Charles McNeil: James Hiddle: That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP: Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader? Is there a mutually agreed definition or standard for a cult? Is a cult defined by its leader, size, teachings, a combination of these or some behavior outside the norms of society? Who makes that call? Is there a fear in the forums that biblical truth will be lost if books and authors not in the main stream are made available to logos or Christian readers? My last understanding is the Logos users still have the freedom to purchase or to read what her or she wills. CM
James Hiddle: That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP: Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader?
Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader?
Is there a mutually agreed definition or standard for a cult? Is a cult defined by its leader, size, teachings, a combination of these or some behavior outside the norms of society? Who makes that call?
Is there a fear in the forums that biblical truth will be lost if books and authors not in the main stream are made available to logos or Christian readers? My last understanding is the Logos users still have the freedom to purchase or to read what her or she wills. CM
Read MJ's posts for some insight on the technical use of the word
DAL
James Hiddle: Thanks Al for your wonderful post but I feel now that I've become hypocritical. Hypocrisy and Pride are the two sins(outside the unpardonable sin)that I fear the most and feel like I commit them(or at least hypocrisy)because I can listen to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's Christmas stuff and it relaxes me but on the same token I consider Mormonism heresy and maybe a cult or I can listen to Gregorian chants which are Catholic liturgical prayers but as a Protestant I'm against Catholic theology. What does that say about my character? I do feel like I didn't think things through and just rushed in starting this thread not thinking that maybe there is some value to those books of his. I did have some of his material bookmarked for possible future purchases because they looked interesting and might have helped with my spiritual growth but when I found out about IHOP I took them off my bookmarks. So as you can see I seem to be a hypocritical dolt that just has a nasty habit of not thinking things through and jumping the gun to quickly. May God have mercy on this poor soul!
Thanks Al for your wonderful post but I feel now that I've become hypocritical. Hypocrisy and Pride are the two sins(outside the unpardonable sin)that I fear the most and feel like I commit them(or at least hypocrisy)because I can listen to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's Christmas stuff and it relaxes me but on the same token I consider Mormonism heresy and maybe a cult or I can listen to Gregorian chants which are Catholic liturgical prayers but as a Protestant I'm against Catholic theology.
What does that say about my character? I do feel like I didn't think things through and just rushed in starting this thread not thinking that maybe there is some value to those books of his. I did have some of his material bookmarked for possible future purchases because they looked interesting and might have helped with my spiritual growth but when I found out about IHOP I took them off my bookmarks. So as you can see I seem to be a hypocritical dolt that just has a nasty habit of not thinking things through and jumping the gun to quickly.
May God have mercy on this poor soul!
We all have our good days and our bad days.
It is an understandable question, but, as others have pointed out, it then becomes a matter of who gets invested with the authority to parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine. I'd rather Faithlife recuse themselves from that role. My motivation is mainly selfish seeing as how I'm Catholic and most of my library would probably disappear if Faithlife did do that.
Average Joe:...as others have pointed out, it then becomes a matter of who gets invested with the authority to parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine. I'd rather Faithlife recuse themselves from that role...
I believe the Bible as it reveals the Logos (John 1:1), Jesus, the Christ, as the authority to reveal, to all men everywhere, what is truth. His life and teachings "parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine."
Without fail, the next battle ground will be which translation, interpretation, and presuppositions, when it comes to God's will and revelation. All observant students of the Word know, this why there are so many denominations. Books and commentaries have their places, but the Bible is the standard guide for "authentic Christian doctrines." Has it not been said, that to discern a counterfeit, study the original?
I guess this might not be a good time to bring up the Temple cult (or cultus for the more squeemish).
MJ. Smith:And as for the poster who essentially said "hey, if you're an Evangelical, your in the in-crowd, so your free to say anything you want about the out-crowd".
I'm assuming that you are talking about me, as I think I'm the only one who used the word "Evangelical" in this thread, so I'll address this one.
MJ, I've noticed that most of the time when you say things like, "...the poster who essentially said..." this usually means what is coming is going to be a significant mis-characterization of what the person says, so you have something to attack, which is precisely what you did here (a classic "straw man" argument).
What I did in my post was answer the question, "Does anyone else find this disturbing..." and the statement that "I should not have started this thread." What I "essentially said" was, "I DO NOT think it is inappropriate for you to go to a forum where the majority of people probably have very similar convictions and beliefs as you, that exists to support software designed for people with similar beliefs as you, by a company owned by people with similar beliefs as you, and ask if anyone else is concerned about the company offering a resource that you think deceptively presents heretical, cult-like views."
This would be contrasted with someone with beliefs similar to the OP who goes to go to a forum of mainly, let's say, Catholics, or Jehovah's Witnesses (since they've been brought up here), or maybe IHOP people, and that person were to post something similar, "essentially saying," "These resources represent beliefs similar to yours. Does anyone here find it disturbing that resources are being offered here that don't fit well with my beliefs, but do fit well with yours...?" You could assume that this would be considered uncouth, and socially unacceptable.
I'm not sure how you would get from my statement that, "In a forum with these circumstances, it is not inappropriate to ask such a question, but no, I don't find it disturbing," that I might be saying "hey, if you're an Evangelical, your in the in-crowd, so your free to say anything you want about the out-crowd." (Your exact accusation.) However, I suspect that you knew I wasn't saying what you claimed. In fact, I didn't say anything vaguely like that.
I'm guessing that I've been visiting this forum for a year or more. In that time, I've noticed significant defensiveness from you, along these lines. I've also noticed that regulars on this forum regularly go out of their way to support you when these things come up, and to try to make you (and others) feel welcome here. My observation is that they don't do this because you do, or do not believe the same way as many/most of the people here. They try to support you because:
1. You have excellent working knowledge of Logos.
2. You are kind and gracious enough to take the time to help people who come here with problems using Logos, as well as regularly helping people who are not having problems, but could perhaps do some things better.
3. You (and 10 or 15 other regulars who invest a lot of time in this forum) add your distinctiveness to this forum, by interacting with both factual, use-based questions, and more conceptual, philosophical, theological questions like this one. This forum would absolutely be different without your active interaction.
Having said that, this doesn't change the fact that the majority of people who visit this forum are likely Evangelical theologically, because that HAS BEEN the primary target customer, and I would wager that the vast majority of people who still purchase the software (and thereby have questions about how to use it, so visit this forum) fit that description as well. Even so, no one would condone people being "free to say anything they want about the out-crowd," and I certainly didn't say anything like that.
MJ. Smith:Given the degree to which Jesus was willing to be with the worst - Samaritans even and even conversed nicely with them and used one as a example of stellar behavior; tax collectors who were not only traitors but extortionists, politely healed the daughter of a pagan occupying soldier .... I find it astonishing that a group claiming to be Christian finds it so difficult to be polite and charitable.
I might not say that I have ever been "astonished," but I have been disappointed with the tone of posts on this forum from time to time. I would guess that if the same group of people were to hold these same discussions, about the same topics, face to face, the tone would be very different. Some of this is definitely the nature of forums, and quickly conceived statements and responses written by, and to, people that will likely never have a face to face conversation. Add to that the fact that it is really easy to "misread" things that are written. Still, I would expect it to be more friendly here than it sometimes is.
Perhaps significantly misrepresenting what people say in their responses, and attacking that misrepresentation doesn't add to a better tone either, though.
Al, MJ almost always finds my posts, and disagrees. I'm exagerating.
But in this instance your description of what you said, and her description of what a poster said, look surprisingly similar. When in safe territory, ones comments concerning the unwashed tend to increase.
Quite often I criticize the evangelicals as anything but, knowing they'll grit their teeth concerning the stupid lady.
Al Het:What I did in my post was answer the question, "Does anyone else find this disturbing..." and the statement that "I should not have started this thread." What I "essentially said" was, "I DO NOT think it is inappropriate for you to go to a forum where the majority of people probably have very similar convictions and beliefs as you, that exists to support software designed for people with similar beliefs as you, by a company owned by people with similar beliefs as you, and ask if anyone else is concerned about the company offering a resource that you think deceptively presents heretical, cult-like views."
Yes, this is the paragraph I was paraphrasing in a satirical manner. It essentially says "hey we evangelicals are the real market of Logos so we can talk as if the forums were Evangelical - ignore all those people with different beliefs - Logos isn't really for them". I am deliberately exaggerating a portion of the message in you statement because I don't believe that you are aware that that is the message sent & received. I do not bother to "call people out on it" who I believe are doing it deliberately and know precisely how it will be perceived.
Al Het: I've noticed significant defensiveness from you, along these lines.
Absolutely and deliberately. I was active in the forums when there were a number of people who had no bounds of courtesy, politeness, or theological extremism. I saw a number of people refuse to ask for help because of the tone of the forums. I saw helpful, knowledgeable people leave the forums because they considered it inappropriate for a pastor to be associated with such vitriol. I was thrilled when a Berean posted that he finally felt safe to disclose his affiliation. And, yes, I am passionate about keeping the forums safe for everyone.
This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist. The last time I ran the Logos numbers, drawn from the web site, only 29.6% of the resources were tagged as Evangelical. That does not translate directly into users or investors but only a few years ago it was nearer 50%. FYI: 30.8% of the resources are ACELO (Anglican-Catholic-Eastern Orthodox-Lutheran-Oriental Orthodox) which implies that there are a substantial number of users in this sphere.
Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."
MJ. Smith: Absolutely and deliberately. I was active in the forums when there were a number of people who had no bounds of courtesy, politeness, or theological extremism. I saw a number of people refuse to ask for help because of the tone of the forums. I saw helpful, knowledgeable people leave the forums because they considered it inappropriate for a pastor to be associated with such vitriol. I was thrilled when a Berean posted that he finally felt safe to disclose his affiliation. And, yes, I am passionate about keeping the forums safe for everyone. This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist.
This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist.
MJ,
Since the matter is on the "table", did you made the forum rules or you just a self-appointed "police" or "enforcer" of the established forum rules or decorum? I think some users, if not expressed, may wondered under who's authority do you operate? In your quest to bring or "keep order", are your doing what you are trying to prevent-- driving people away?
To have mutually agreed rules on one hand, should not we, on the other hand, have mutually agreed enforcers? Is it the job of the MVPs or yours, solely? Do I perceive your task on this forum, beyond contributing your views and helping when you can, that Christians are incapable or unwilling to control/govern themselves?
MJ, I have no "beef" with you, just questions. Peace, until next time. CM
Phil Gons (Faithlife): Please abide by the following guidelines as you interact on our forums. Please keep your discussions focused on Logos Bible Software: our software, products, websites, company, tools, etc. Please do not discuss or debate biblical, theological, or other controversial topics. Use one of the many web forums intended for these kinds of discussions. Please treat each other with the love, courtesy, respect, and kindness that you would if you were sitting in your living room together. Please do not use our forums to sell or give away anything or link to anything you’re selling or giving away—including Logos products promote or link to competitors point people to other places that sell Logos-compatible products advertise yourself, your business, your ministry, your website, etc. (a tasteful link in your forum signature is acceptable) post Logos Coupon Codes. If you are aware of a special promotion Logos is running online, you are welcome to link directly to the promotion. Please search before posting. It’s likely that someone has already asked your question. Please help others follow these guidelines. If the problems continue after you’ve given a gentle reminder of these expectations, please click “Report Abuse” under “More” or send an email to forums@logos.com. Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy discussing and learning about Logos Bible Software.
Please abide by the following guidelines as you interact on our forums.
Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy discussing and learning about Logos Bible Software.
I neither created the forum guidelines nor appointed myself police or enforcer as neither are roles I enjoy. However, I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously. When others step in, I quite willing bow out. When others appear to encourage going outside the guidelines, I step in. As I have said before, people who know me personally break out laughing at the incongruity of the "police" image on the forums. My concern is specifically making the outlier groups feel welcome or at least willing to use the forums to ask questions and learn.
May I ask you, why do you think guidelines should be mutually agreed upon as opposed to Logos set requirements for participation? Do you take the 6th guideline seriously - if so, how do you exhibit it. perhaps I can get some hints to improve my image;
Charles McNeil:Christians are incapable or unwilling to control/govern themselves?
The vast majority do; a few have never checked the rules but get the idea quickly from the behavior of others or a gentle nudge; a few explicitly state that they don't have to control/govern themselves ... and occasionally stir up others; a few have medical reasons that they should be cut some slack.
Quick addition: I remember a time when a forum member used a very offensive term for Catholics that had always be used in a derogatory sense. They were quite surprised and embarrassed when called on it (by an Anabaptist). I prefer to assume that most exclusionary or prejudicial statements are made with as much innocence, in part through limited exposure to the broader Christian community outside their own and closely related traditions.
Milkman: Grampa I think would take offence with your last line... abondservant: MJ. Smith: abondservant:Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it. I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
Grampa I think would take offence with your last line...
abondservant: MJ. Smith: abondservant:Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it. I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
MJ. Smith: abondservant:Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it.
abondservant:Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone.
Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it.
I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
. . . but only if she had ended with all bats are off . . .
I like Apples. Especially Honeycrisp.
MJ. Smith:I am deliberately exaggerating a portion of the message in you statement because I don't believe that you are aware that that is the message sent & received.
So, is it proper to misquote someone in order to make a point?
Enable-and-Submit-Log-Files | Install
This all brings to mind the song from Frozen, "Let it Go."
Soli Deo Gloria
Randy
MJ. Smith: /quote] I neither created the forum guidelines nor appointed myself police or enforcer as neither are roles I enjoy. However, I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously. When others step in, I quite willing bow out. When others appear to encourage going outside the guidelines, I step in. As I have said before, people who know me personally break out laughing at the incongruity of the "police" image on the forums. My concern is specifically making the outlier groups feel welcome or at least willing to use the forums to ask questions and learn. May I ask you, why do you think guidelines should be mutually agreed upon as opposed to Logos set requirements for participation? Do you take the 6th guideline seriously - if so, how do you exhibit it. perhaps I can get some hints to improve my image;
/quote]
MJ. Smith:The vast majority do; a few have never checked the rules but get the idea quickly from the behavior of others or a gentle nudge; a few explicitly state that they don't have to control/govern themselves ... and occasionally stir up others; a few have medical reasons that they should be cut some slack.
Thanks for your timely response. Forgive me, for my delayed response. Let me say first. If the “majority” of the Christians users of this forum, know the rules and abide by them, why must you become the Nudger-In-Chief of rule # 6? You don’t have faith in the behavior of the majority of Rule Abiding Forum Users to welcome the newcomers and set the tone for general behavior?
In your enthusiastic quest to implement rule # 6, could it be that you’re pulling up the “wheat” in removing the “tares”? I know you mean well, but sometimes, all that is right is not always expedient.
As for the “few explicitly state that they don't have to control/govern themselves ... and occasionally stir up others; a few have medical reasons that they should be cut some slack” is this privileged knowledge or something most rational people can discern with encounter? You seem to be hinting at warning newcomers to the forum and/or publicly addressing those professionally labored with mental issues.
Is there something inherently wrong if this forum reflects the “real world” and people that attend our churches? Remember, we’re not in heaven.
Americans seem to have more respect for things they have a say in; thereby, giving them a sense of ownership or “skin in the game.” This is what I had in mind in reference to the rules being “mutually agreed upon.” With some input, they will affirm and accept the appointed or elected authority.
Yes, Logos has the right to “set requirements for participation”, but who enforces the rules is another story. He who makes the rules, obey the rules, are to enforce the rules. All users may not exercise equal self-discipline nor be responsible to the expectation of others. You don’t think the majority of adult mature Christians can’t absorb extreme behavior of the few in this forum? Are you taking on too much, for too many, too often?
You said, “I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously.” Does this mean you like Pius IX of the First Vatican Council, on December 8, 1869, claiming the July 18, 1870, dogma of Papal Infallibility? To do so in a figurative way, could this be the possible reason for your "police" image on the forums.
I am in no position to tell you what to do or how to behave. I don’t know all that you know or don’t know and probably, never will. As for now, I’m just seeking to understand who appears to be well-read.
In addition, MJ, you appear to be a passionate, enthusiastic, long time, frequent user of the Logos product and the forums. If you or anyone chooses to change, it would be your choice, on your timetable and from within. God made us all free moral agents. We are free to choose to do or not to do. Shouldn’t this be applicable to the forums too?
As for Forum rule # 6, “Please help others follow these guidelines. If the problems continue after you’ve given a gentle reminder of these expectations, please click “Report Abuse” under “More” or send an email to forums@logos.com”, this can be interpreted in as many ways as there are users.
Until then, consider the lyrics (Johnny Mercer):
“You've got to ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE
Eliminate the negative
LATCH ON TO THE AFFIRMATIVE
Don't mess with Mister In-Between
You've got to SPREAD JOY UP TO THE MAXIMUM
Bring gloom down to the minimum
HAVE FAITH or pandemonium
Liable to walk upon the scene
(To illustrate his last remark
Jonah in the whale, Noah in the ark
What did they do
Just when everything looked so dark)…”
In conclusion, you have a place in the forums. Many have and will benefit from your insights on the Logos Product and its functions. Keep sharp! Do and be what you want others to be and do. Recalibrate your “fallacy detector” for your own comfort and peace of mind in using the forums. Encourage the “good” sayings and things. “More bees are caught with honey than with vinegar.”
Oh, MJ, in the real world (outside the forums) expectations of others, are better caught than taught. CM
Charles McNeil:As for the “few explicitly state that they don't have to control/govern themselves ... and occasionally stir up others; a few have medical reasons that they should be cut some slack” is this privileged knowledge or something most rational people can discern with encounter? You seem to be hinting at warning newcomers to the forum and/or publicly addressing those professionally labored with mental issues.
Those who need some slack are either obvious to a reasonable person or have explicitly identified themselves as such - I can think of one case where it was the individual's wife who requested the slack and gave the reason. It's relevance is not that anyone in the forums would tell others but that it often explains charges of unfairness.
Charles McNeil:You don’t have faith in the behavior of the majority of Rule Abiding Forum Users to welcome the newcomers and set the tone for general behavior?
In general yes; and in general it is not newcomers who are problematic. But consider what has happened in this case. I did not and had no intention of responding to the OP. What he said was borderline but well within the general tenor of the forums. My first post was to abondservant where I misunderstood abondservant's post - a point he corrected and I apologized for - twice. Why did I respond to abondservant? Because he is a long term, valued member of the community. Then someone took a pot shot at Jehovah's Witnesses ... not exactly the topic of the thread.
Charles McNeil:You don’t think the majority of adult mature Christians can’t absorb extreme behavior of the few in this forum?
My concern is based upon the people who have explicitly left the forums or have mentioned in the forums that they are uncomfortable in or visit rarely because of the forum tone - not on an abstract notion of fairness but in terms of real people with real needs.
And poor old Fallacy hound ... he comes out only for serious fallacies ... strictly logical not moral or belief based as some seem to believe. And even then only when the fallacy is so blatant that I assume most will recognize the fallacy by the mere appearance of the hound. As in this exchange:
MJ. Smith: I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously.
Charles McNeil: Does this mean you like Pius IX of the First Vatican Council, on December 8, 1869, claiming the July 18, 1870, dogma of Papal Infallibility?
Sorry but that was just too great a fallacy to not bring out the hound since you had mentioned him (called him from his perspective). (I wish they had a bigger grin emoticon - a hound sized one.)
I will seriously consider what you have said and adjust behaviour accordingly if deemed appropriate. And yes I will try to bear in mind both the rural community in which I was raised and the city (Seattle) in which I spent most my life are noted for politeness and nonconfrontational styles.
MJ. Smith:I will seriously consider what you have said and adjust behaviour accordingly if deemed appropriate. And yes I will try to bear in mind both the rural community in which I was raised and the city (Seattle) in which I spent most my life are noted for politeness and nonconfrontational styles.
Thanks again for your response. Your willingness to be willing is a start for many others to reflect upon themselves for a ground-swell of changes here in the forum. Self-examination for improvement is most effective than others demanding you (or me) to change. A new or a fresh tone in the forum begins with the individual (prayer and reflection). Since we are discussing books, system functioning, making suggestions, occasional resource preferences, and/or general awareness of pertinent information, there is no reason to be unkind.
Besides, is it too much to ask or expect Christians to be Christian in this forum? We all have our bad days and misspeak from time to time, but that should be the exception and not the rule. Just to hear of the above principles, many will return to the forum. Loving kindness spread by word-of-mouth is most powerful than all of your American laws.
Correct me if I am wrong, is it true that most people in the Seattle area are liberal, generous and kind? Keep the Hound in its pen or at least on a leash, this is the impression given by those who love this area. CM
Jack Caviness: MJ. Smith:I am deliberately exaggerating a portion of the message in you statement because I don't believe that you are aware that that is the message sent & received. So, is it proper to misquote someone in order to make a point?
at first I read "mesquite" . . . I guess that is akin to getting "hot under the collar?
Charles McNeil:Let me say first. If the “majority” of the Christians users of this forum, know the rules and abide by them, why must you become the Nudger-In-Chief of rule # 6?
If MJ stopped acting on Rule #6, either someone else would take on that role, and fall subject to the same criticisms that she has to deal with, or the application of Rule #6 would be greatly weakened and the forums would suffer. Rule #6 exists for good cause.
Few of the regular posters in the forums, and almost none of the people who visit the forums, consider themselves able to and feel comfortable acting on Rule #6. Those of us who are willing and able to act on Rule #6 almost without exception would prefer not to do so in the instances when this may cause conflict, and we may delay in the hope that someone else will act on Rule #6 instead.
I, for one, appreciate when MJ (and others) act on Rule #6 in situations when it's called for because that usually means that I can stay entirely out of potentially and actually acrimonious threads and do more pleasant things instead, ones that are less likely to get established forumers upset with me (again).
Catholic Products Forum - Book Suggestions UserVoice - Verbum Blog
SineNomine:Few of the regular posters in the forums, and almost none of the people who visit the forums, consider themselves able to and feel comfortable acting on Rule #6. Those of us who are willing and able to act on Rule #6 almost without exception would prefer not to do so in the instances when this may cause conflict, and we may delay in the hope that someone else will act on Rule #6 instead.
Well said.
SineNomine:I, for one, appreciate when MJ (and others) act on Rule #6 in situations when it's called for because that usually means that I can stay entirely out of potentially and actually acrimonious threads and do more pleasant things instead, ones that are less likely to get established forumers upset with me (again).
Well said, again.
Logos 7 Collectors Edition