Deleting A Poster Akin To DF'ing?

by Englishman 98 Replies latest jw friends

  • joeshmoe

    Is it really comparable? I believe in many respects, it is.

    Your story of the guys in the bar (which gave me a chuckle, by the way) is about a group of outsiders they didnt know anyone there and the worst harm that was done was they had to find another pub. But what if such action had to be taken (justifiably or otherwise) against a pub regular?

    As far as Im concerned, posters like MrMoe are (were) family around here, and cutting them off from the board has a very similar effect as Dfing does, whether the action is reasoned to have been justifiable or not.

    That having been said, Simon is very fair and most of those deactivated can simply speak with him to get themselves reactivated if they really want to.

    So....I guess my concern is that this EXTREME action not be taken too lightly, especially when its taken towards one of the regulars. Im afraid that in the heat of the moment in the last few days, there were extremes taken on both sides. You may think otherwise, but its good to keep in mind and I thank Englishman for starting the thread.


  • gsx1138

    I also recieved an email from her on the matter. I haven't really been following the moderator banning drama. Mainly because I don't care but that's just me. Although, I don't think I've ever been on a message board that didn't have a moderator that didn't have to ban someone. Of course with all the recent bannings I'm wondering if it is people testing the boundaries or mods flexing their egos. My posts won't change so if I get banned, oh well. In fact I don't even know what the rules of this board are but I'm guessing people would have some sense of judgement on their own. If not, that is what the mods are for.

    As for Moe, I totally get where she's coming from and liken it to the feeling I get when I'm approached by someone on the street asking if I've accepted Jesus in my life. Since anger and vomiting are not feelings I enjoy I wouldn't expect Moe to like them either thus she did what she thought was right for her.

  • Englishman
    Of course with all the recent bannings I'm wondering if it is people testing the boundaries or mods flexing their egos

    No, only Simon can suspend / ban a poster.

    Just a little background: Some time ago Simon asked for volunteers to assist in running the forum, eventually he settled on 5 from various countries. 3 have not made themselves known.

    Assistants are not expected to spend more time on the board than they would normally, or even to read threads that would not normally interest them.

    They have some choices, if a post is attacking or obscene, they can email the poster and request that changes be made. Some posters are great about it, some are absolutely horrible.

    Sometimes they will communicate with each other for an opinion.

    They can edit a post, this does however reveal who is doing the editing. The F word will always be edited out.

    They can delete a single post or a whole thread. Deleting a single post does tend to cause others to be orphaned and meaningless though, so it's rarely done.

    They can lock a thread and let it fade away naturally.


  • Hyghlandyr

    Some Defintions:

    Main Entry: dis-
    Function: prefix
    Etymology: Middle English dis-, des-, from Old French & Latin; Old French des-, dis-, from Latin dis-, literally, apart; akin to Old English te- apart, Latin duo two -- more at TWO
    1 a : do the opposite of <disestablish> b : deprive of (a specified quality, rank, or object) <disfranchise> c : exclude or expel from <disbar>
    2 : opposite or absence of <disunion> <disaffection>
    3 : not <disagreeable>
    4 : completely <disannul>
    5 [by folk etymology] : DYS- <disfunction>

    Main Entry: 1 fellowship
    Pronunciation: 'fe-l&-"ship, -lO-
    Function: noun
    Date: before 12th century
    2 a : community of interest, activity, feeling, or experience b : the state of being a fellow or associate
    3 : a company of equals or friends : ASSOCIATION
    4 : the quality or state of being comradely
    6 a : the position of a fellow (as of a university) b : the stipend of a fellow c : a foundation for the providing of such a stipend

    So to dis-fellowship (which isnt even a word btw) is to do the opposite of fellowship. To not be in a state of companionship or activity, feeling, interest, experience. To not be equals or friends. And yes in that case simon is disfellowshipping folks. So did the pub owner.

    But do Jehovah's Witnesses dis-fellowship people? Certainly. However, they do not stop at dis-fellowshipping. They then take it a few steps further.

    Main Entry: shun
    Pronunciation: 'sh&n
    Function: transitive verb
    Inflected Form(s): shunned; shunning
    Etymology: Middle English shunnen, from Old English scunian
    Date: before 12th century
    : to avoid deliberately and especially habitually
    synonym see ESCAPE
    - shunner noun


    Main Entry: humiliate
    Pronunciation: hy-'mi-lE-"At, y-
    Function: transitive verb
    Inflected Form(s): -ated; -ating
    Etymology: Late Latin humiliatus, past participle of humiliare, from Latin humilis low -- more at HUMBLE
    Date: circa 1534
    : to reduce to a lower position in one's own eyes or others' eyes : MORTIFY
    - humiliation / -"mi-lE-'A-sh&n / noun


    Main Entry: mortify
    Pronunciation: 'mor-t&-"fI
    Function: verb
    Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fying
    Etymology: Middle English mortifien, from Middle French mortifier, from Late Latin mortificare, from Latin mort-, mors
    Date: 14th century
    transitive senses
    1 obsolete : to destroy the strength, vitality, or functioning of
    2 : to subdue or deaden (as the body or bodily appetites) especially by abstinence or self-inflicted pain or discomfort
    3 : to subject to severe and vexing embarrassment : SHAME
    intransitive senses
    1 : to practice mortification
    2 : to become necrotic or gangrenous

    I am thinking mostly of 3...and that is what JWs do. While shunning and avoiding people, they also mortify them. They talk about them in front of the person. One woman I know who is "DFed" has had her mother tell her husband right in front of her "Tell Anne bla bla bla" (name changed). WHATEVER! Others I know have stood in line in stores and listened to witnesses talk about them right in their presence. Simply to humiliate them.

    Cancelling an account is slightly different. This isnt to say in all cases it is justified. I am not paying attention to who all is deleted.

  • ThiChi

    Lets see: You loose your privilege to communicate to the community. You loose the ability to defend yourself when the lap dogs come out to talk about you and tell Simon how he did the right thing. You loose the fellowship of the board by being banned. For good or bad, "its Simons board" so the "Men in authority" do not need anything more, "go someplace else if you don't like it."

    Nope, it does not sound like DFing at all!

    BRING FRED BACK........

    Edited by - thichi on 22 August 2002 11:5:13

    Edited by - thichi on 22 August 2002 11:20:12

  • Hyghlandyr

    Oh, and we practice shunning on yahoo chat. We call it GROUP IGNORE.

    Sometimes we do it because someone comes in with boot codes trying to knock us out.

    Sometimes we do it because someone is just scrolling and we cant see each other.

    Sometimes we do it because someone comes in and says " DONT KNOCK AT MY DOOR MFERS..." gee dude never heard that one before..

    Sometimes we do it to have fun and humiliate a new arrival.

    Sometimes we do it to each other because we are just that way.

  • radar


    The Watchtower could use your analogy of the PUB as a perfect reason why they have the right to dissfellowship people.

    In fact it is so good that it might appear in the next issue of the Watchtower LOL.

    JW.COM is not a pub, although you may see it that way. Supposedly its an open forum in cyber space for JWs who want the freedom of speech.

    Profanities have been used here and applauded many times by those who would now brazenly fly the flag of censorship.

    I keep hearing this expression Simons Board and I feel this is where this forum is going astray. If it is Simons board then maybe it should be entitled Simons Board.


  • ThiChi

    Erasmus (1520 AD): "If we want truth, every person ought to be free to speak what they think without fear."

  • Englishman


    Hylandyr made it really clear about the difference between pub - banning and DF'ing. In the pub world that's what you get banned from if you don't comply with the rules. The pub and the pub alone.

    In the dub world you get banned from everything, including your family.

    Just because we have moved away from a rigid society doesn't mean that we can act with impugnity, especially when it affects others adversely.

    It could be argued that those who insist on a carte-blanche type of forum are forcing obscenities on others, could it not?

    Would you take your kids into a low dive pub and happily allow them to listen to obscenity? No you would probably stay away. Just like recovering dubs will stay way from here all the time that inconsiderate and attacking posts are left up to view.


  • ThiChi

    E-man: then apply the rules fairly. Should the rules only apply if you have been a victim of molestation? Should non/ex -Dubs get away with posting a pic of YK as having his head up his ass with impunity? Where are your Pub rules now?

    Everyone wants a civil board. However, if rules exists, then apply them fairly. Sir, you have failed your own test, IMHO. Can you at least admit that?

    PS: Simon's reinstating (for lack of a better word) BBoy was a good first step. How about fred?

    Edited by - thichi on 22 August 2002 11:30:18

Share this