Christian inspiration

[jcribb16]

Quote from: jcribb16 on Today at 01:54:56 pm
Now see, that's where there's a little problem here.  You seem to think you and the moderator are the co-monitors in here ...

Quote from: falcon9:
No, the "little problem here" is that you apparently do not read posted replies.  It was stated that both the FC moderator and I, (a regular FC member like you, not a mod), have recommended the use of the 'ignore button'.  No claims to being an FC moderator were stated nor, implied.  Your own slanted misinterpretations do not constitute accurate statements of fact, (especially when the post itself remains visible and archived).

You are the one who keeps combining yourself with the moderator like you and he are the co-moderators of this forum.  That's exactly what is coming across through your words.  You act as if you will not get into any trouble for your actions, yet everyone else will when they stand up to you.  Stop using the "moderator" as your shield and stand on your own 2 feet.  As for "archived" posts, you aren't the only one who archives posts - you are just the one who continually likes to remind people of it.  Keep up the good work there, as will others.

[jcribb16]

Quote from: jcribb16 on Today at 01:54:56 pm
I remember a post from the moderator towards BOTH of US recently.  That surely means BOTH and anyone else who test the rules, not just everyone else BUT you.

Quote from: falcon9:
Being evenhanded, the moderator warned all parties involved so as not to be partisan in his arbitration of the dispute.  I deemed that fair and wise of the moderator, (especially since you were the one in specific violation and not I)

Careful, there.  You don't want to be accused of calling the moderator a liar - he said BOTH not just me.  Yes, you would deem it fair and wise of the moderator thinking he wasn't scolding you as well.  His words were aimed at both.  You were in just as much specific violation as you accuse me of being.  The report button is there for a reason.  However, it apparently can't be used against you, in your eyes.  He said both sides were abusing that report button.

[Falconer02]

I've said it before and I'll say it again,the worst punishment falcon could have is if all his detractors put him on ignore.He's a diva that craves attention.Take that away from him and after two or three days of he and his cohorts patting each other on the back,he'd leave from sheer boredom

"Remind the people..to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people."

Titus 3: 1-2

Damn, dude! You outright suck at this Christian thing. Oh, but I probably took this verse out of context, didn't I? Convenient! lol

Anyways, I guess the original argument kinda got derailed. Ah well. If it returns, I'll jump back in.

[JediJohnnie]

Maybe falcon is a frustrated English professor in real life.lol It's funny how people like waterbearer are exempt from ridicule when it comes to typos and misspelled words (and lets face it,he's one of the biggest offenders.) Might there be a double standard there,somewhere?

In any case,mocking people over typos is the hight of childishness,not that I'd expect less from falcon and his ilk.

[falcon9]

Wow!  You raise an eyebrow at his "tainted" typo, yet some of your words are misspelled or have typos. You raise an eyebrow at his so I guess it's alright to raise eyebrows at yours.  Just sayin'...

Oh, I wasn't raising an eyebrow at the misspelling itself; that arched brow was for the subtle "tainted" part in that context.  As you pointed out, I often make typos, (sometimes even as unintentionally-humorous as JJ's).  Although mine are generally due to fast typing speed and mild dyslexia, (the later often accompanies those with very high I.Q.s), though you can raise all three of your eyebrows at mine if wished.
 

You are really hung up on the "calling out" issue.  He said nothing about calling you out - he said to "call his bluff."  That is not "calling out," especially as in making a new thread to call you out.

There was no bluff and the "calling out" occurred within this existing thread, not a new thread, (nothing precludes a calling-out from originating from a single or more post within any thread - that's your assumption based upon the moderator stating that such intentionally-titled threads were not going to be permitted).

He's speaking of calling your bluff with wanting people to actually "ignore" you so you wouldn't have opportunity to ...

As I stated, it wasn't a bluff.  The reason it was stated was/is because JJ has repeatedly demonstrated a distinct inability to actually ignore me after claiming to use the ignore button.  Since you speculated about why I would recommend using the ignore function, (an incorrect conclusion, btw), I'll give that a whirl too.  It could be that JJ has used the ignore button but, has had it sloooowly dawn on him that when others quote my posts in reply, (and he doesn't have those others on ignore), he still sees some of those "ignored" posts.  Further, he doesn't even need the sight of those "ignored" posts to keep engaging in non-ignoring 'gossip' which specifically names me, (the pseudo-ignored member).  By naming me specifically, he's both trolling me and calling-out by 'nym.

Also stop threatening the moderator on someone just because he or she challenges your comments.  It doesn't do anything for you.

Where have I threatened someone with the moderator?  The mod is not some sort of partisan forum weapon as you seem to imply there.  The only previous times I've reported something, (not "threatening" to do so), were when a few of you xtians submitted false reports of what never happened in a previous thread/forum.  The moderator's warning went out to all involved, not because I was engaging in the same reporting behaviour as you few but, so as to not take sides.  I agree with his nonpartisan not taking sides while at the same time realizing that you few tians were desparately hoping he would in siding with your false reports.  Essentially, the mod stated that he was being 'flooded' with reports to the moderator, (I sent one or two - not exactly a "flood" while you xtians sent who knows how many false reports in order to constitute a flood).

[falcon9]

In any case,mocking people over typos is the hight of childishness,not that I'd expect less from falcon and his ilk.

Now there's an "ilk"?  Soon there'll be a 'swarm', or maybe a 'plethora', (no wait, JJ would have to look that last one up - disregard). I've got mild dyslexia; what's the reason for your errors; are you an idiot-savant, sans the savant part?

[falcon9]

I remember a post from the moderator towards BOTH of US recently.  

Quote from: falcon9:
Being evenhanded, the moderator warned all parties involved so as not to be partisan in his arbitration of the dispute.  I deemed that fair and wise of the moderator, (especially since you were the one in specific violation and not I)

Careful, there.  You don't want to be accused of calling the moderator a liar - he said BOTH not just me.  

Nothing of what I posted accused the mod of lying.  See, it just that sort of twisted twisting of the meanings of the words which were posted which was meant by your submitting false reports to the mod, (even though he's perfectly capable of reading the actual words posted here as we are).  In this instance, those actual words were "the moderator warned all parties involved", (and the violation referred to was not for submitting reports to the moderator since that is not a specified violation - being instead something the mod told all involved to stop doing excessively - the violation was for another xtian involved specifically trolling by name).

[jcribb16]

You really do think awfully high of yourself - sorry, it doesn't impress others when you admit to nothing towards anyone.  That is really sad.  The scolding was indeed applied to all involved, including you, and including me, and including whoever else.  He said both sides. You were on the other side of things.  I, and many others, will continue to say something (dissenting view) as you like to call it, in response to your disrespect toward Bible verses by posters (dissenting view) as you call it.  You want to discuss the verses, posters will be more than happy to, with respect both ways.  Your "bible-bashing" picture and your disparaging remarks are not "debating" and "discussing" anything - they are rude.  Period.

[falcon9]

The scolding was indeed applied to all involved, including you, and including me, and including whoever else.  

As you remarked in an earlier post, that had to do with submitting multiple reports to moderator.  Since I submitted 1-2 such reports in that regard, while you xtians submitted multiple reports, the "scolding" referred to all involved in that manner.

[jcribb16]

The scolding was indeed applied to all involved, including you, and including me, and including whoever else.  

As you remarked in an earlier post, that had to do with submitting multiple reports to moderator.  Since I submitted 1-2 such reports in that regard, while you xtians submitted multiple reports, the "scolding" referred to all involved in that manner.

And as I said, it included you, me, and the others - all that submitted reports.

[falcon9]

The scolding was indeed applied to all involved, including you, and including me, and including whoever else.  

As you remarked in an earlier post, that had to do with submitting multiple reports to moderator.  Since I submitted 1-2 such reports in that regard, while you xtians submitted multiple reports, the "scolding" referred to all involved in that manner.

And as I said, it included you, me, and the others - all that submitted reports.

Yes, and as mentioned above, those constituted multiple reports, which was what precipatated the moderator to tell all parties to knock it off.  Since my 1-2 reports aren't a multitude, one can reasonably deduce that the mutitude occurred upon the onslaught of reports submitted by more than one xtian whining about stuff that didn't violate FC's Terms of Service when at least one of those xtians did violate the TOS.  See the difference?  I didn't think so.

[Abrupt]

Let us see here.  You admit to the offense of misquoting and contextualizing.

No, I specified that such a response was in response to those same tactics of yours.

And I called your accusations a lie and you a liar for making them.  You have repeatedly failed to show any proof after I have called you out on this probably a dozen times.  You even gave me a challenge to show proof and indicated you would respond with yours, and yet when I immediately did you were unable to once again show any.  I repeat so that you understand just what I am saying -- you are a LIAR in this matter and thus in likely much more and to steal some words from one of my favorite quotes I add "And is because, boy, your words are feeble, and twisted as an old woman's!"

You have no proof to back up your lies about me where you claim I did the same thing first.

Since your previous reply indicated a strong likelihood of your disregarding such evidence, I reconsidered going through the trouble of locating it.  Though, since such evidence is archived, I suppose I could get around to it later.

My reply indicates that there is no evidence of this imagined offense you indicate, and for as much as we have had to hear you cry about this across many pages you have yet to demonstrate it. 

My has your skill of debate fallen to pathetic levels of late.  

Coincidentally, I had been prepared to inquiry as to whether or not you'd recently experienced severe head trauma of late ... perhaps from a car accident, or self-inflicted by a heavy biblical tome?

Yes, I do see the coincidence in that such a question from you would indicate the degree of sadness of your skill.  Thank you for honestly admitting your weakness for a change instead of just showing it and denying it.

What threat are you imagining here?

It only takes scrolling down thread, not any imagination, to see the remarks you posted concerning "actionable" legal threat and your attempts to bring the moderator in on a debate in your behalf.

How is that a threat?  My you must be awfully thin skinned.  That was an indication that the likelihood of such things not being allowed here was in high probability since the offense you have committed is considered one that is actionable.  If you had been familiar with many forums that offer a quote key you would be aware of this and the reasons they give for having the rules they place on modifying quoted posts. 

You are aware that if you tell someone that if they "don't get out of your house" or some similar situation that you will "call the police" that such does not constitute a threat?

That's a false parallel since the FC forums are neither your, nor my private residences/domains.  These forums 'belong' to FC and as guests here, it would be inappropiate for you to 'threaten' to bring in the "police", (FC moderator), because this isn't your "house", (or mine).  I'm surprised such a simple concept escapes you and that this 'dumbing-down' was apparently required, (though doubtless it wasn't down far enough if you continue failing to grasp the concept).

Don't be such a simple child, the parallel wasn't to the offense but to the warning and it is absolutely an apt comparison to that.  I suppose it is going to be necessary for me to dumb things down so that you can comprehend what I am saying since you are having continuous difficulty following me even though I am speaking to you as I would a child.  You seem to have this habit of trying to consistently speak as if you somehow represent FC or the moderators, but you do not and we all very well know it so you can quit this "they got my back" routine already.

[Abrupt]

I've said it before and I'll say it again,the worst punishment falcon could have is if all his detractors put him on ignore.He's a diva that craves attention.Take that away from him and after two or three days of he and his cohorts patting each other on the back,he'd leave from sheer boredom.


If you go into the D&D area you can expect to get your nose bent.I can except that.The problem then,is his following people around from thread to thread to ,

A. try to get the all importaint "last word".

or

B. Harass some profession of religious beliefs.

The Admin has made it clear as crystal that this behavior will continue to be tolarated.Arguing with him to leave "off topic" subjects like Daily Bible Verse or Prayer requests alone,simply will cause the mods to move the thread to the D&D.

He acts like he's daring people to ignore him,like he doesn't care.Call his bluff.Ignore him.It's his Kryptonite.

While you are probably right in this matter, it is for the people that might be new and continue to see his disrespect and insults towards Christians that I will not do this and instead hold him to the challenge.  I have always taken a great pleasure in dealing with bullies such as him.  I will think about this more, though, and whether it might ultimately be better to simply ignore him as the lying child that he is.

[Abrupt]

Maybe falcon is a frustrated English professor in real life.lol It's funny how people like waterbearer are exempt from ridicule when it comes to typos and misspelled words (and lets face it,he's one of the biggest offenders.) Might there be a double standard there,somewhere?

In any case,mocking people over typos is the hight of childishness,not that I'd expect less from falcon and his ilk.

He often makes repeated typo's in his posts to me and I only once replied about it as he was accusing one of my correctly spelled words as being spelled wrong and he actually wrote that I "mispelled" it, and yes he really misspelled 'misspelled'.  I couldn't resist that one and had to point it out.  Now he wants to fall back on claiming dyslexia or some other excuse he will likely fabricate later on.

I do notice that that he is very tolerable of what those that tend to give him but pat posts, and it reminds me of a group of blue haired old women that flock together to casts insults about other women's hair.

[falcon9]

And I called your accusations a lie and you a liar for making them.  I repeat so that you understand just what I am saying -- you are a LIAR in this matter ...

As I've stated before, I'm not a clinical or diagnostic psychiatrist and am therefore unable to determine whether or not your penchant for lying is pathological or, compulsive.  For that, you'd need a trained professional.
hth