To: IW - Stop Dodging the Bullet

by Amazing 91 Replies latest jw friends

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hello Steve,

    Naaaaaaaaa, I wasn't particularily calling you down - more like Amazing. Lol - and I value Amazing a lot too. But it remains - you locked the original thread down. IW brought it back up & so did Amazing.

    I've read the thread you referred me to. One difference is....IW can't lock it down if it goes not the way she wants. You and Amazing can - and he stated just that.

    I understand your thinking - and agree to the point that it's a complicated situation...but it boils down to:

    • None of us have to do anything - including Franz and Bowen.
    • We *should* be able to choose how much we do, or not do.
    • Speculation is different from information.
    • Verified information is totally different than information from a good source.
    • Verified information is totally different than legal evidence.
    • If things can be blown out of proportion on an open forum.....they will be.
  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    I again agree with waiting and I have made a post on the other moderator's thread that is running as well.

    hawk

  • Simon
    Simon

    I'm sorry, but if moderators are not able to do things that other poster can't then what is the point of someone being a moderator?!

    Trying to suggest that moderators cannot enter into discussions is rediculous. They are moderators because they are able to take part in discussions properly and help to keep the forum balanced.

    I think it was right that IW's topic was locked. I've seen the kind of character assassination by rumour and insinuation that has gone on in the past and it appears there is an attempt to make some kind of coordinated attack on Ray Franz again. I have my own suspicions as to which 'obsessed character' is behind it and can recognise some of the patterns and language. They have managed to turn Silentlambs almost into an 'anti-Ray' group and isolate them from what should be their main supporters. It would be a shame to see even more damage done because of misguided and ill conceived attacks on an old man of 90.

    What Amazing is doing is quite right, challenging IW on her statements but facilitating a discussion about the issues raised. She should either put up or shut up. Come up with the goods or retract her statement. What she appears to have done is decide to leave after getting in a strop because her accusations were challenged.

    I think people are losing sight of the important issue here and instead focusing on the rights and wrongs of moderation. What is important is what accusations have been made and whether the person who made them is going to back them up or not. I suspect not - we have had lots of these claims of "lots of evidence" and, of course, it never materialises. It seems some Silentlambs supporters think that accusations are proof enough. They are not. They are worth nothing and, if they are not followed up, just appear to be a cheap form of harrassment.

    I do not want to see slanderous or libelous comments made on my forum and it will continue to be moderated as it has been.

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hawk.......anytime you want to be adopted, let me know, cutie. I've always wanted a son who agreed with me 3 times in a row.....about anything.

    It's so rare as to be remarkable.

    waiting

  • waiting
    waiting

    Hello Simon,

    I think people are losing sight of the important issue here and instead focusing on the rights and wrongs of moderation.

    Would you like me to start a thread on it specifically - referring to IW's locked thread, then the next thread she made, then to Amazing's thread? Imho, then that fourth thread will fall into this same type thread - as that's where the argument Franz vs Bowen (on both sides) remains.

    What is important is what accusations have been made and whether the person who made them is going to back them up or not.

    I personally think the pattern of Forum Assistants who start - or enter into a discussion on a thread stating it will be discussed until they don't want to discuss it anymore - then it will be locked - as of some importance too.

    I suspect not - we have had lots of these claims of "lots of evidence" and, of course, it never materialises. It seems some Silentlambs supporters think that accusations are proof enough. They are not. They are worth nothing and, if they are not followed up, just appear to be a cheap form of harrassment.

    Well, I do agree that accusations aren't proof enough. If someone can't back up the accusations, then take them back down. But then, this - and all xjw forums - offer unproven accusations regularily.

    Btw, how does one offer actual proof on a forum of an alledged action which might have taken place many decades ago? Or actual proof of another person's knowledge at that time?

    And if one is in a legal situation.........that one shouldn't be presenting any proof in any open arena (unless lawyer approved).

    Yannnnno, I think IW's thread would have gone the way of her threads to me, Farkel & a couple of other posters if other people hadn't gotten all in an uproar about this. Her thread would have quietly slid off first page.

  • If things can be blown out of proportion on an open forum.....they will be. - waiting

    • I do not want to see slanderous or libelous comments made on my forum and it will continue to be moderated as it has been.

    Well, it's your forum - I just civilly disagree with you and *some* of the actions of your Forum Assistants. But I will always be grateful for the opportunity you've given thousands of jw posters to voice their opinions.

    waiting

  • Englishman
    Englishman

    Waiting,

    You and I have had some interesting and valuable exchanges over the last 2 or 3 years, so I'm confident in your very honest and open nature to tell you what bothers me about this whole situation.

    I am concerned that the plight of those who have been abused is being exploited by some persons who are seeking to use this to suit their own agendas. I am very concerned that Ray has become a hate figure for some who are making use of vulnerable people to enhance their own egos. I do also suspect that one or two persons are masquerading as abuse victims themselves with the sole intent of garnering a "following" or at least some status for themselves.

    A wise author wrote recently that "every noble cause is eventually hijacked by persons seeking to further their own ends". Somehow, I suspect that we are seeing something of this now. What a terrible crime it would be if genuinely abused victims were being encouraged to vent their wrath upon an elderly gentleman such as Ray Franz just to satisfy the egos of one or two decidedly maladjusted persons.

    Best regards,

    Englishman.,

  • hawkaw
    hawkaw

    hmmm .... and who is make accusations now ... eh ... Englishman?

    As much as I respect the moderators on this forum - as it is a very difficult job - I again must "echo" waiting's comments in this particular lively debate.

    hawk

  • waiting
    waiting

    Yo Eman.

    I've seen you - as forum assistant - in another thread - Minimus' lonnng thread where he asked it to be locked - and you said you couldn't see a reason why? And declined to do so. I thought it was a smart move on your part.

    I'm in neither man's camp....barely in my own husband's. But I (as an outsider) see peculiarities on both sides....as neither man is perfect. And God Knows That Too. I suspect what you say about hidden agendas to have truth to it....but then I could do as Amazing demanded of IW - provide proof or your accusations have no merit.

    I know there's all kinds of agendas that I don't know, never will, and don't want to. IW's thread was short, and if she hadn't been jumped on....it would have probably died swiftly, imho. But she was. If she had been told that if she started another thread at the time her original one was locked with similar thoughts (and no proof) that it would be swiftly locked also, I wouldn't have thought much of it.

    But it's this thread that brought up the Forum Assistants' freedoms vs posters freedoms. Amazing started this thread to confront IW after Jst2laws shut her thread down. Why continue a discussion y'all don't want discussed? And then saying that they'll close the thread if they feel it gets "dicey." "Dicey" by who's viewpoint? Imho, by the other side of the discussion if we don't agree with the forum assistant.

    Y'all have a thankless job. And in most things that are seen - do a marvelous job. It's just this one area I find odd. If moderators want to post as posters....great. But then don't turn around and threaten to lock that same thread if you're disagreed with. And don't use your authority to start another thread that's been locked - telling other moderators to not lock YOUR thread. And I know it would be cheap to say here "wish I could do the same." So I would never stoop to that low humor.

    waiting

    ps: What IW posted was so low level in intensity, imho - that's why I think it was no big deal, but made into a big deal.

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/56134/1.ashx

    Why is this thread still going on......particularily in view of Simon's, Amazing's, Steve's, comments? This isn't the only thread against this poster with major accusations - but no proof. Why haven't the moderators asked for proof to be presented - or sent to them privately? That way the threads could be locked and the guy kicked off. But he's still here and the threads continue.

    If there's no proof, why are the threads continuing against the guy - he's apologized twice now.

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    Waiting: Thanks for being honest enough to voice your opinion on this. Here are my thoughts that I hope will explain where I am coming from.

    You stated above:

    Y'all have a thankless job. And in most things that are seen - do a marvelous job. It's just this one area I find odd. If moderators want to post as posters....great. But then don't turn around and threaten to lock that same thread if you're disagreed with.

    I did not state that I would lock the thread if someone disagreed with me. I would never do that. I respect reading various opinions and sometimes they improve or even change my own opinion.

    I did say that if the thread got too dicey, that I would lock it. It seems to me that it is not the topic but how people handle it that determines whether it gets locked or even deleted.

    I would never lock a thread and then start a new one. I did not lock IW's thread. I started this thread for the sole purpose of trying to elicite a factual response from IW. Yet, I recognize that it is possible this subject will segway into other heated stuff that may deserve locking ... and I wanted Simon and the other Mods to understand that I was not trying to start a flame war ... but if it becomes one, then I would extinguish it as an act of respect.

    I have rarely acted to change a thread by locking or deleting ... usually the other Mods have beaten me to it. Most of my Mod action over the last year has been to move threads to better suited categories ... I am very self-conscience about not interferring with a thread unless it becomes abject rank fighting.

    In some cases, I have disagreed with some threads being locked, but have said nothing out of respect for the Mod who locked it. In some cases, my recent political threads have been moved ... it irritated me, but I accepted it. My point in all this is that I never act to use or abuse any Mod powers for any personal gain.

    If it will help, I will not lock this thread and leave that judgment to other Mods, since I started this thread. Anyway, I am off now to call Ray Franz and will get back to you all in a while. Thanks. - Jim W.

  • logansrun
    logansrun

    So far.....Island Woman is nary to be found.....

    Bradley

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit