I miss kenpodragon - I was starting to get to know him a little bit. where the hell is he?
I do not miss the Jewhating jjizro.
CZAR
Who do you Miss here on this forum
by JH 41 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Focus
I agree with many of the choices already expressed here... Here is a group of posters, most but not all mentioned at least once before in this thread, whom I DEFINITELY miss (though one has not posted here). I am sure I have forgotten some others I would miss to if I remembered them this minute!
I dole out praise sparingly, so please interpret the following in that light.
AlanF - but AF is here!
AlanF . Re: Population of Deaf JWs . Dec 13, 2002 02:06
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=42265&site=3
Is it meant that we no longer get those long, insightful, superb posts/articles that AF writes over here? I confess it has been a while since I have seen any from him. He has started only 5 threads here in the last half-year, and only 2 in the last 4 months - all of them brief. Where is he posting regularly, please?
I know he popped by a month ago to explain things to a couple of (still regularly posting on this DB) ego-challenged "intellectuals" in http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=39911&site=3 - alas, pearls and pigs mixeth not! Both were, by conduct, encouraging jjrizo's abuse of, and threats against, me for daring to stand up to the "FACTS" resulting from his "research". One of these "intellectuals" has since quietly changed his tune, done a 180-degree'r, and was monitEred singing Simon's praises for throwing jjrizo off the board (about which decision I, while supporting Simon, have declared I have mixed feelings). No apology from the "intellectual" to me, of course - ah, the stauros one has to bear! The other one is, I am informed, demonstrating his profound knowledge of 20th century history etc. elsewhere. If I wasn't so anti-class, I'd put him in the Ted Jaracz Class, but he just might be playing a fisher of menschen, so I'll give him the benefit fttb.Norm
This is a TRAGEDY, for Norm is brilliant. Just read:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=12167&site=3
which was his last thread here, though his account is still live. Thanks Lisa for BTTTing it. Where is Norm posting now, please - Kent's (it is not trivial for me to set up workable proxy-chains + spoofing, so answers to these questions would really be appreciated; thanks)? I miss his biting irony and icy wit.
I am aware of some of the issues involved in Norm's withdrawal, and I must confess I share many of his views. This DB enjoys many substance-free threads (a bit like this one: oops, I am posting in it ). And, JWD must pose as a fatal attraction to airhead posters who join such serious threads as subsist but to whom it seldom seems to occur to carry out the research first and then ejaculate later, or if unable to research, to remain silent, instead of posting utter nonsense (thereby removing such doubts as existed as to their state of mental chaos).JanH
Why, why, why, why is JanH not here? He is concise, very knowledgeable and an absolutely first-rate gladiatorial debater. He suffers fools only a second longer than I do. What happened? What will it take, and from whom, to get him back to JWD, please? PLEASE?Kent
But KS is still with us, only on a holiday... or what did I miss? I know his predeliction for dropping in juicy "hot" links was not to the taste of many. Are we responsible for unsupervised net kids? We surely don't want this site to lose semi-JW lurkers or be added to a Net-Nanny list, but that isn't likely at this level of incidence of such things. I am aware that his attacks were harsh, but for each one I saw there was some explanation, if not justification. Prima Donnas can't have it both ways, though of course they want to (else they would not be Prima Donnas).MacHislopp
Whatever happened to Mac? His humor was just right for me, and his comments were bitingly accurate.MommieDark
{{(MD)}} She was the best antidote to that disgusting pro-WTS Net-Nazi and stooge Steve Champagne, about whom more comment is not appropriate at this stage (as I now know much more about him than does AF). And MD is a very direct and capable writer.Tina
I have seen that Tina is deleted. I believe I recall Tina asking for this to be done. I miss Tina's friendliness and her insights. Where is she posting, please?Maximus
An enjoyable and thought-provoking poster.Seeker
Gedanken
Surely he is still here? Gedanken's irrebuttable style of argument and reasoning is one that many here could learn from. Back at H2O, we did a bit of sharpening on each other from time to time... Where is Gedanken, please?Ginny Tosken
Yes, now that it is mentioned - I certainly miss GT's interesting posts. What happened?Uncle Bruce
Well, he does pop in and out, but it is mainly out. I won't and can't describe what makes him so very missable. Koalas and fingers... Some cannot understand his wit and his drive. The same 'some' cannot then understand his (eventual) frustration with those who could not understand his wit and his drive.You Know
Now, Bobby's return, or that of his twin brother, may be arranged, You Know: have respect for the Theocratic Arrangements in place.F iend
Was my delicately offered serving of truth too painful for him? His value was primarily as a foil, serving to illustrate, in the first person singular and active voice, the intricate verbal deviousness and argumentative subtlety by which the WT constructs its web of deceit and trickery...Greg S
I was tempted to say, "as for above", but I pray that rumors of his impending apostasy are not basis-free. His tensional inventiveness, confusion of 'phrase' and 'clause' etc. made him somewhat hostile to me, though my offer to help him out with his understandings was genuine. Oh TJ45 too.But not Danielle
Account deleted by that "Fascist Diktator" (nicht), before Focus appeared on JWD.The question is: Is there a fundamental reason (other than natural wastage and entropy) that so many FINE posters (i.e. One-day Danielle etc. excepted) are not here? This place is superior to the "Old" H2O in many ways - certainly technically - but inferior in others. Smart-alec answers like "Because they do not want to be, or they did things so that they would not be" are excused in advance, thanks, as they offer nothing "upbuilding".
If we identify the cause, maybe a remedy can be worked on. I can't believe that the majority actually want almost nothing but fluff. Note that I am not suggesting action against fluff (for that has its theocratic usage too), but here the flufferers have on occasion been seen to proactively and aggressively drive away and discourage real talent (whose posts are to lurker dubs as honey is to flies).
The greater cause.... focus!
--
Focus
(As much of an Asshole as would be Bro' Farkelson were he on Steroids Class)Reminder: Data re the whereabouts (as in, DB) in cyberspace of all the above would be appreciated.
[Edited to correct URL and tune the counterattack]
Edited by - Focus on 14 December 2002 21:27:42
-
Englishman
Focus,
The reasons that posters leave or get deleted from a board are many and various. This is what I am aware of, although I will confess that the posters themselves might not agree with me, so I am willing to be corrected if I err in this reply.
Norm. Took exception to Tina's departure and felt that Simon had mishandled the situation. Kent ditto. Jan H bit the hand that hosted him once too often and was deleted. Machislop still posts but not often. Mommie Dark don't know. Tina asked to be deleted then retracted a couple of times, eventually it was made permanent. Maximus hassled by trollers and said enough was enough. Seeker don't know. Gedanken posts vary occasionally. Ginny T, I think I know but that's her business. The rest? I know as much as you do.
Englishman.
-
Valis
peaceloveandharmony...yumminess lost...
Sincerely,
District Overbeer of the "One Day I will Get My Grubby Paws on Her" class
-
Focus
Circuit Overseer Englishman quoth:
although I will confess that the posters themselves might not agree with me, so I am willing to be corrected if I err in this reply
But not here and by the said posters themselves, for the reason that occurred to you too.
Thanks for the overview, though. I don't know of any errors in your account at this point, but then I have not researched the matter (nor do I wish to). I just want to say: PLEASE COME BACK!
Those of us with some experience know that free speech without ANY limitations whatsoever usually (not always) does not work, because some will choose to abuse the system - and then there can be escalation and attraction of trolls. That said, censorship is anathema to me. Scylla and Charybdis. Now as long as the other person is willing to debate in an HONEST manner (however bright or dumb or knowledgeable or clueless he/she may be), i.e. adhering to common sense guidelines (which only exist for the purposes of clarity, intelligibility and time-saving) re argumentation, I far, far, far prefer to demonstrate the manifold follies of my "opponent" rather than see him/her silenced.
What do I mean by "HONEST"? No endless ground-shifting, no repeated jumping from one thing to another before the first is given a fair chance to be debated, no deceitful editing - and a few other things Farkel can delineate very well. The first way, many can benefit from the exercise: while a few protagonists are well beyond the economic repair threshold, most onlookers are not at all in that state.
There will be some who choose not to follow such basic, common-sense courtesy (to which I strive to afford all my protagonists, while hammering their argument into the dust - there is no contradiction there) to the onlookers who are trying to decide which side of the argument (not which person!) is right. And then things really can deteriorate.
My normal approach when honest debate is shown to be clearly impossible is to stand back and provide ample rope to the other side. They usually use it fully, and after the fracas they are seldom the better for it.
Let us now look at BOARD POLICY, please.
The question as to who determines ejections is always moot. Of course, there has to be an ejection method (the failure to have one will soon result in conduct which makes it essential; self-fulfillment) but it must be used very sparingly indeed. As the site is entirely Simon's (right?), and as he stands - legally-speaking - at the front gate, he must have the final say. Obvious. Nothing to stop him privately consulting first.
And a committee decision re ejections is NOT per se safer, or less likely to produce inconsistencies, than an individual one, in my experience of these things. The committee members will be subject to lobbying, and all sorts of charges of favouritism or bias may be levied afterwards. The only difference is that the mudslingers and/or aggrieved parties have a better choice of target with a committee!
Charges of arbitrariness and DF'ing analogies may be expected, and this should be kept in mind by Number One. And "No attacks" rules don't work, either. It is a subjective decision as to what type of attack is not on. Tough to decide, but hey, it comes with the territory. More constructively (and this seems like a sensible thread into which to eject this):
HERE ARE MY 'UMBLE SUGGESTIONS.
Hence, a procedure is what is called for, so a person is left in no doubt that further conduct of a specified sort will result in ejection: a private (if possible, else public) first warning and then a public final warning on reoccurrence within a specified time frame. Each warning to expire in, say, 60 days of issue, so there is not an unending Sword of Damocles over the head of the perp. However, any three warnings issued in a (say) 9 month period also qualify for ejection.
The above steps give the moderator, only human thank Baal, time to cool off too.
Thread-locking is certainly not a panacea:
(a) as the perp may not be the thread originator, and
(b) there is collateral damage, whoever is the originator, to other thread participants who may have wished to continue.Deletions of posts (except where required for legal reasons, or on reasonable request by the poster) should be avoided like the plague, as the great majority will not have seen the offending item, and the poster can then play to the audience (and if he/she feels wrongly done, will) who will not have the evidence to judge it. Perhaps, an H2O style bin for "deletions" (I don't really see the point here, as this place is clearly... umm... not 100% theocraptic).
Now, should a warning once issued be withdrawable by Simon upon persuasive appeal, or in the face of clear and common dissatisfaction of other DB participants at the decision? YES. This is not an
extermination campholiday rest and recuperation camp with swimming pool, money exchange and brothel facilities.Finally, almost all ejections (subjective judgment here, I know) AND all self-cancellations (other than those which were just one step ahead of an ejection, in which case they are viewed as ejections) should be allowed to be reversed after a specified time - say 6 months - VIA AN OVERT SUGGESTION/INVITATION FROM JWD TO THE DEPARTED ONE. That way, face is saved: "I came back as you asked me to." and there is time for the ejected one to reflect on things. Of course, should the conduct repeat, then at least one and probably both of the warnings may be dispensed with.
Comment? Perhaps some of this is already in place? Simon? Eman?
--
Focus
(Here to help! Class)Note: I continue with "The way to handle such people is the the same method used by Jonathan Jeffrey Crab on his clan. (Remember that book about the crab that wasn't content to walk around, he wanted to learn underwater ballet?) Jonathan, knowing the dangers of attempted departure from the cage, said, 'Hey! This is fun! What a gathering of crabs! I'm going to go get some more!' And he danced off to freedom.
Our suggestion: keep the trolls away from your goals." and I properly attribute this, to Mr McWilliams. Always check for what is left out, folks. -
MrMoe
JanHWhy, why, why, why is JanH not here? He is concise, very knowledgeable and an absolutely first-rate gladiatorial debater. He suffers fools only a second longer than I do. What happened? What will it take, and from whom, to get him back to JWD, please? PLEASE?
Yup. We need JanH back here.
-
Prisca
What will it take, and from whom, to get him back to JWD, please? PLEASE?
Ever thought that maybe JanH doesn't want to come back here? Going by all the snide comments he has made about Simon, this board and certain participants, why would someone like him want to associate amongst us mortals?
-
MrMoe
Just because you don't like him Prisca does not mean he doesn't not belong here. People don't like YOU so does that mean YOU don't belong here? If we went by that my dear, none of us would be here, because in the end just about everybody here has somebody that does not like them.
JanH was one of the best damn posters here. And Prisca, if you are so interested in "the other board" post this crap there, not here. Keep the two places seperate, it IS after all part of Simon's rules.
Edited by - MrMoe on 14 December 2002 23:33:2
-
Valis
Moe, there is such a thing as bieng too smart and too full of oneself to not let something go. If indeed janh had thought more about his logterm goal (of brilliantly informing people about JWland), he would have not kept up so w/his need to give Simon problems. He knew what he was doing and clearly willing to accept the inevitable consequences. Do I wish jan posted here again and regularly? Yes! Is there a need to stir up shit of your own percieved lack of free speech? No, not if you want to play someone else's game...BTW Moe, did you find a suitable place for you map?
Sincerely,
District Overbeer
-
Prisca
Moe,
Whether or not I like him had nothing to do with my intial post on this thread.
I simply said that JanH has said things that indicated his feelings about Simon and this board, and Simon deactivated him because of JanH's actions and words.
It's Simon's board, Simon's rules. If Simon doesn't want him here, that's Simon's right to keep him off this board. If Simon allows JanH to come back here, that's ok too.
Remember, this SIMON'S board. Not Eman's, not Prisca's, not Moe's not anyone else's. SIMON'S.