I dont know why you insist on converting behavior to personal attacks. If behavior is unacceptable you get booted, thats it. Not booted if you are a non male, or non catholic, or non anything. The site is created to serve a community. When the time comes, that some elect to redifine what that community is, or should be, then the community ousts them. Your attempt to equate behavior to personal targeting is common to all movements. If youare an xxxxxx and you throw rocks through my window, and I have you arrested, then why do you complain that i am a xxxxxaphobe.
In regards to your second coment,,, You have twisted that also. Once again my position is constant. Use the site for what it was not intended for and you should get the boot. Had someone offered the examle of tree huggers instead of islamists I would have used the example of groups destroying forestry sites and equipments. And as such a group that woud engage in discussions about how to damage personal property to prevent the cutting of forestry, would be doing so outside the scope of the designed purpose of the SB site.
If you wish to take up the Christian community issue again Then you have no grounds untill the christian group wants their own forum on SB based solely on their religous association. I doubt that anyone would have problems with that so long as discussions remained diving based. However if such group had a forum that centered discussion on how to interfere with or destroy an athiest dive boat operators business, they should also get the boot.
The site has a right to protect themselves from attack both internal and external. It is routinely demonstrated when, board behavior is believed to be unacceptable, language, personal attacks, ect. If I were to start a non ending slandering rant on how you are a bla bla bla, I should expeect to be suspended or booted for the behavior and not aspects of the poster of the offence. If i started a thread on how to make crack at home, I should expect to be censored also. Not because of gender or any other factor but because the discussions are not in line with in the purpose of hte SB site.
I am not a new kid on the block. I have seen my share of "oh poor me manipulations" of just about everything that a cause can toss at society.
This thread has transitioned from a christian comment some where, to an objection by a non christian to christian comments, to SB being a christian preferential site. To SB showing favoritism to christians by teling non christians to leave the site if they dont like it. I strongly suspect that if someone were to tell SB that "unless they display a giant cross on the home page, they shall eternally burn, They would be ignored. If they however engaged in discussions on how to enact denial of service attacks on SB, action would be taken, an most likely beyond just banning from the site. And when that happened the stories will fly that SB banned a group proving they are homophobes, gender phobes, fatphobes, religiphobes, you name it anything other than the facts of the behavior. The assumed fact that the majority of SB users share some religous identy is not supportive of your claim that SB offers/denies forms based on religious affiliation.
This conversation reminds me of a story i got sent to me. very briefly it goes
Ther is a fire in a 4 story apt building. All die except the renters of the 4th floor. Some demographic leaders demanded from the fire chief why all perished except the 4th floor in attempts to show the cheif engaged in preferential decision making to save certain groups of renters and allowing others to die based on race, legality, criminal status. The cheif answered that the folks on the 4th floor was at work at the time of the fire and that is why they did not perish.
In regards to your second coment,,, You have twisted that also. Once again my position is constant. Use the site for what it was not intended for and you should get the boot. Had someone offered the examle of tree huggers instead of islamists I would have used the example of groups destroying forestry sites and equipments. And as such a group that woud engage in discussions about how to damage personal property to prevent the cutting of forestry, would be doing so outside the scope of the designed purpose of the SB site.
If you wish to take up the Christian community issue again Then you have no grounds untill the christian group wants their own forum on SB based solely on their religous association. I doubt that anyone would have problems with that so long as discussions remained diving based. However if such group had a forum that centered discussion on how to interfere with or destroy an athiest dive boat operators business, they should also get the boot.
The site has a right to protect themselves from attack both internal and external. It is routinely demonstrated when, board behavior is believed to be unacceptable, language, personal attacks, ect. If I were to start a non ending slandering rant on how you are a bla bla bla, I should expeect to be suspended or booted for the behavior and not aspects of the poster of the offence. If i started a thread on how to make crack at home, I should expect to be censored also. Not because of gender or any other factor but because the discussions are not in line with in the purpose of hte SB site.
I am not a new kid on the block. I have seen my share of "oh poor me manipulations" of just about everything that a cause can toss at society.
This thread has transitioned from a christian comment some where, to an objection by a non christian to christian comments, to SB being a christian preferential site. To SB showing favoritism to christians by teling non christians to leave the site if they dont like it. I strongly suspect that if someone were to tell SB that "unless they display a giant cross on the home page, they shall eternally burn, They would be ignored. If they however engaged in discussions on how to enact denial of service attacks on SB, action would be taken, an most likely beyond just banning from the site. And when that happened the stories will fly that SB banned a group proving they are homophobes, gender phobes, fatphobes, religiphobes, you name it anything other than the facts of the behavior. The assumed fact that the majority of SB users share some religous identy is not supportive of your claim that SB offers/denies forms based on religious affiliation.
This conversation reminds me of a story i got sent to me. very briefly it goes
Ther is a fire in a 4 story apt building. All die except the renters of the 4th floor. Some demographic leaders demanded from the fire chief why all perished except the 4th floor in attempts to show the cheif engaged in preferential decision making to save certain groups of renters and allowing others to die based on race, legality, criminal status. The cheif answered that the folks on the 4th floor was at work at the time of the fire and that is why they did not perish.
Last edited:
