JIA, should someone open up an endless line of threads repeating endless anti-Christian attacks without sense, reason or point to discuss, I would close them like a shot. When it comes to the enforcement of the rules and the way we expect the Religion area to proceed, you can be sure I am as impartial as can be.
When it comes to taking part in a debate, then I do that as a poster, not a moderator. When I act as a moderator, arguing with me is against the rules. That's hardly appropriate for a debate. There, I am just another face in the crowd, my respect or otherwise down entirely to what I am stating and how well I am stating it. It's a level playing field for us both. Are you worried that as a moderator I have an unfair advantage in debate? Because that is not so; I am working entirely off my own merits.
As it is, I don't post to debate THAT much. I do it when I see something that irks me, which in this case was your off-hand treatment of Samura's line of reason, which was perfectly appropriate but which you seemed to want to laugh off, which in turn seemed to be because you didn't understand it.
As all I really did was clarify Samura's position and take you to task on dismissing it, I wasn't actually advancing any further atheist arguments at all, so I don't know what your problem there is, either.
You would do well to address, rather than evade, the issues.
So let's put it simply. What relevance has, or difference was made by, JFK's belief in God? Which was, incidentally, strongly Catholic, but that aside, why do you raise it? If it is to demonstate that great men believe in God, Samura is entitled to say not-so-great men do also. That is a fair retort to your point, There are plenty of equally fair retorts you could make to that retort, so why not do that rather than moan about the clarification I made?
Originally posted by Strangelove
Has anyone else noticed that JIA loosening up a little? Smileys? "J-Fitz?" "D-Joe?"What's going on?
Not so strange, I think it is a tactic to try and "reach out to us" even though not many of us speak like that.
The funny thing is that even shortned D-Joe is not spelt right.
There is no "e" on the end of Debbiejo.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
JIA, should someone open up an endless line of threads repeating endless anti-Christian attacks without sense, reason or point to discuss, I would close them like a shot. When it comes to the enforcement of the rules and the way we expect the Religion area to proceed, you can be sure I am as impartial as can be.When it comes to taking part in a debate, then I do that as a poster, not a moderator. When I act as a moderator, arguing with me is against the rules. That's hardly appropriate for a debate. There, I am just another face in the crowd, my respect or otherwise down entirely to what I am stating and how well I am stating it. It's a level playing field for us both. Are you worried that as a moderator I have an unfair advantage in debate? Because that is not so; I am working entirely off my own merits.
As it is, I don't post to debate THAT much. I do it when I see something that irks me, which in this case was your off-hand treatment of Samura's line of reason, which was perfectly appropriate but which you seemed to want to laugh off, which in turn seemed to be because you didn't understand it.
As all I really did was clarify Samura's position and take you to task on dismissing it, I wasn't actually advancing any further atheist arguments at all, so I don't know what your problem there is, either.
You would do well to address, rather than evade, the issues.
So let's put it simply. What relevance has, or difference was made by, JFK's belief in God? Which was, incidentally, strongly Catholic, but that aside, why do you raise it? If it is to demonstate that great men believe in God, Samura is entitled to say not-so-great men do also. That is a fair retort to your point, There are plenty of equally fair retorts you could make to that retort, so why not do that rather than moan about the clarification I made?
Sorry, I don't see it. I have only known you to interpose yourself in discussions between myself and Shaky, Imperial, and Alliance. Shaky accused me of something that he just skirted completely when asked to explain. He wanted to do it privately. But Shaky's accusation against me was not private so why should he be allowed to deal with the matter privately (rhetorical question). Imperial is a big boy as well and you have once again ran to someone else's aid--Imperial's, first Shaky, now Imperial. And Imperial is one of the most knowledgeable, competent, articulate members on this forum. If anyone does not need any help at all responding to my posts it is Samura. Man, it must be nice to have moderators in your pocket and on your team to speak up for you when the discussion begins to go south for you. That has to be the reason because you have never done that for me. Not that I care. You obviously can see that I don't need any assistance, I can stand firmly on my on two feet and articulate myself intelligently. Imperial can do this too so I don't understand why the constant relief that you provide him and others against me. Who am I? Nobody, I am nobody special to contend with, I am nothing to be feared. Lastly, you jumped to Alliance's side and ordered me to respond to his posts. I haven't to this day and don't plan to in the foreseeable future. Oh, and you accused me of evading Samura. How can you truthfully come to that brilliant deduction when I answered each line item that he put forth to me one by one? You know some people call a spade a spade but with you, you seem to call a spade something else. You basically jumped on the bandwagon (once again showing your allegiance instead of your impartiality) and repeated what you heard Samura say, perhaps to provoke or somehow induce me to respond out of character. I don't answer posts the way that you think that I should, meaning I am not gullible. What you call evasion I call wisdom. I exercise wisdom like a skilled tactician in battle. I know where to tread and where not to tread. I don't believe the things that you say about me, hook, line, sinker, the fisherman, the rod, the boat and his boots. I check to see if I am indeed guilty of your accusations (or rather characterizations). I looked and re-read my last two posts in response to Samura's and I could not find any evidence of evasion on my part.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Sorry, I don't see it. I have only known you to interpose yourself in discussions between myself and Shaky, Imperial, and Alliance. Shaky accused me of something that he just skirted completely when asked to explain. He wanted to do it privately. But Shaky's accusation against me was not private so why should he be allowed to deal with the matter privately (rhetorical question). Imperial is a big boy as well and you have once again ran to someone else's aid--Imperial's, first Shaky, now Imperial. And Imperial is one of the most knowledgeable, competent, articulate members on this forum. If anyone does not need any help at all responding to my posts it is Samura. Man, it must be nice to have moderators in your pocket and on your team to speak up for you when the discussion begins to go south for you. That has to be the reason because you have never done that for me. Not that I care. You obviously can see that I don't need any assistance, I can stand firmly on my on two feet and articulate myself intelligently. Imperial can do this too so I don't understand why the constant relief that you provide him and others against me. Who am I? Nobody, I am nobody special to contend with, I am nothing to be feared. Lastly, you jumped to Alliance's side and ordered me to respond to his posts. I haven't to this day and don't plan to in the foreseeable future. Oh, and you accused me of evading Samura. How can you truthfully come to that brilliant deduction when I answered each line item that he put forth to me one by one? You know some people call a spade a spade but with you, you seem to call a spade something else. You basically jumped on the bandwagon (once again showing your allegiance instead of your impartiality) and repeated what you heard Samura say, perhaps to provoke or somehow induce me to respond out of character. I don't answer posts the way that you think that I should, meaning I am not gullible. What you call evasion I call wisdom. I exercise wisdom like a skilled tactician in battle. I know where to tread and where not to tread. I don't believe the things that you say about me, hook, line, sinker, the fisherman, the rod, the boat and his boots. I check to see if I am indeed guilty of your accusations (or rather characterizations). I looked and re-read my last two posts in response to Samura's and I could not find any evidence of evasion on my part.
Devil in sheeps clothing? ✅
Not to mention, since when have you ever had a conversation with me?
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
First of all - moderators are allowed to debate as well. The designation "moderator"doesn't mean they have to be impartial....
So then explain to me why Ushgarak invariably interposes himself between me and another forum member but in favor of the other poster and never me? I mean off top he has come to Alliance's aid, yours, and Shakes.
Me: 0
Others: 3
You do the math. Your right moderators don't have to be unbiased and impartial, but it would be nice. Hey, I don't have to brush my teeth either, but it would be nice. If I was a moderator I would just instinctively know that I should--not that I must--but should show some equal treatment, just because. I treat all members the same, I don't have any favorites, but I think Ushgarak does. Hmmm...I wonder who they are?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So then explain to me why Ushgarak invariably interposes himself between me and another forum member but in favor of the other poster and never me? I mean off top he has come to Alliance's aid, yours, and Shakes.Me: 0
Others: 3You do the math. Your right moderators don't have to be unbiased and impartial, but it would be nice. Hey, I don't have to brush my teeth either, but it would be nice. If I was a moderator I would just instinctively know that I should--not that I must--but should show some equal treatment, just because. I treat all members the same, I don't have any favorites, but I think Ushgarak does. Hmmm...I wonder who they are?
Your problem is that you don't follow forum rules. YOu are a criminal complaining about the Justice system. Your comments have no wieght.
Ush and I have spats all the time, but he's a fair mod. As are all the other Globals here.
Ush's comments have nothing to do with your opinions, they have to do with your forum conduct.
Originally posted by Alliance
Devil in sheeps clothing? ✅Not to mention, since when have you ever had a conversation with me?
This is the first time that I have responded to you since I resolved not to three months ago. You don't remember me responding to your constant barrage of disparagement. I recall trying earnestly to just hold a decent convo. with you minus your frequent contumely towards my posts. It got so bad that another poster who I didn't even know reproved me for responding to you. He or she told me to stop casting my pearls before swine (they were quoting the Bible). I thought about the consistent abuse and decided to stop responding to your posts. Although the abuse did not stop and neither did you stop responding to my post (like you did just now). Ushgarak ordered me to respond to you and I told him negative. Tell me, do you not recall these events?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
This is the first time that I have responded to you since I resolved not to three months ago. You don't remember me responding to your constant barrage of disparagement. I recall trying earnestly to just hold a decent convo. with you minus your frequent contumely towards my posts. It got so bad that another poster who I didn't even know reproved me for responding to you. He or she told me to stop casting my pearls before swine (they were quoting the Bible). I thought about the consistent abuse and decided to stop responding to your posts. Although the abuse did not stop and neither did you stop responding to my post (like you did just now). Ushgarak ordered me to respond to you and I told him negative. Tell me, do you not recall these events?
You have to understand that when you ignore people's valid points, you will lose thier respect.
You do that all the time...when someone makes an argument that you cannot prove false, you simply disregard it. That's unacceptable.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
This is the first time that I have responded to you since I resolved not to three months ago. You don't remember me responding to your constant barrage of disparagement. I recall trying earnestly to just hold a decent convo. with you without your frequent contumely towards my posts. It got so bad that another poster who I didn't even know reproved me for responding to you. He or she told me to stop casting my pearls before swine (they were quoting the Bible). I thought about the consistent abuse and decided to stop responding to your posts. Although the abuse did not stop and neither did you stop responding to my post (like you did just now). Ushgarak ordered me to respond to you and I told him negative. Tell me, do you not recall these events?
We'll I respond to your flood of indirect and spamish posts. I always attempt to have conversation with members. Thats the POINT of the forum. Not every accepts your opinions. The point is to share and analyze them.
As to not answering, most of the members here have complained about how you do not address their questions.
I recall a version of these events. I also recall your consitant comdenation and hate.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
This is the first time that I have responded to you since I resolved not to three months ago. You don't remember me responding to your constant barrage of disparagement. I recall trying earnestly to just hold a decent convo. with you minus your frequent contumely towards my posts. It got so bad that another poster who I didn't even know reproved me for responding to you. He or she told me to stop casting my pearls before swine (they were quoting the Bible). I thought about the consistent abuse and decided to stop responding to your posts. Although the abuse did not stop and neither did you stop responding to my post (like you did just now). Ushgarak ordered me to respond to you and I told him negative. Tell me, do you not recall these events?
Ush ordered? I've never heard Ush "order" anyone. I've heard him tell you to stop spamming these forums with your repetative babbling, but never have i heard him order you to respond to a particular member's questions or accusations.
And, as I've told you before, no one condemns you for your beliefs(with the possible exception of me...because I think out of all of us, should the reality of christianity come to pass, you'll be the one burning in hell) We're just tired of you preaching at us. No one likes it. If you buy into this bronze age bullshit, then that's great. I'm glad you've found something in your life. But don't be suprised when people approach you like one of the kids from Jesus Camp. Because that's how ridiculous you look to the vast majority of people on these forums. A nut. And if you didn't get a hard-on over being called a nut, then you wouldn't repeat yourself ad nauseum. But you do. You get off on people's response to your bullshit. And if you enjoy being on these forums, if you enjoy wasting your time preaching to people on whom your words are wasted, then good for you. But if you wanna thank anyone, it's not god. It's that I'm not a moderator. Because I would have banned your ass a long time ago. And I would ban any new member that acted like you Whob. Right or wrong, I'd cut them off at the toe nails. Surely you can support that. I mean, you drool all over your own lap when Bush does it.
Okay, I'll make this short and to the point.
JIA, just because someone is a mod does not mean they need to stay neutral in a debate if they decide to participate in it, in which case we post and participate just like everyone else, unless it turns to a case to someone breaking the rules. Only when it comes to enforcing the rules does a mod need to stay impartial and unbiased, but when it comes to participating in a debate, we can be just as opinionated as everyone else.
Did you know I'm also a mod, JIA? Are you going to accuse me of being impartial and running to Alliance and Samura's side because they happen to be the people I agree with?