Total posts: 2,627
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
In mass graves.
Graves claim the meek and the mighty alike.
The very Earth is a mass grave.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
The Beatitudes are quite lovely.
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
Interesting. For me the prohibition of free speech would have been the first and last nail in the coffin.Yup. I eventually abandoned it due to some major flaws: an unrestricted state that calls for no limits, the exact combination of a state and its nation, and nationalism that can be taken to extreme extents (I'd prefer nationalism to the present idea of globalism, but it too is essentially flawed).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Love.
And happy Thanksgiving to you as well, jane. 😊
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Orthodox consider it a heresy.
So do you disagree that the Bible is a complete source of what must be known about God? Are you opposed to the concept of biblical inerrancy?
Created:
-->
@triangle.128k
You've abandoned fascism? Unexpected.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Did you read 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea and feel the unspoken homoerotic tension between Captain Nemo and Professor Aronnax. Bow-chick a-bow-wow.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
That's weird, I haven't experienced any of those problems. You try switching browsers?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I'd never heard of it, that's very interesting.
From Wikipedia:
"In Christianity, bibliolatry is used to describe extreme devotion to the Bible or to biblical inerrancy. Supporters of biblical inerrancy point to passages (such as 2 Timothy 3:16–17) interpreted to say that the Bible, as received, is a complete source of what must be known about God. Critics of this view call it a form of idolatry, pointing to verses (such as John 5:39–40) to indicate that Jesus asked humanity to relate to God directly rather than seeking God's rules and spurning a relationship with the God who created them."
Fascinating. I'd be interested to know which of those positions the various Christians here lean toward.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
When are you gonna pick a profile picture, man. I keep getting you confused with Polytheist-Witch because you both have white and green patterned pictures. The brain processes images before it processes letters in usernames.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I know your views on truth and God. What I do not know is why you've said that because I am an atheist I must see myself as God rather than the flawed human being that I am.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
That does sound better, but it does not sound like Christianity.My ticket would probably say hell, since I haven't accepted Jesus as my lord and savior.No, no no. See, this is a misconception and one of those ol pieces of baloney I can never change others from saying and thinking. There are more options that going to heaven or hell, it's not just one or the other. A person has to actually earn one or the other despite popular belief and despite what religion sells. If you don't make it to a heaven you will reincarnate either here or a place similar. You never have to fear that or believe that unless you live like a criminal and wish to abuse others. If you would like to understand this more just ask.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
You probably right that I am not very good at making psychological analyses and diagnoses of people I have never met based on internet posts.I should take a leaf from our theist friends who have uncovered that I am hate filled, ignorant and superstitious - all things I never knew about myself.
I urge you to consider that simply because some theists are wrong about you does not mean all theists are wrong about gus.
It's very true that I did not come to know gus as a person. I don't know his life. I would be very wrong to make conclusive judgments about who he is. But I did come to know him as a poster.
My opinion (and it is only that) is that as a poster, gus was hooked on the stimulation he got from attacking his enemies with high-contempt, high-scorn posts. Occasionally, if I would confront him about this, he would clear his throat and straighten his tie and give me some excuse about how his wanton vitriol was designed to help theists and make the world a better place. This was, if you will excuse my language, complete fucking bullshit. Even if there was once a time where that truly was his goal -- and I'm not saying there wasn't -- he lost sight of it. Myself and others explained to him more than once why his tactics were making things worse, not better, and he never met our points or altered his behavior. Funny enough, the tactic he always considered to be right was the one that allowed him to keep being as nasty as he wanted.
And now I feel more than a little ashamed for talking ill about a fellow who isn't here, and must desist. I just couldn't leave the "huge heart for theists" thing alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I do not take myself as being God. I take myself as being a flawed human being.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Yahweh seems to have begun as a henotheistic deity, not a monotheistic deity, and I suspect that's what we're seeing in those passages.
Created:
Posted in:
Hmm. draft says he did not stop spam reporting after being discovered; bish says he did stop spam reporting after being discovered. I have no evidence of either claim and it would be fairly silly to pursue it.
Not that it matters now for any reason, but I'll have to personally stick with no anonymity. I am forced to conclude that, regardless of the most recent case involving drafter, knowing the identity of a report spammer would in general be of greater use in apprehending them than not knowing the identity of a report spammer.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
@janesix
You're two of the nicest people on the board, made me sad to see ya fightin'. I totally understood why both of you were upset fwiw.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
What ways around it have you found? Forgive my interest; I'm sure you may have wanted to kick back and pursue less controversial topics. We do debate the issues quite enough here already.Religion and politics do often overlap. Is there nothing within Jewish tradition that conflicts with modern left-wing politics?From an ultra-orthodox perspective, sure. Homosexuality is certainly not accepted in the orthodox community, though we have found ways around it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
Religion and politics do often overlap. Is there nothing within Jewish tradition that conflicts with modern left-wing politics?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
Is there ever conflict between your conservative religious position and your left-leaning political position?
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Oh look the BODY HATER speaks. He wants you to cover your flesh in SHAME while you define your philosophical premises and elucidate your arguments and theses, instead of nude as Socrates intended. Is The Thinker by the great Rodin wearing a stitch of clothing? No he is not WAKE UP.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
In regards to modding. I had a short run with Secular on the religion forum in DDO. I felt Secular and I would have done an excellent job bc we were both pretty good at analyzing each situation to see what's best to do. I wish that could have gone on a little longer bc i feel we had a lot of potential.
Everyone please ignore this, he is lying. The truth is that while Sec and Outplayz were in power they made it against the rules to post on the forum while naked, which as you can imagine was deeply upsetting and problematic for everyone in the religion forum. All of us -- I can't stress that enough, literally every single person in the DDO religion forum even if they deny it to you now, they're just being modest -- posted with buns to the wind. Why? None of your fucking business I'll do what I want in my own goddamn house, that's why. The point is Sec and Outplayz took a shit on our whole culture and way of life and didn't even care, personal freedom means nothing to them. If made mod again Outplayz WILL make you wear clothes online, mark my words. Even though in debate, clothes are a CAGE for your SOUL.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
To be frank: Some people will overreact and block you, yes. But overreacting to them blocking you scarcely makes you much better.Did you mean not overreacting to them blocking me makes me better? I'm not that good of a person lol. If someone disrespects me and runs.. i will have something to say about it. I don't like bullies, and bullies come in all shapes and sizes. I make sure they learn their lessons.
Do you perceive people who block you as bullies? Or think that the act of blocking you is bullying you?
In regards to blocking i fully agree with you. I was referencing the "extra features" part of the discussion with Rat. If there was extra features to the block function where i can't even enter a thread, or i can't comment on a debate... that's extra and it would be a restraint on your freedom. To be fair, he only wanted it on the comments of debates.. but that's bc he uses those the most so for him it would be more convenient to block people from entering. I don't see why that eventually wouldn't apply to forums too. All in all, i think it's a very bad idea bc it will be abused. People block others for no reason at all other than not liking them. And, that is what i see the block function used for the most... if all these people couldn't enter specific debates in the comments bc one person thought to block them... it would be a mess. That was the reason i introduced ex ante and ex post reasoning. The ex ante reasoning on this would be... once everyone can do it, there could be a potential i wouldn't be able to enter any debate where i disagree with the person. Why wouldn't i block everyone i disagree with and make sure only people that will vote for me can get on? That will happen.
Well I can certainly see where you're coming from there, but I haven't heard any staffer talking about implementing changes that drastic to the block feature, so I don't think there's currently cause for alarm.
That would be jail, not prison.Oh come on... let me feel like a bad-ass for just one second.
😄 All right man. Send me the rap video once you make it.
Created:
Posted in:
I volunteer at a Christian church during their charity events and holiday giveaways, which are surprisingly exhausting to organize and complete, and wipe me out every time. In a good way. In rural areas such as mine many people depend on Christian charity.
Created:
Posted in:
There's no way I could settle on just one.
It may seem like a strange choice, but Dark City was unforgettable to me. So was Cloud Atlas.
Others probably deserving honorable mention would be What Dreams May Come, Cast Away, Pleasantville, It's A Wonderful Life, Shawshank Redemption, and The Matrix.
If kids' movies that affected us in childhood count, I'd have to put in votes for The Lion King, The Karate Kid, and The Neverending Story.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Do you really think blocking members punishes them unfairly?In regards to blocking, i think it has the potential for abuse. As my conversation with Ratlar is a perfect example. I may have been a little pushy, but i personally wanted to see if i'll annoy him enough for him to ban me. So i made sure i did so in a substantive way. He didn't disappoint. Now, any forum or debate he's in... if he had it his way, i wouldn't be able to join. I think people just ban people bc they don't like them, as is proof here. But i didn't even need to set this up bc it's apparent everywhere else too. People ban others simply bc they don't like them or that they feel trapped or something by the arguments. I think for this site to hand down extra punishment in banning them from threads and debates is excessive. But not only that, it will be abused. The number of people that justly get banned vs the latter i think is too small to have this website step in and set up an extra feature to punish users even further.
You're still able to join any forum debate or discussion that person is in, and even address them directly, albeit without @ing them.
I've been blocked for saying things someone didn't like, but I did not feel it was cruel and unusual punishment and I did not feel that it constituted a restraint on my freedom.
To be frank: Some people will overreact and block you, yes. But overreacting to them blocking you scarcely makes you much better.
I've been to prison twice... albeit just for fighting so i was in the drunk tank. All i can say is prison is a lot scary and actually puts shivers down my spine. Something this site can never do.
That would be jail, not prison.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Depends on how loose your definition of "immediate temporal proximity." I certainly didn't stop at that moment or in that day. I made the decision to stop (and not just stop, but unreport the votes I had reported) sometime after this thread here which was several days after my thread here. And I've explained my reason for doing so.Do you have evidence to the contrary? Or some argument as to why my stated reasoning is doesn't count as an "other reasonable explanation"?
Your first two links are to the same thread.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
If this was their policy, I imagine abusive posters could be at large for a long time. Problem members aren't always gonna hand you a gift-wrapped slam dunk reason to finally ban them. But "many cases of being a jerk" isn't really how I'd describe it.Doesn't look like he recently said anything any worse than normal, it must have just been an accumulation of offensive behavior.This is sorta something i have a problem with. Many cases of being a jerk shouldn't be stacked against you to get you banned. I think there should be a clear instance of being malicious and abusive that gets you banned. I've seen it from D, but he already got banned for the time i saw it. I'm just hoping that's what got him in trouble again... not that he's mean-spirited bc we all know he is.
Do you really think blocking members punishes them unfairly?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
gph.to/2BioE8RThe one thing I cannot stand the most is when other people put words in my mouth or claim things about me I never said and do not believe. A post like this only serves to anger people. The best way to handle it is to speak for yourself and argue atheist concerns, you cross the line when you begin to tell people what they think and believe.Love.....would really be the only way to build bridges, I'm not talking about pretending like there are no problems but posts like these have the opposite effect of what we really want, which is for the individual to make spiritual progress. This takes a lot of work and time but certainly you can create a more genuine original topic with all the wonderful things about the Creator to discuss?I think atheists in general have had enough verbal beat downs, maybe it's time we raise the bar and treat people with mutual respect regardless of what they believe. In the end, you will be happy that you did.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
If you were serious, then here we must disagree. I don't think gus had a "huge heart for theists" and to be honest I'm startled that you would even suggest it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Lol. I saw this and was like "dafuq you doin' in my activities, intruder?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
So stripping report anonymity was not responsible for cleaning up the spam reports. The spam reports stopped because draft decided to stop making spam reports.Yes, if only because now Drafter is not reporting every vote on every debate. Even with the report limit in place, a user could overwhelm moderation's current capabilities depending on how many other reports come in at once. Once a debate is reported, that report is evaluated like all the others are against site standards. But, if it becomes clear a user is misusing the report function, the mods could work to educate that voter on site standards to discourage future misusing of the report function.
This implies that whether or not knowing the identities of the reporters helps you prevent future spam reports is still something of an open question. Something you'll only know the next time we're hit by a new barrage of them?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
It's hard to imagine that Christianity would've gotten off the ground without Paul.
Created:
Posted in:
It wouldn't be the first time I was called unrighteous just for being an atheist. But the Bible says there is no one on Earth who is righteous, not even one.
Created:
-->
@keithprosser
It was this I wasn't sure you were being serious about.I'd say Disgused has a huge heart for theists which is his 'motivation for sharing in these forums'.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Goldtop's name is still grayed out and struck through.
And I wasn't sure if keith was being serious.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
You're Catholic?
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
Yeah I've never reported anyone either. Not even Poly.
Doesn't look like he recently said anything any worse than normal, it must have just been an accumulation of offensive behavior.
Created:
-->
@Outplayz
He was never really abusive with me either. There was a recent incident but it was pretty isolated as far as my history with him goes. I did however watch him abuse others, always theists or conservatives.
Created:
I wonder what finally put him over the edge to get a ban. His last post was just "damn".
Created:
Did disgusted just get banned?
Edit: yes he did, question withdrawn.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
Do you mean this feature would notify everyone whenever any debate enters its voting period?
Created: