"Ruth" and related matters.

[Oscar]

Folks,

I have deleted a post from "Ruth".  She came here to post a link to an article on her website in which she pours out her bile on most of the regular participants...the men in particular.  She seems to have a "thing" about men.

As to why, I think this would be a good time to explain my understanding of Moderator.

When Brian asked me to be a moderator he did not spell out any purpose, rules, or prohibitions for the board.  He just told me he trusted my judgement. He did not guarantee that he would always agree with me.   Since then he has intervened once, and that only to comment on my decision to delete a post by Dave Mauldin.  He did not overrule me.

Now, having a moderator at all implies that there are standards which should be observed.  So, we have had, (I believe) three moderators who have never agreed upon any standards for the board.

My own ideas are related to the purpose of the board.

It seems to me that the purpose of the board was/is/should be something like:

1. To inform people about the George Geftakys and his assemblies, including the teachings, practices, and inherent dangers.

2. To help people escape from those assemblies or to avoid becoming involved.

3. To help people recover from their involvement.  This can be accomplished by:

a. Answering questions and sharing experiences.

b. Discussing the subjects that arise as people re-establish their lives on a healthier basis.  This would include just about anything.  Religious beliefs are basic to most human behaviors, so we must explore how those beliefs apply to church polity, money, marriage and child raising, doctrinal teachings...even poker (I suppose). 

c. To provide a place of cyber-fellowship for those who have been in the assemblies or even other cultic groups.  (No, I don't think Dave M. should be excluded.  I just think he should behave himself.)

In light of the above, I don't think the board should be a place for attacking individuals for personal reasons. Strong disagreement is one thing.  Vituperation is another. This is why I am limiting "Ruth", as it seems to be her principle reason for coming here.  In her most recent foray she had one of her solo conversations and then popped in here to place a link.

Ruth...don't bother.

These are my thoughts, and I did not hear them from a burning bush. No claim of infallibility.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to spend hours every day reading every word in every post.  But I do check in every day and see what is going on.

I cannot promise perfection, but I affirm my good intentions.

Thomas Maddux

[Margaret]

Tom, I do believe that we have had our day and our say. I think more recent Assembly escapees should be in charge of the board, and I propose Marcia for moderator. Ciao.

[editor]

Here's the link that was deleted.

If Ruth had come on here and said a bunch of really bad things I can see censoring her.  Of course, others have done so and they weren't censored, which is a rather sticky consideration.  All she did was post a link, to something she wrote, which you may or may not disagree with.

I think it is clear that Tom does not endorse the viewpoints expressed in this link, and I am also certain that many people will not agree with her as well.

Nevertheless, I trust each of you to be able to read whatever you want to read and draw whatever conclusions you wish to draw.  Who knows?  You might even learn something. 

http://www.soaringwiththeeagles.com/yabbse/index.php?board=14;action=display;threadid=389

Brent

[Suzie Trockman]

and I propose Marcia for moderator. Ciao.

Vote for Marcia

[vernecarty]

Here's the link that was deleted.

If Ruth had come on here and said a bunch of really bad things I can see censoring her.  Of course, others have done so and they weren't censored, which is a rather sticky consideration.  All she did was post a link, to something she wrote, which you may or may not disagree with.

I think it is clear that Tom does not endorse the viewpoints expressed in this link, and I am also certain that many people will not agree with her as well.

Nevertheless, I trust each of you to be able to read whatever you want to read and draw whatever conclusions you wish to draw.  Who knows?  You might even learn something. 

http://www.soaringwiththeeagles.com/yabbse/index.php?board=14;action=display;threadid=389

Brent

I am with Tom on this one Brent. Sondra has made her contempt for the participants of this board quite clear.
Considering the strict control she excercises over her domain, it is totally class-less for her to come on this BB and post a link to her site which people are free to go and read if they wish to.
Posting such a link without comment is contemptuous of the process and shows disdain for those conversing here.
Tom was right to delete it in my view.
Verne

p.s. I suggested to Brian 18 months ago that he should consider making Marcia a BB moderator. Good gender balance doncha think? She has a fairly level head too! 

[moonflower2]

A VOTE FOR MARCIA IS A VOTE FOR TRUTH      A VOTE FOR MARCIA IS A VOTE FOR TRUTH       A VOTE FOR MARCIA IS A VOTE FOR TRUTH[/color]

[M2]

Some time ago, in a former life, I knew this family who were well-liked because they were so nice and they never "got involved" when issues arose, but they always had a very strong opinion, and other people rose to the occasion to speak out on their behalf.  So the family never suffered from foot in mouth disease as a result.  And then there was me, who always had an opinion and always got involved and always got in trouble just because I got involved.

Well looks like I've gone and done it again, so...

First I want to apologize to Tom for the tone of my recent posts.  I hate having to entreat/exhort a brother, especially one I respect.  It's easier with sisters and even easier when I was annonymous.  So Moonie cut it out!!

Second, I am not the woe-man for the job of moderator, especially if the BB is going to die, as some have claimed.  But also because I disagree with Tom/Verne/Moonie re. Sondra and they disagree with me re. Lenore.  So I have a bias so to speak.  Next, I do not know the first thing about BB moderating.

So I vote for Suzie Tr0ckman

Marcia

[editor]

Second, I am not the woe-man for the job of moderator, especially if the BB is going to die, as some have claimed.  But also because I disagree with Tom/Verne/Moonie re. Sondra and they disagree with me re. Lenore.  So I have a bias so to speak.  Next, I do not know the first thing about BB moderating.

So I vote for Suzie Tr0ckman

Marcia

Not gonna happen.  Nope.

DNR is a good policy. 

I say we bring back six weeks off.  Take Six Weeks Off.  Don't show up here for Six Weeks.

Brent

[M2]

Not gonna happen.  Nope.

DNR is a good policy. 

I say we bring back six weeks off.  Take Six Weeks Off.  Don't show up here for Six Weeks.

Brent

What is DNR??

Marcia

[soul dreamer]

 I think He means "Do Not Resuscitate" this BB unless there is some new information such as GG inviting us all to a real repentance and reconciliation meeting... especially if he is willing to pay for a caterer to bring in  both lunch and dinner for about 1,000 saints.  Now that would be great news!

[moonflower2]

What is DNR??

Marcia

Do Not Resusitate abbreviation in medical jargon. (Let it die.)  

The only problem with DNR in the wild BB e-life, is that there will be uncontrolled freakish feeders on the carcass.  

So, I say, "VOTE FOR MARCIA!"

[vernecarty]

Second, I am not the woe-man for the job of moderator, especially if the BB is going to die, as some have claimed.  But also because I disagree with Tom/Verne/Moonie re. Sondra

And what exactly is it that we disagree about?
That she has come onto the BB and disparaged just about eveyone that posts here, including you?
That she has consumed an inordinate amoung of cyberspace and time denigrating those who have been pointing out the wickedness of the house that George built?
That she has engaged in vicious slander which she refused to acknowledge and apologise for? etc. etc, etc.
Please be more specific.

and they disagree with me re. Lenore.  So I have a bias so to speak.  Next, I do not know the first thing about BB moderating.

So I vote for Suzie Tr0ckman
  Marcia   

Whatever her problems, and they are obvious, I consider Lenore a sister in Christ and  am thus greatly contsrained in how I relate to her regardless of my personal feelings.
I have never ever heard Lenore refer to the apostate Geftakys as "The Lord's Servant" and that alone gets her some credit in my ledger...
While I think we need to speak the truth in love in every instance, it seems to me that when you consider the conduct and history of these two individuals, you are comparing apples and oranges Marcia. Just my two cents.

Do Not Resusitate abbreviation in medical jargon. (Let it die.) 

The only problem with DNR in the wild BB e-life, is that there will be uncontrolled freakish feeders on the carcass. 

So, I say, "VOTE FOR MARCIA!"

Nature abhors a vacuum...
Verne

[M2]

Not gonna happen.  Nope.

DNR is a good policy. 

I say we bring back six weeks off.  Take Six Weeks Off.  Don't show up here for Six Weeks.

Brent

I was planning to post something this morning, but I will reply to a couple of posts first.

Verne, I was not comparing the two.  I also disagree with Sondra re. her attitude towards you.

Moonie, we need a skeptic type to p'troll the board so that the birds of prey do not swoop in and take over eh??

All,

During the Tom/skeptic ruckus I mentioned that I watched the movie Coach Carter.  It is based on a true story, and it reminded me of our own assembly story, if I was to equate Coach Carter with Brent, and the rest of us with the student/athletes, and Carter's woman with Suzie and...  you get the picture.  See the movie and if the board is still going in 6 weeks, I would love to hear your opinions.

I posted a poem in the Quotes to Ponder thread that was quoted in the movie. see  www.assemblyboard.com/index.php?topic=160.msg26396#msg26396
You may not agree with it entirely, from a theological perspective, but read it as an inspirational piece.  It was posted to inspire all former/present assembly members towards real healing and thus be a blessing to others as well.

"And, as we let our own light shine, we consciously give
other people permission to do the same.
As we are liberated from our fear,
our presence automatically liberates others."

See you in 6 weeks, maybe.  I managed less than 2 weeks the last time I left.

Au Revoir, Asta Lavista,
Marcia

P.S.  Delila, I love you and hope you are doing well.  Send me an email sometime.
Marcia

[vernecarty]

See you in 6 weeks, maybe.  I managed less than 2 weeks the last time I left.

Au Revoir, Asta Lavista,
Marcia

Your persepctive will be sorely missed.
Let's have a little contest shall we?
Whoever posts first owes the other person a double-dip ice cream Sundae!
If you accept the challenge, send me a p.m.
Of course after six weeks, we are both free post.
This may inspire both of us to really take some time off the board huh?
Sayonara!
Verne

[Oscar]

Tom, I do believe that we have had our day and our say. I think more recent Assembly escapees should be in charge of the board, and I propose Marcia for moderator. Ciao.

Margaret,

I believe that there is much much more to say. Much, in fact, that needs to be said.



In addition, I don't think simply changing moderators will make much of a difference.  A moderator can't really moderate unless he/she is allowed to do so. 

In order to moderate fairly, there must be a standard that everyone is expected to observe.  What are the standards for this board?

Beats me!   

Brent,

Regarding my deletion of "Ruth's" link, and your replacing it, exactly what did I do that I shouldn't have?  For that matter, how can I even know what I should do?

Brent you seem to change your mind frequently.  Now visitors can post, now they can't.  Now Matt P. is welcome, now he is excluded.  So, I guess the standard is "How does Brent feel today?"   That's how it seems.

Of course, you could have done that because of some ideas about Libertarianism.   It is, as you  know, a sort of "maximum freedom" philosophy of government.   This situation highlights one of its problems. 

The idea is that "my right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins."  So, everyone is free to "swing their arms" until they hit someone's nose.   If you try to limit dangerous arm swinging you must abandon your libertarian principle and set up a new standard of potential harm.  Which, of course, is what governments already do, so what use are the Libertarian ideas?

This may sound theoretical, but just substitute drunk driving for arm swinging, and you can see why no country has never been governed by Libertarianism.

The issue is not what people have a right to read.  Everyone here knows how to get to SWTE, and is free to read all they want.

The issue is allowing people who admire and praise evil to advertise their wares on this BB.  On the one hand you condemn people for not having adequately repented of their involvement of GG, then you turn around and permit what amounts to a Geftays supporter to spread their, (and his), lies here.

Thomas Maddux