Deleting A Poster Akin To DF'ing?

by Englishman 98 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Hyghlandyr

  The Watchtowers claim that you knew the rules when you joined, doesnt really cut it though. The courts are unaware of numerous instances when folks are disfellowshipped for things that they are told they cannot be. I was told by an elder, a partaker (I dont call them annointed) that I could not be dfed if I celebrated my birthday. It would just show me to be spiritually weak. Good thing I didnt listen. The Nov 99 watchtower said that a person voting would not be excluded. Yet the COs were going around telling elders it was still a DA offence. Different langauge same thing. It is against the LAW to do something it is a CRIME to do something. However you word it your sorry boooo tocks is still in jail.

  There is no place a witness can go to that has in one concise form all of the current does and don'ts. They are unaware that some pretty silly things can get them dfed. They are unware that if they arent 'sinning' but have a temptation and go to the elders with that, they might end up dfed. They are unaware that they can appeal. They are unaware that the appeal almost never works. They are unaware that there are people doing things flagrantly against the "rules" like elders children, and getting away with them. While others are being cast out and aside, humiliated, and hurt, for greed, and jealousy.

  Long and the short of it is DF/DA is an excellent tool to control people. I use it myself in the yahoo chat rooms. Our DAs/DFs (group ignore) last usually a few minutes. Often with us not even really putting the person on ignore. Then when they speak we say "Sir, you are on ignore, kindly refrain from typing. How can I ignore what you say if you continue to insist on saying it?" And when I get my cult goin I will use it if any of the broads in my harem act up. "That's it lassie! To the spanking bench!" Course then if I spank her I really havent dfed her. But I dont think she will be a complainin.
• 

  Kingpawn

  think her opinion is of great value and warrants looking at closely. Is suspending someone for the contents of their posts justifiable then?

  The problem (seems to me) is drawing a fine line between the contents of a post (ideas, opinions) and how the content was expressed.

  As far as banning certain ideas and opinions...first, we are arguing in favor of free speech and an unimpeded flow of ideas based on our home countries, whereas Simon's in the UK. Our perspectives are different in many cases. Some have had relatively free speech for a long time; others much less. Things that would be considered acceptable in one country may not be in another and vice versa. Chris Rock might be seen as sophisticated in Los Angeles; would he get the same rating in Manchester?

  Second, there are some things that probably most/all of us could agree are properly restricted--advocating the violent overthrow of the home country's government, slander/libel, encouraging a suicide, etc.

  But, say, (Bleep's? FredHall's?) statement that Bill Bowen is using the people who've testified about abuse as weapons in some private war he has with the Society, while maybe outrageous, isn't illegal and deserves airing if someone wants to discuss it. And thoughtful discussion can happen without the thread degenerating into a Jerry Springer-like brawl.

  The comment made by (can't remember who--I'm old, what can I say?) toward CC Ryder's wife was outrageous as well as unexplainable. And it's contemptible that no apology or try at clarifying the post happened. But it wasn't illegal or one of the other categories mentioned above. I may come off sounding like I'm defending that poster for what they said, but I'm not. I'm defending the principle, and unfortunately X happened to be the particular user of that principle. An analogy: in 1996 in America the Communications Decency Act was passed. At an early stage it mandated a six month jail term and a $250,000 fine (someone correct me if I'm wrong on the details) for making "porn" available on a website to minors. A couple in Milpitas California ran a BBS with kiddie porn on it. Someone in Memphis d/l'ed some and complained. Those opposing the terms of this law were demonized as supporting kiddie porn. We weren't, but it was easy to make it look that way, if you didn't care to split hairs. Speech can be offensive, but here we're getting to the point (as JanH and others have noted) where clean, non-"F" word speech can bring repercussions. That scares me. It scares me more when a sizable portion of a country willingly goes along with it. Mob mentality.

  Maybe I'm getting callused about insults, but I hear lies and misinformation over and over by the fundamentalist Right in America. I understand why people here get upset at the conduct of some. But how hard is it not to read their posts? Ignore threads they start if need be. That way you don't get upset with them. FredHall's, Youknow's, and Bleep's pictures above their names are distinctive enough.

  Back in the 1970's when CB radio was popular, I could count on out-of-towners starting fights over the air with locals in my town. Lots of "Where you at, man?" and threats, and of course the two sides rarely if ever met up. I see the same thing here.

  So on the original question: I think the two are different. People get banned from here, but others are free to talk to them via e-mail and so on without the fear that they, too, will be banned from JWD for doing so. You don't have that in the Society. The pub story is a more accurate model.
• 

  Englishman

  As a moderator, I would recommend that you read all posts that fall under your watch. As you know, many insults, profanity and other uncivil actions poor over to other topics.

  ThiChi,

  In that case, you too should read THIS thread thoroughly before you post. Had you read Page 1 you would have seen that I said:

  "Assistants are not expected to spend more time on the board than they would normally, or even to read threads that would not normally interest them."

  But thanks for the courtesy anyway.

  Englishman.
• 

  radar

  Well everyone, as one respected poster(Farkel) once said to Simon " If you want a coffee shop(PUB) thats fine by me.

  It was a moderator (Englishman)that brought this subject up not I.

  I have exercised my freedom of speech (praise be to Simon) but it seems that I've wore out my welcome. (calls for me to go somewher else if I don't like it)

  I enjoyed the debate.

  ThiChi, its been nice working with you on the ministry

  I will post again.

  Radar

  Edited by - radar on 22 August 2002 12:51:1
• 

  ThiChi

  E-Man

  I do not appreciate you condescending manner. I did read your post, and I did read your "disclaimer." You have excused your actions (or lack of them) by way of blinders. Fine. It seems like a copout to me. How can you defend a system when you do not know what the F**K (Im I doing this right?) is going on?

  Regarding the "Its Simons board" crowd, that does not mitigate any of the issues here and this mantra sounds sooooo Dubish.

  I assumed (wrongly?) that the very fact that Simon has sought donations to help keep the board running is a sign of community trust. This in fact, gives many persons a "stake" on this operation by their monetary contributions, making it more of a public effort. Like stock holders. So, Simon has some responsibility to his stock holders, IMHO.To just allow donations without considerations is wrong, IMHO. And on the whole Simon is doing a good job. I have never read anywhere this is what Simon thinks "Its my board, leave." (I may be wrong).

  Edited by - thichi on 22 August 2002 12:53:25

  Edited by - thichi on 22 August 2002 12:56:54
• 

  SYN

  I've never sworn here either - purely because I post a lot from work during my lunchtime (there's nothing like having a few JWD threads with your sandwiches ), so that's why I don't post anything obscene, because you never know when your boss is peeking over your shoulder.

  But that doesn't mean I don't want to, in fact what if I did want to one day? I would get moderated. So, I don't bother. The rules are there, and are not going to change, so we might as well live with them. If you want to be profane, go to BBoy's board and be profane there. I have so many friends on this board that I don't want to stop chatting to that it makes no sense to leave if I disagree with the management. It's always very difficult running a big DB, and obviously Simon can't please all the people all the time.

  What one needs to keep in mind is, the hard drives this entire site is stored on could all be struck by lightning from Jehovah tomorrow, and then, goodbye to all your freedom, as freedom of speech on this board is irrelevant if your posts are fried by a divine thunderstorm. And no, please don't "moderate" us, Jehovah, I'm begging you. At least give me a week to backup my posts

  On that point, do you guys also archive some of your more lengthy posts? It's a highly recommended thing to do...!

  The one thing that pains my heart is the fact that Moe stumbled into the firing zone, and she has certainly not walked out unscathed! Hopefully BBoy's board will allow us all to vent our XJWish, irrascible language, pictures and senses of humour.

  [SYN] of the Wishes He Could Go Back In Time And Press The Delete Key Class.
• 

  Simon

  As owner of this pub I intend to drink all the free beer te-he-he

  What? There's no BEER?! What kind of lousy pub is this?!

  (in Homer Simpson voice)
• 

  ThiChi

  Radar:

  Keep the faith bro!
• 

  Valis

  Simon...there is beer all around you...use the force...and check your email.

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer of the "144,000 beerly anointed" class
• 

  hillary_step

  Radar,

  Personally I have no problem with disfellowshipping and shunning people, I do it all the time and I suspect that you do also.

  If I do not like a person for whatever reason, I will not have them in my home and will actively seek methods of avoiding their company. If I were the landlord of E'Mans pub, the owner of this Board, or just me, that is how I, and I suspect most people run their own personal lives. Many disfellwship and shun the members of this Board because of behavior that they feel crosses their personal boundaries, and that is their right to do.

  Can people not understand that though this Board is public domain it is the personal property of Simon and Angharad. As such it is they who determine what is acceptable behavior or not on this Board, not you or I. As, I have said before, if we do not like this scenario we have the option to leave with no retribution attached, and in this aspect the Board cannot be paralleled in the least to the WTS. In fact, I find the parallels drawn so far between JW.Com and the WTS laughable. For example if the WTS ran a public discussion Board do you think we would be talking this issue through as we are freely able to do?

  Fred Hall has been deactivated pending an apology for outrageous comments that he made to the victim of child-abuse. The type of comment Radar, most parents would have viewed with absolute disgust. If he made those comments in their homes he would have then been asked to leave or if he refused to, to be thrown out on his tail. Yes, he would have been 'disfellowshipped' and 'shunned' from anybody's home for his behavior.

  He did not respect Simon's home and has been asked to leave, pending and apology.

  Best regards - HS