Getting the forum back on track

by Simon 147 Replies latest forum announcements

  • Trevanian
    Trevanian

    Some of what Simon says is good, like not getting too emotionally involved with anonymous people. But Is it only me, or does Simon's post say nothing of substance concerning a change in the administrative policy going forward?

    ... we have decided that we need to bring the forum back on track and as such we will be clamping down on a lot of the aggressive / insulting posts which have begun to become the norm for a few people.

    But not all of? If not, then who will be clamped down on and who won't? I don't mind a tiered policy - some respected posters are aggressive and insulting sometimes, and often they have earned the right to be.

    But here "a lot of" is an empty policy.

    On the other hand, many of the supposed falsehoods are trivial, unimportant or could be misunderstandings and I fail to see why people get soo emotional about them. Has someone told a lie on the internet and you found them out? Wowee ...

    The internet IS real life. Telling a lie on the internet is telling a lie. Telling a lie by email is telling a lie. Telling a lie by IM is telling a lie. Yes wowee.

    On another subject, we will no longer be allowing ANY solicitations for donations or funds from the forum without prior consent

    Without prior consent? So SOME solicitations will be allowed? I struggle to see the policy here!

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    Some struggle to make Problems where there are None.....The posting guidelines are "Quite Clear"......Guideline #12 Is "especially clear".....Most of us,like our Cyber home at JWD!!..If you don`t like it......Guideline #12 Will help You,solve your Problem.............................Laughing Mutley...OUTLAW

  • Ancient One
    Ancient One

    lol outlaw, I have to admit I've never even read it. It should have been first thing to do before making any post. I think all of us quickly forget this forum is not provided by Government's social institutions. Anyway here's the quote for all of us who never read it before.

    Annoying the forum owner
    If you have a query or a complaint then send a personal message or email. This is my site and I can say or do what I want and don't need lectures from anyone who doesn't like it. If you don't like this then don't use the site.

    AMEN!

  • coffee_black
    coffee_black

    It is often the attempts to get them to see just how stuck they are in this thinking that results in many of the Board wars that we have seen over the years. Unlike many, I do not recoil from the idea of combative threads that might force people to sit up and take stock of their thinking. Yes, often it can be painful, but suffering a little short-term discomfort for the sake of a longer term advantage is imo a price worth paying.

    HS

    I have to disagree here. In this thread alone there are some who have said that they hesitated to post for fear of how they would be treated. I think that speaks volumes.

    I manned the 800-why-1914 helpline intermittently for about 8 years. What do you think would have been the results..had I yelled at callers or swore at them or called them names over the phone? Do you think I would have awakened them? Or do you think I would have proved to them that the watchtower was right about people who leave the organization? I know it's frustrating to deal with the watchtower indoctrination that is so deeply ingrained in some... but you can't blast it out of them. It takes patience and time and reasoning to help them. They are already in enough pain. We don't need to give them more...from the very place they come to for help.

    No one ever convinced me of anything by calling me names or being abusive..... with one exception. I was married to a verbally abusive man for almost 20 years.... he convinced me that I didn't want to be married to him any more... and once I realized I could, I divorced him. He's still a jw and has virtually no relationship with either of our grown kids or his grandchildren. He's still convinced he's right though... but no one is listening to him any more.

    Coffee

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Coffee,

    I manned the 800-why-1914 helpline intermittently for about 8 years. What do you think would have been the results..had I yelled at callers or swore at them or called them names over the phone? Do you think I would have awakened them? Or do you think I would have proved to them that the watchtower was right about people who leave the organization?

    I think it would have been very rude of you to do this.

    Apples and oranges though are what you are trying to compare, and for obvious reasons. It has I am sure not escaped you that this is an entirely, and I stress, entirely different media than the much more intimate telephone call. These venues are so different in so many numerous ways Coffee, that I am surprised that you have even tried to parallel them.

    A person who has subscribed to this Board, as I have stated in the past more often than is neccessary, has by default already been reading the Board. They know what to expect when they start posting. This Board it should be noted is a 'discussion board' NOT a 'support Board' and half the problems we get here are that people cannot distinguish the two. Posters imbue dimensions to this Board that it is not capable of handling. It is not a substitute for professional therapy, it is just a discussion board - that is all. To expect more is unfair on the posters who post here and are no 'needy' or high maintenance.

    Those who call on the telephone are in a private conversation. Those who post on this Board know that their posts are going to be publicly read, internationally, by a huge mix of people with the potential of tens of millions of viewers.

    Those who telephoned you on your support line were their for one purpose - support. Those who post on this Board are here for many, many reasons. The number who need 'support' are outnumbered in the score by those who no longer need to be babied out of the WTS. This whole noble desire to offer a public discussion Board as a vehicle for 'support' is imo overplayed and logically flawed. Many have asked, 'Why are you here'? Those who are addicted to online chatting always say - to 'support' those who are coming out of the WTS. What guff! Those who are newly exited say, 'to get support'.

    There are numerous Boards out there which are far more 'supportive' than this. They have information by the ton, analyses by the gross, testimonies by the pound. An interesting thread would be to ask all the aching 'newbies' how they arrived here. I would be most surprised if this Board were their first stop.

    The only part of the analogy that comes close to comparison is this. If you perchance, heaven forbid :), might ever be rude to a person on the telephone, they can hang up on you. On this discussion Board certain threads are guaranteed to provoke passion, again I have noted this more often than neccessary, the political threads and those that deal with atheism etc. Think about this Coffee, a person neither has to pick up the telephone by entering those threads, or they can hang up in a split second if someone is rude to them. What is so difficult to understand about that? Why do people seldom discuss this when focusing on these issues. Something nasty turns up on your TV, switch to a different channel. Something nasty turns up on your board, click out of the thread. It is not rocket sceince, but it does require a level of maturity often missing in many posters.

    Sorry Coffee, you analogy between telephone and discussion board is badly flawed.

    HS

  • minimus
    minimus

    Just my thought: I view communicating on the board as I do writing a letter, speaking to a person, etc. I try to be civil and respectful in my dealings. If I disagree with someone's position----even if I am confident that they are dead wrong----berating them is not the best way of dealing with a person. If we typed berating words, said the same thing on the phone, via mail, or in person----it still can hurt the PERSON. This is not just about posters, it's about persons, real people.

    On a personal level I try not to succumb to being nasty just because someone is to me. Yesterday someone knocked me on a thread and I let it go. I admit that I won't be bullied by anyone and I don't believe it's better to let someone crap all over you, but I would rather try to be a better person, if it's possible. (Just don't tick me off).

  • Gregor
    Gregor

    Hope Simons ass isn't getting chapped from all the smooching.

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    Weird all this.

    I just don't remember, in the old days (H20, Witnesses.net, early JWD, etc), that a person who was "questioning their JW beliefs" was considered synonymous with "I'm a neurotic shell of a human being who must not be subjected to conflict and must be allowed to foist my internet exacerbated personality disorders upon all other ex-and-questioning-JW's, who, by the way, owe me unconditional love no matter what a prevaricating storyteller I am by virtue of us both having been in a KingdomHall once".

    The JW religion is no bigger a problem, in some people's lives, than the easy over-familiarity and anonymity of internet discussion boards. They'll use either as an excuse for bad behavior.

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Coffee,

    No one ever convinced me of anything by calling me names or being abusive..... with one exception. I was married to a verbally abusive man for almost 20 years.... he convinced me that I didn't want to be married to him any more... and once I realized I could, I divorced him. He's still a jw and has virtually no relationship with either of our grown kids or his grandchildren. He's still convinced he's right though... but no one is listening to him any more.

    I have been thinking about this paragraph the past hour or so. It is a passive agressive attempt imo to 'win' an argument that you began by PM.

    Judging from the private correspondence between us, unsolicited on my side I might add, I think you are suffering 'transference' issues. I think these issues are clouding your judgement. Lets just leave it at that.

    Six,

    I just don't remember, in the old days (H20, Witnesses.net, early JWD, etc), that a person who was " questioning their JW beliefs " was considered synonymous with " I'm a neurotic shell of a human being who must not be subjected to conflict and must be allowed to foist my internet exacerbated personality disorders upon all other ex-and-questioning-JW's, who, by the way, owe me unconditional love no matter what a prevaricating storyteller I am by virtue of us both having been in a KingdomHall once ".

    Ohhhhhh! Six is being 'unsupportive'.....or is he?

    Pout - HS

  • Gopher
    Gopher
    I'm a neurotic shell of a human being who must not be subjected to conflict and must be allowed to foist my internet exacerbated personality disorders upon all other ex-and-questioning-JW's, who, by the way, owe me unconditional love no matter what a prevaricating storyteller I am by virtue of us both having been in a KingdomHall once

    Sixy,I think Simon addressed that in his initial post when he said:

    If people post stories online and there are major inconsistencies then people have the right to challenge them and to know if they are for real. If the person chooses not to respond then that is a response in itself and people can draw their own conclusions from it.

    I don't think newbies are given an absolute free pass, if they're way off base they should be challenged.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit