Mods, why was The Barbarian banned?

[Town Heretic]

I think diversity of opinion is the kelp of a forum ecosystem. Drive that out and you're asking for an eventual failure of the system to thrive, a reduction of it to a pool of predators and random idiot fish that might happen by. And who really wants that? I know who doesn't, occasional scowl notwithstanding. TOL can withstand it. Always has...

I don't follow the issue that appears to drive Barbarian and Stripe, both of whom I've rep'd and liked else, crazy streaks notwithstanding in them, but I think the idea that they'll be around butting heads on it if they feel inclined to is a good thing, for whatever next wave of guppies swims through the front door.

And, really, if we can keep a willfully self-consuming pariah fish like Stuu away from a permaban finding room for one another in civil (in hopefully repartee rich) difference can't be that problematic, can it? :noid:

 

[bybee]

I think diversity of opinion is the kelp of a forum ecosystem. Drive that out and you're asking for an eventual failure of the system to thrive, a reduction of it to a pool of predators and random idiot fish that might happen by. And who really wants that? I know who doesn't, occasional scowl notwithstanding. TOL can withstand it. Always has...

I don't follow the issue that appears to drive Barbarian and Stripe, both of whom I've rep'd and liked else, crazy streaks notwithstanding in them, but I think the idea that they'll be around butting heads on it if they feel inclined to is a good thing, for whatever next wave of guppies swims through the front door.

And, really, if we can keep a willfully self-consuming pariah fish like Stuu away from a permaban finding room for one another in civil (in hopefully repartee rich) difference can't be that problematic.

I am fond of both of them.

 

[chrysostom]

While I am not a "Fundie" and think of myself as a
Party of One" still my faith and practice are based on some very foundational principles.
Yet, I was banned once for six months for using a naughty word twice! I did not whine or complain, just waited it out and did not make the same mistake again.
..."and here I am back in the middle again...."

some of them were not even english

 

[alwight]

While I am not a "Fundie" and think of myself as a
Party of One" still my faith and practice are based on some very foundational principles.
Yet, I was banned once for six months for using a naughty word twice! I did not whine or complain, just waited it out and did not make the same mistake again.
..."and here I am back in the middle again...."

I think you are a very nice lady bybee and I'm not just saying that ...no really.

 

[bybee]

some of them were not even english

I did reference a female dog a couple of times....:banned:

 

[Stripe]

Sorry to see you got banned for this. Wow.

:mock: Whiners.

 

[Stripe]

Kelp.

Admit it. You made that word up.

 

[Town Heretic]

Admit it. You made that word up.

Did not. It's a Beatles tune. lain:

:noid: Damn you, hooked on Fonics. :mmph:

 

[alwight]

I think diversity of opinion is the kelp of a forum ecosystem.

Yes, seaweed is of course one of the pillars of modern day civil discourse. lain:

 

[Town Heretic]

Yes, seaweed is of course one of the pillars of modern day civil discourse. lain:

In precisely the same sense and to the exact same degree civility and tolerance forms the bedrock of an actual underwater ecosystem, yes. lain:

 

[Traditio]

People are challenged in different ways. My faith was rocked as well and in a rather unorthodox way.

People are stupid. :idunno:

I mean, that's just a fact. 1. People are stupid and 2. people have an overinflated sense of pride and self-worth. So, with respect to 1, people believe in (often stupid) things (and this, often for stupid reasons) and stop believing in things (which may or may not be stupid) for stupid reasons.

Mormonism and scientology exist. Need I say more?

And what compounds the danger of popular stupidity is the fact that people are generally very poor at recognizing their own stupidity. In fact, they generally trust in their own (non-existent) wisdom.

Obviously, the people thought, the problem lied with Socrates, not with them, right? [To my mind, the death of Socrates is an irrefutable indictment both of "the people" and of democratic political systems.]

Sure, sure. Catholicism has been around for roughly 2000 years. Philosophers, i.e., truly wise and learned men, practically flocked to Catholicism (consider the testimony of St. Augustine) even in its early years. It has practically watered the sciences and education for those roughly 2000 years. It has been the home of exceedingly intelligent and learned men who devoted much of their energies to understanding, explaining and defending it.

But the problem lies with Catholicism (or, more generally, Christianity), not with the stupidity of the individual, right? The problem clearly is that Catholicism is in error, not that I am in error, am ignorant and simply don't understand (because I haven't studied hard enough). Right?

Once again: stupidity and hubris.

What more evidence need we of the Fall?

 

[Town Heretic]

Because some posts cry out for serious, sustained intellectual analysis...I thought I'd rather take this one.

People are stupid. :idunno:

That's a stupid thing to say...:think:...but a neat trap.

I mean, that's just a fact.

Isn't. In fact, it's contra-factual, which likely means the impression is funded illegally.

Mormonism and scientology exist. Need I say more?

No and I think I speak for everyone when I say that.

And what compounds the danger of popular stupidity is the fact that people are generally very poor at recognizing their own stupidity.

But do a bang-up job with the next fellow, or fellows.

Obviously, the people thought, the problem lied with Socrates, not with them, right? [To my mind, the death of Socrates is an irrefutable indictment both of "the people" and of democratic political systems.]

Or it's an indictment of the notion that you can say anything to the powers that be and get away with it just because you can plainly see that they're all wearing dresses. Don't be fooled. The English didn't learn that lesson and the Scots had to underscore it for them.

And that's why I support slacks for women. lain:

Sure, sure. Catholicism has been around for roughly 2000 years. Philosophers, i.e., truly wise and learned men, practically flocked to Catholicism (consider the testimony of St. Augustine) even in its early years.

How's that working out lately?

It has practically watered the sciences and education for those roughly 2000 years.

I don't think that was water though. :nono:

It has been the home of exceedingly intelligent and learned men who devoted much of their energies to understanding, explaining and defending it.

Few men more intellectually able than Thomas Jefferson. He owned people. But your point was good too. :thumb:

But the problem lies with Catholicism (or, more generally, Christianity), not with the stupidity of the individual, right? The problem clearly is that Catholicism teaches x, and not that I don't understand x, right?

Wait...if most people are stupid and most Christians are Catholic...couldn't most of them have gotten it wrong and kept the others in line? Isn't that how it tends to work in groups?

Once again: stupidity and hubris.

Yes, yes. Those are most definitely words. No point in denying it.

What more evidence need we of the Fall?

Autumn? A nice trip? This one is stumping me. Did you mean to capitalize it?

 

[rexlunae]

stupid...stupid... stupid...stupid...stupid...stupid...stupidity...stupidity...stupidity...stupidity

Did you realize that you used the same blanket ad-hom attack more than an average of once a paragraph over the entirety of your post? But you're the smart one. You're the one who really sees the truth.

 

[rexlunae]

Sure, sure. Catholicism has been around for roughly 2000 years. Philosophers, i.e., truly wise and learned men, practically flocked to Catholicism (consider the testimony of St. Augustine) even in its early years. It has practically watered the sciences and education for those roughly 2000 years. It has been the home of exceedingly intelligent and learned men who devoted much of their energies to understanding, explaining and defending it.

If that's your argument, Judaism has you beat on age, and potentially on philosophers per capita. It's certainly more rigorously skeptical.

 

[meshak]

basically, i'm saying Jesus did not strike a man -

you are right.

 

[meshak]

And I'm noting that he overturned tables and had a whip in his hand,

He used it to overturned the table, not to whip people.

 

[Town Heretic]

He used it to overturned the table, not to whip people.

Keep trying your best, but that's violence. So is judgement day.

And that's why you keep leaving off my kids being attacked with you standing by a gun bit. You know you'd shoot him. And you know if you stood there and watched them come to a harm you could have prevented you wouldn't be doing God any favors.

 

[Eeset]

who derailed this thread? :kookoo:

 

[meshak]

Keep trying your best, but that's violence. So is judgement day.

So you endorse violent faith using that verse?

You obviously ignoring the fact Jesus is called as the gentle Lamb.

We need to read the Bible in God's perspectives. Don't twist to read to suit your desire or agenda.

We certainly can make our own doctrines using the Scripture.

We are supposed to use the Scripture to practice to be godly and loving Jesus' way.

 

[Quetzal]

So you endorse violent faith using that verse?

You obviously ignoring the fact Jesus is called as the gentle Lamb.

We need to read the Bible in God's perspectives. Don't twist to read to suit your desire or agenda.

We certainly can make our own doctrines using the Scripture.

We are supposed to use the Scripture to practice to be godly and loving Jesus' way.

Everyone has an agenda or bias, even you.