the Internet to find their way back to strength while others are using it to help with their circumstances in that if they see others with similar problems who have conquered them because they really uphold the field ministry, the meetings and it's preparation, prayer, and association with the friends at the Kingdom Halls... then they will be influenced for the better. We have all seen the praise for Gert's efforts with the Daily Text... people need us, and even the inactive ones need us.

    So, the principle should be, as long as we don't know their circumstances, we assume that they are in good standing.

    Jehovah will reveal to us the troublemakers and unsavories... and disfellowshipped ones are included. Once identified, we take action.

    On that note, I do have to inform you that it is official that the poster Irene Beni( [email protected]) from Wit.net, a sister from Hutchinson, Ks, is now disfellowshipped. So look out for a female by the name of Irene, although I don't think she is hanging with us anymore. There is however, a brother in the Filipino forum that goes by the name of Irene... so don't be too quick to shoot him.

    That is all for now...if you have any further comments, let me know....

  • Gozz
    Gozz

    Big Ray prides himself as a man of thinking abilities. I fear that he has stopped thinking. And he is treading a very dangerous path, setting up a parallel congregation - in which disfellowshipping announcements can be made - on the Internet. This is the kind of policing syndrome that has eaten deep into some. You haunt them in their homes, in the congregation and then in a virtual community. How far will we go? That announcement is both immature and unspiritual; it is an assault. I wish Irene would sue for this. Is is possible, even remotely? Are there lawyers there who can make something out of this?

  • Gozz
    Gozz

    Besides, this "good standing" thing. Is it with the Organization or with Jehovah? Which is more importatnt and what are the determinants? Since when have human began judging hearts.

    " ... for not the way man looks is the way God looks..."
    - God, to Samuel.

  • Latte
    Latte

    That is SHOCKING.... What can you say??

    I hope Irene takes action!!

  • nelly136
    nelly136

    is this bloke a wannabe closet elder? does he have watchtower org backing to disfellowship people on the internet or set up a private judicial committee to police jws on their site?
    and does this woman even know that he's made this announcement?
    things that make you go hmmmm
    nelly

  • Prisca
    Prisca

    I'm definately not surprised by this. I was kicked off WOL because I was honest enough to say on this DB (jw.com) that I was inactive by choice. Having read this, despite going against the counsel of their FDS about visiting "apostate" websites, they decided that I was not worthy of being allowed to post at WOL anymore because I was inactive. Even though I hadn't posted any "controversial" posts on their site! They admitted this in a letter to me, which I posted here a month or so ago.

    I just hope one day these people wake up to themselves one day. They must live such shallow lives to have to practice such low-grade behaviour.

  • Gozz
    Gozz

    Prisca,

    the morbid fear the JW community has for the Internet is real. I see the Internet/Apostate site rule going the way of rules of the sort: they could be bent to gain a little advantage. That is what is called Tact, or Strategy. I'm wondering how many of us are thinking the same thoughts and slowly killing ourselves by keeping them within.

  • RedhorseWoman
    RedhorseWoman

    Prisca, I was thrown out of Obed's first Witnet site at MiningCo for mentioning on an exJW DB that I had posted there. That's why I tended to keep a fairly low profile on the other Witnet site.

  • truth_hurts
    truth_hurts

    From: Mark <mefabian@N...>
    Date: Mon May 29, 2000 5:39am
    Subject: Re: Qualification of posters - again

    I was thinking, (which is a dangerous thing) If we are to consider Hockeyman "Marked", shouldn't a thread be started to indicate proper decorum on the subject? In the congregation, when someone is disciplined, a talk is given at the KH during the Service Meeting to indicate inappropriate behavior. It is then left to the congregation to decide how to act. Without naming names, should not a "Netiquette" reminder be posted? This, of course, should be by the "Netiquette" specialist (in my opinion) Gert. (He is so handy with words.)

    Then, should it be deemed appropriate, Hockeyman could be placed on probation.

    Only the Admin and Hockeyman would know what is going on. And he would have the reminder in a public forum. Should he disregard the counsel, he would be removed from the DB. Then he would be "disfellowshipped" from WOL.

    Any comments? Gert?

    Mark :)

  • mommy
    mommy

    Truth hurts,
    I noticed that both of these letters are dated from last year. Were you "in" last year to be privy to this delicate info? So if you were "in" are you now "out"?
    wendy

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit