W
wwjd_kilden
Guest
Welcome to the internet.
The internet is no excuse for being rude, hateful or threatening. The same laws apply there as IRL
Welcome to the internet.
Welcome to the internet.
The problem presently is that there is someone blatantly blaspheming against the Holy Ghost on several forum threads. He is spreading his anti-Christian religion on post after post and saying the Holy Spirit is not who God sent to us, but a human man. He is taking advantage of the opportunity to propagate his blasphemous beliefs against the Holy Spirit because some members are actually trying to reason with him in vain. He has no intention of submitting to Christ but keeps stringing members along in his many posts to keep posting his religious doctrine throughout the forum.
It's actually making me sick seeing his false religion posted all over the place. I've reported him over & over for two days now. It's like he's taking over the website. I don't understand why he is still here.![]()
Yes, I can see a lot of people accusing a lot of people of being heretics.Problem with this is some trolls are Very obvious and can be spotted and recognized by anyone. Others are more subtle. And in some cases there can be debates between users over if someone is, or is not, a troll. Or what constitutes a troll.
Most people already misuse and abuse the report button. Giving them a public space to continue that misuse would create a... crapstorm of issues. It would mostly be full of BDFers reporting each other for being heretics.
The internet is no excuse for being rude, hateful or threatening. The same laws apply there as IRL
While the trolls are hard to deal with because of members' interactions with them, The "heretic" issue is easy to deal with.
You see, you don't have to ban a heretic because of doctrine..... you ban them for their nasty behavior..... which, BTW, WE HAVE RULES FOR THAT.
Heretics have a bad habit of name-calling, insulting, & bullying. There's no excuse NOT to ban them.
If you read my post, I said heretics shouldn't be banned for their doctrine, but for their bad attitudes & actions.well Stephen...you and I have some major doctrine differences
so if I, or others who disagree with your stance on certain things (pretty sure we don't have to be specific here), does that make us heretics in your eyes?
I'm asking, because I have responded to certain of your posts that I find inflamatory and insulting...however, I would not call you a heretic and I would report you though, if you resorted to name calling etc
I know you take a VERY strong stand on what you think is presently not included in this century, and I actually prefer to not even engage you, you come on so strong
so maybe that heretic idea of yours does not actually work
trolls and spammers are something else entirely
If you read my post, I said heretics shouldn't be banned for their doctrine, but for their bad attitudes & actions.
There was a time when the church loved it when preachers preached it hot..... now many want to be petted on the head & tell them they're alright.
Do I come on strong? Sure do, and don't apologize for it. The one thing Jesus was with the people was brutally HONEST.
Luke 4:22-30 (NASB)
[SUP]22 [/SUP]And all were speaking well of Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips; and they were saying, "Is this not Joseph's son?" [SUP]23 [/SUP]And He said to them, "No doubt you will quote this proverb to Me, 'Physician, heal yourself! Whatever we heard was done at Capernaum, do here in your hometown as well.'" [SUP]24 [/SUP]And He said, "Truly I say to you, no prophet is welcome in his hometown. [SUP]25 [/SUP]"But I say to you in truth, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the sky was shut up for three years and six months, when a great famine came over all the land; [SUP]26 [/SUP]and yet Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. [SUP]27 [/SUP]"And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of Elisha the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian." [SUP]28 [/SUP]And all the people in the synagogue were filled with rage as they heard these things; [SUP]29 [/SUP]and they got up and drove Him out of the city, and led Him to the brow of the hill on which their city had been built, in order to throw Him down the cliff. [SUP]30 [/SUP]But passing through their midst, He went His way.
Luke 13:1-5 (NASB)
[SUP]1 [/SUP]Now on the same occasion there were some present who reported to Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. [SUP]2 [/SUP]And Jesus said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans because they suffered this fate? [SUP]3 [/SUP]"I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. [SUP]4 [/SUP]"Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? [SUP]5 [/SUP]"I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
If we are to take up our cross & follow Him, we must do more than suffer; we must speak the truth, no matter how many applecarts we tip over. These last hours we live in is not the time or the place to water down the Gospel or sugarcoat the truth.
BTW, what you said in red is probably the best compliment I've received since I've been on here.![]()
Do I come on strong? Sure do, and don't apologize for it. The one thing Jesus was with the people was brutally HONEST.
well Stephen...you and I have some major doctrine differences
so if I, or others who disagree with your stance on certain things (pretty sure we don't have to be specific here), does that make us heretics in your eyes?
I'm asking, because I have responded to certain of your posts that I find inflamatory and insulting...however, I would not call you a heretic and I would report you though, if you resorted to name calling etc
I know you take a VERY strong stand on what you think is presently not included in this century, and I actually prefer to not even engage you, you come on so strong
so maybe that heretic idea of yours does not actually work
trolls and spammers are something else entirely
They would be the same criteria for reporting someone, yes? And yet reporting people is still a constantly overused aspect of the site.
Reporting people is private. It goes directly to mods, so they don't have to go to a special section of the forums to see it. And there are already a set of guidelines in place for reporting. Also what if they determine someone isn't a troll? Now there is an Extra step involved in having to go and remove this persons name from public.
And they have to investigate every accusation, so i'm not sure how making this public would do so?
If you remove the privacy and create a space where people can be publicly called out, no matter what guidelines you put in place, it will be abused. Probably worse than the report button.
Also how many people would go to a forum just to see who is being accused of being a troll? What if someone is accused falsely and there's no one on to remove them from the list? Then the falsely accused person could be on there for hours.
What about those who defend certain trolls? How will they respond if they see someone publicly reported as a troll? What kind of arguments will that stir up?
Also it runs the risk of why someones name is on the list. What if (just for an example haha) i put your name on such a list? And no one was on for 5 hours to deal with it? Then it would be an issue of 'why is she on there?'. This could lead to gossip. You feeling defensive. You may even be able to figure out it was me. Posting names of people accused of being trolls just leaves open so many ways for it to go wrong. And no matter what restrictions you put someone will misuse it.
I don't know if they still do this, but in the chats they used to have a few people with the kick and ban capacity who were not mods. They were only allowed to use this for people who were obvious and blatant problems, such as repeated cussing and other clear violations. Who they were was not revealed, so they had no rights to do any other sort of mod activities, such as step in on arguments or mandate a subject change.
Something similar may be of use in the forums, on a very restricted basis. But even then it would be a volunteer position and no guarantee they would be on either.
The internet is filled with trolls and has been since AOL days in the 1990s -- they will be here to the end of time likely. All you can do is lessen it never actually eliminate it.