SPAM Forum

[ClubV12]

Like to the private forum of some dude who posts nothing but untruth.

You have entered the SPAM FORUM, by truth files.

[Truth Files]

Only spam when I or others post what you reject ..... right?

.... but certainly not spam if the poster fits your game

You need to re-define your definition of spam

[ClubV12]

SPAM is when you DOMINATE a forum with your constant barrage of threads.

[phkrause]

Club just let him be, or are you afraid he will shake your faith?? He can't Club, if your faith is strong, there should not be a problem. You could also ignore all the threads.

[ClubV12]

No way he is going to shake my faith!!! It's an issue of NETIGUETTE, he has none.

His CONSTANT barrage of threads is out of line. For anybody, on any topic on any forum. It's rude, it's crude and takes up way to much band width.

He has his own website and posts on many other websites all day long. Nothing more than a troll spamming the air waves and spewing garbage.

It would be no different than somebody posting endless threads about Subarau's on a Ford web site. People get tired of hearing it, I'm tired of hearing it.

[Tom Wetmore]

Why don't you just let Stan worry about the bandwidth part and let the moderators worry about regulating the forum?

"pkrause" is quite right. There are many who post here that I can't agree with. Some seriously heretical views are often expressed, IMHO. But my faith is not built on those houses of cards anyway. I don't feel a need to correct every heresy, large or small in order to affirm my own orthodoxy and faith.

And if you think he is a troll, stop feeding him. Every time you react, respond or comment, it's raw meat for a troll. Imagine a comedian telling jokes to a large group that never laughs or even smiles. Imagine that nobody even heckles him. How long do you think he would keep it up?

It is just the same for internet trolls. They feed on your reactions and attention. Stop feeding them. They will give up and go away.

[teresaq]

I agree with pkrause and Tom, ClubV12. Let me hasten to add that I have also been in your position and understand how you feel.

Tom is right. If our dear precious brother's-at least in God's sight-threads weren't responded to, well...

[ClubV12]

Ignore his threads? Like ignore the elephant in the room? Having to scroll down through a dozen threads to find something NOT posted by tf? No rules? Anything goes? Let any one man dominate the forum? Not YOUR problem, eh Tom? Let somebody else worry about it?

Ever heard of Netiguette? Do the Google if you haven't, you NEED to know how it works.

Lets consider rule #4.

"Rules for discussion groups"

Rule 4 has a number of implications for discussion group users. Most discussion group readers are already spending too much time sitting at the computer; their significant others, families, and roommates are drumming their fingers, wondering when to serve dinner, while those network maniacs are catching up on the latest way to housebreak a puppy or cook zucchini.

And many news-reading programs are slow, so just opening a posted note or article can take a while. Then the reader has to wade through all the header information to get to the meat of the message. No one is pleased when it turns out not to be worth the trouble. See "Netiquette for Discussion Groups" on page 65 for detailed rules.

No, TOM, and those who agree with him are NOT right. Don't be a false sympathizer. Recognize a problem exists and do something about it.

[teresaq]

I understand your frustration, but just how far will you take this censoring business.

Perhaps you have not yet come to the point I did some years ago. As I thought about this and that that I would do, could I, I realized there would not be left a whole lot of people in this world once I got done.

But I still have work to do on myself when it comes to censoring others.

Bottom line tho. If we get tired of being Christlike for even a moment perhaps we should consider just what god it is that we really want. The words are for me just as much as for anyone else.

[ClubV12]

Give it a rest, you guys don't have a clue whats going on here.

As I look at my screen right now tf has FOURTEEN THREADS. Many of them on the same basic subject matter, the 2,300 day prophecy comes up very often in most everyone.

The guy has his own web site and posts on a LOT of other forums, thats what he does, thats ALL he does, take up bandwidth. If your so interested in learning about his twisted views, go to HIS web site and knock yourself out.

I don't want to have to scroll through this garbage to find something worth while.

I've been on public forums for years, I know a troll and spam when I see it.

[John317]

OK, I've already limited the number of new discussions that can be opened. He can only open several and then those must be dealt with before creating any new ones. If I see more than that before the old ones are finished with, they will be deleted. I can't stay online all the time, though, but when I get online, if I see ones that don't belong, I'll take care of them. In the meantime, it is best if other members will send me a PM rather than try to moderate the discussions themselves.

If anyone sees things on the discussions that don't belong there, send me a PM.

[CoAspen]

Give it a rest, you guys don't have a clue whats going on here.

As I look at my screen right now tf has FOURTEEN THREADS. Many of them on the same basic subject matter, the 2,300 day prophecy comes up very often in most everyone.

The guy has his own web site and posts on a LOT of other forums, thats what he does, thats ALL he does, take up bandwidth. If your so interested in learning about his twisted views, go to HIS web site and knock yourself out.

I don't want to have to scroll through this garbage to find something worth while.

I've been on public forums for years, I know a troll and spam when I see it.

[ClubV12]

John317 is handling it CoAspen, let it go.

Apparently some of you aren't aware of netiguette. Here's a link, there is VAST difference between censure and common courtesy.

http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Here... just use this as an answer whenever a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants person posts..

In all fairness, if a non-SDA looked at this forum, he/she would not know it was Adventist...except for the "key words" scattered throughout the topics. The forum isn't (I don't believe) a website devoted to advocating SDA beliefs. It's more like an ecumenical mish-mash of theological viewpoints, most of which are unsubstantiated, unscientific, unorthodox, and erhmm... sometimes bordering on heresy. IMHO..

It's also rather boring, nowadays...

[miz3]

No way he is going to shake my faith!!! It's an issue of NETIGUETTE, he has none.

His CONSTANT barrage of threads is out of line. For anybody, on any topic on any forum. It's rude, it's crude and takes up way to much band width.

He has his own website and posts on many other websites all day long. Nothing more than a troll spamming the air waves and spewing garbage.

It would be no different than somebody posting endless threads about Subarau's on a Ford web site. People get tired of hearing it, I'm tired of hearing it.

More Gestapo tactics and RCC Inquisition destruction.

ClubV12, do admire the way the RCC clamped down on "heretics"? Are you advocating that SDA do the same?

[miz3]

OK, I've already limited the number of new discussions that can be opened. He can only open several and then those must be dealt with before creating any new ones. If I see more than that before the old ones are finished with, they will be deleted. I can't stay online all the time, though, but when I get online, if I see ones that don't belong, I'll take care of them. In the meantime, it is best if other members will send me a PM rather than try to moderate the discussions themselves.

If anyone sees things on the discussions that don't belong there, send me a PM.

John317, it is definitely your call!

However, I don't think, in my opinion, limiting posters in this way is a good thing. I happen to like FREE SPEECH!

That means putting up with some "speech" we don't like.

Now if Truth Files or anybody else was using their Freedom of Speech in such a way as to deny others that same right I could see clamping down on that, however, in my humble opinion Truth Files was not inhibiting anyone else's Free Speech.

In fact Truth Files was indeed getting others to respond to him. No one forced others to respond.

If it is not to much I would hope you would reconsider you decision to limit Truth Files or anybody else in this manner.

Thanks John317!

[CoAspen]

Yes, we all would like others to conform to our belief system...isn't that what we teach! Throw the 'dirty rotten scoundrels' out!!

[ClubV12]

Doesn't matter what you believe in, when one man comes into a forum, any forum on any subject, and dominates it by starting a thread and then leaving it and starting another thread, again and again it needs to be addressed. It has been, case closed.

On one forum I frequent, temporary bans are often used. A couple of days, a couple of weeks, a couple of years. On occasion, a permanent ban. Often for simply arguing with the moderator! You question the moderators "threat" to give you a temporary ban, I gaurentee you WILL get one as a result.

This concept of "freedom of speech" is often used as an excuse to do, say post whatever you want. It doesn't apply, it's a myth, it's a lie. These are PRIVATE forums, anything goes but not everything goes. The moderators have the power to determine what, when, where, how much is to much. No one should be "forced" to ignore anything because of someone elses rude behaviour.

For those questioning the moderators call here, I got news for you, try that on a site I frequent and you'll be banned within minutes. So much for your "free speech" concept. If you really want free speech, start your own forum, no rules, anything and everything goes, good luck with that (it will be a zoo)! :)

[teresaq]

Where do you place Stan in this equation? Do you think it might be more up to the Admin than to the moderators-thank God, or we would probably empty the board right quick, except for those that "think right" of course.

As I said before, be careful what you wish for. You might be the one considered a problem.

[ClubV12]

When you stand for what is right, you always run the risk of being abused for your principles, I accept that.

Did the people bring to Moses every little problem? No, those cases went before "moderators" first. There is order in that, it is reasonable.

You STILL don't get it teresag, you STILL think this is NOT an issue of theology.

This has nothing to do with his, mine or your theology. It has everything to do with multilple threads started, never finished, abandoned and stating the same fundamental issues in yet another new thread. Time after time after time. It's rude, it's distracting, it's the very definition of "babylon", confusion. Ask a question, or several, and then stick around to uphold or discuss your position. Don't take your toys, leave the sand box and start a new thread (often on the same subject) with a different title. It's childish!!

But hey, if you think I'm outta line here, and don't agree with John317 either, PM Stan with your concerns.

Be advised, be careful what you ask for....

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

When you stand for what is right, you always run the risk of being abused for your principles, I accept that.

Did the people bring to Moses every little problem? No, those cases went before "moderators" first. There is order in that, it is reasonable.

You STILL don't get it teresag, you STILL think this is NOT an issue of theology.

This has nothing to do with his, mine or your theology. It has everything to do with multilple threads started, never finished, abandoned and stating the same fundamental issues in yet another new thread. Time after time after time. It's rude, it's distracting, it's the very definition of "babylon", confusion. Ask a question, or several, and then stick around to uphold or discuss your position. Don't take your toys, leave the sand box and start a new thread (often on the same subject) with a different title. It's childish!!

But hey, if you think I'm outta line here, and don't agree with John317 either, PM Stan with your concerns.

Be advised, be careful what you ask for....

I fully understand what you mean ClubV12!

[miz3]

Where do you place Stan in this equation? Do you think it might be more up to the Admin than to the moderators-thank God, or we would probably empty the board right quick, except for those that "think right" of course.

As I said before, be careful what you wish for. You might be the one considered a problem.

Good points teresaq(sda)!

The Bible states that we reap what we sow!

[Lysimachus]

More Gestapo tactics and RCC Inquisition destruction.

ClubV12, do admire the way the RCC clamped down on "heretics"? Are you advocating that SDA do the same?

I suppose Jesus was employing "Gestapo tactics" and employing "RCC Inquisition destruction" when he told Judas to leave after he dipped the bread in bitter herbs?

[teresaq]

I take it you didn't find the "don't respond" suggestions as anything worth considering?

And who is abusing you?

How do you know you are standing for the right?

When you stand for what is right, you always run the risk of being abused for your principles, I accept that.

Did the people bring to Moses every little problem? No, those cases went before "moderators" first. There is order in that, it is reasonable.

You STILL don't get it teresag, you STILL think this is NOT an issue of theology.

This has nothing to do with his, mine or your theology. It has everything to do with multilple threads started, never finished, abandoned and stating the same fundamental issues in yet another new thread. Time after time after time. It's rude, it's distracting, it's the very definition of "babylon", confusion. Ask a question, or several, and then stick around to uphold or discuss your position. Don't take your toys, leave the sand box and start a new thread (often on the same subject) with a different title. It's childish!!

...

[teresaq]

How do you see my post below as challenging whatever mod decision J made here? Cause I'm telling you your post below looks very much like intentional misrepresentation and an effort to cause problems.

Where do you place Stan in this equation? Do you think it might be more up to the Admin than to the moderators-thank God, or we would probably empty the board right quick, except for those that "think right" of course.

As I said before, be careful what you wish for. You might be the one considered a problem.