Admin account

[Rymmen]

we'll see. but as things are now, cm has a lot to answer for. i'm done posting.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I recommended Forkbender to Dr.Leospace, because I know Forkbender to be a very nice person. I still believe he is. I also had this strong conviction that restin is a kindhearted person. Restin knows this. But both of them have acted irresponsibly or neglectfully when it comes to mediating the conflicts involving GOD.

Dr.Leospace doesn't necessarily agree with me, or anyone else here, because he doesn't have the time to read or participate in the discussions that have taken place. He did know about GOD though, first through complaints by the admins before me, and then every now and then from me. But because he himself never really investigated it thoroughly, he never decided to ban him. The banning of GOD probably doesn't make much sense unless you participate on this forum frequently, read a lot about spirituality and are sensitive.

 

[Guest]

we'll see. but as things are now, cm has a lot to answer for. i'm done posting.

I highly second that.

 

[st.bot.32]

we'll see. but as things are now, cm has a lot to answer for. i'm done posting.

I highly second that.

Same--on both those counts.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I saw a threat about making someone pay for the consequences of its irresponsible behavior, IF those consequences occured. I see nothing wrong in that.

I do. Because who is going to determine whether a particular type of behavior was really irresponsible and the cause of, for example, a suicide? Certainly GOD is not qualified to make judgments about that.

GOD may bring some heat to the forum and have a problem with his attitude, but he doesn't deserve to be banned. Isn't it always the same people who are getting in trouble with him?

"Heat to the forum", as in flames?
And no, it's not always the same people. More are added to the list every few months.

I think those people should take some time to THINK, because it is often clear to me that that's what GOD wants to acheive in a lot of his "rude" posts.

If GOD has an agenda like that, don't you think he should get his own website where he can make people think, rather than bringing heat to this forum, which isn't his?

Moreover, why doesn't GOD just want to make people THINK, but also THINK LIKE HIM? You see, you can say about my interests whatever you like, but I've only SHARED my thoughts on astrological correlations, never PUSHED them unto others. I know numerous members here don't believe astrology is based on anything, but I'm not calling them mentally confused or anything like that. I have always respected the opinions of others. And as far as I've seen, ALL MEMBERS HERE do that quite well, except for Oleg.

I see a lot of people getting pissed off at him because he is rubbing them in the face something for which they gave lots of efforts not to think about.

It's always "rubbing in the face". That's preaching if you ask me.

Since GOD came back, the trouble started in the thread about Ahuax who was thinking about suicide.

And in the moderator thread.

GOD may have initiated the "fight", but it's just because he said what any person with good sense would have thought = CM was saying dangerous bullshit, by telling him that because of his astrology sign it is normal that he is contemplating death and blah blah...

That's your opinion, or a belief. It doesn't prove either of you have good sense. Really, you're skipping some steps in your argument. You will have to explain exactly why what I said was dangerous. GOD never said much about astrology, other than that it's bullshit and what not. He never wanted to discuss it from a philosophical point of view. And that goes for many of the things he rubbed into people's faces: he didn't really try to figure out what they were talking about. Interactions with GOD were a one-way street, again and again. I would love to believe in this idea that GOD just wanted to make people think, and that he loves everyone, but I just can't.

Again, GOD was right, he just didn't express himself in a peaceful way. But I did have shivers when I read CM's post too and I think GOD was right.

GOD wasn't right, he had a certain opinion, and so did you. That's fine. Everyone is entitled to have his or her own opinion. Just don't start pushing it onto others.

If I had to choose between banning GOD or CM, it would be CM for sure.

Why? I understand you might want to ban me for the so-called hijacking, but otherwise, up to that point, for what did I deserve a ban?

Caduceus, you are not better than the anti-drug prohibitionnists.

Why? You guys are anti-astrology or anti-spirituality. What am I against?

GOD has his flaws, it is true, he may be a disturbance sometimes, but I've rarely seen him being the only actor in the disturbance

LOL! The answer to that one is just too easy.

And even more rarely I've seen someone prove him wrong.

His opponents are not that interested in proving others wrong, so I'm not surprised. Moreover GOD doesn't want to debate issues fairly. There are hundreds of examples of this to be found all over the board.

So who's the nuisance? Him, or the ones who take every chance to twist what he says to try to ridicule him or make him seem wrong (I've seen a lot of that)

Yes, it does happen, and I've also misinterpreted some of his statements, but I don't believe anyone twists his words on purpose. He does use words and sentences in a way to achieve just that: people reacting in a certain way.

Here is what I think happenned: CM read GOD's threat to "get him", and thought "here's my occasion to make this bitch pay" (we all know CM keeps a huge grudge against GOD).

Wait a second here, CM doesn't keep a huge grudge, that's just a myth created by GOD. It's factually a general annoyance that started immediately, and only intensified as time went on. Grudge means something significant happened, but what I feel about GOD's behavior is the result of reading hundreds of hurtful statements and bad jokes, as well as a tendency to play games with people, not a particular incident.

So again, he twisted what GOD said in a PHYSICAL threat so it becomes something really bad and justifies banning him.

No. I banned him, because all his posts since his return were aimed at causing trouble, and any impartial observer (who also has access to the moderator forum) will confirm this.

 

[mysticwarrior]

Interactions with GOD were a one-way street, again and again. I would love to believe in this idea that GOD just wanted to make people think, and that he loves everyone, but I just can't.

That's the point, you guys should invest some time in manipulation techniques, i mean a guy can do anything, as long he acts as if he loves us all.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

I'd way prefer to liberate Barrabas than Jesus...

A little bit of irony never hurt anyone. The fish's head really has been cut.

I am that I am, and I don't really know you all yet so I can't really love yall but I like most of yall if yall know what I mean...

ok ok I stop ... :roll:

 

[Guest]

That's the point, you guys should invest some time in manipulation techniques, i mean a guy can do anything, as long he acts as if he loves us all.

Fun fact :

When I read this, I think of a few people who are frequently on psychonaut.com, but none of them is GOD.

 

[Tunnelvision]

I would advice to fight these battles in pm's and emails in the future. 8)

 

[magickmumu]

That's the point, you guys should invest some time in manipulation techniques, i mean a guy can do anything, as long he acts as if he loves us all.

Fun fact :

When I read this, I think of a few people who are frequently on psychonaut.com, but none of them is GOD.

That could be anyone. :?
So who are you talking about. :?:

 

[Guest]

So, what's the situation ?

Did Fork got his account back ?

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Yes, three days ago.

 

[Psychoid]

OOPS double post

 

[Psychoid]

Thanks for explaining yourself CM. I understand you better now but still think that what you did was profoundly wrong. You should never have banned GOD without consulting anyone beforehand, this kind of decision must always be voted.

And please, I quit with the name-calling after my first impulsive post, I would appreciate it if you end it too now.

Something had to be done about GOD, but not that and not that way.

My last post here.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Thanks for explaining yourself CM. I understand you better now but still think that what you did was profoundly wrong.

Yes, I'm embarassed about some of it.

You should never have banned GOD without consulting anyone beforehand, this kind of decision must always be voted.

I think that's why there should be clearer forum rules. Let people can vote on the rules that the moderators are going to enforce, rather than on a particular person. Because voting doesn't really work on an open forum where some members log in daily and read most of the discussions, and others only log in once a week or once a month and hardly read anything.

And please, I quit with the name-calling after my first impulsive post, I would appreciate it if you end it too now.

I'll have to go through this thread to see what you're referring to here, because I'm not into name calling generally, unless I'm very, very angry, and I haven't been angry at all in these discussions. I was only angry for a couple of minutes when I found out Sam's thread was ruined.

Something had to be done about GOD, but not that and not that way.

In the past year (and before) I did try through other means. Lots of writing and lots of talking. Not necessarily to get anyone banned, but to reduce the name calling and harsh words. But at the end I was even ridiculed for my concerns, which eventually made me overstep the moderators in an impulsive way.

If these moderators had taken my concerns (which WERE shared by at least some others) more seriously, and dared to moderate GOD when he went too far, I wouldn't have gone so far as to ban him myself.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

Heh... his legalisation section was decaying while he was trying to teach me "The truth".

It was getting a little bit too personal here on many levels, I have been requesting action for the last few months, I have tolerated being called a nutcase cause in truth, I liked the guy and we even exchanged a few messages.

He was cool... until SOMETHING got him upset or something, I think the way he was banned did not make him look any lower or higher, it's just fine.

Besides he still can talk to the owner and fix him himself. We're all grownups here, you have agreed to the disclaimer as much as anyone on this site. It's universal responsibility of men to seek disclaimers as he enters a space, especially a public place. It's not the role of the dislcaimer to dance in your face, that would be enough to make one the nutcase.

If I ever get over that rational barrier we kind of still are getting a grasp of, while trying to maintain the freedom (not necessarly of speech but on many levels), we need swift action like this onw. And I expect to be banned if I ever cross the rules.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

I did read the disclaimer before, but did so again just now, and noticed that some of the things I would want to add to the 'forum rules' are already included in the 'disclaimer'. I wonder who wrote that disclaimer, I think it's really good.

You agree that you will not use this website nor its forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, excessively vulgar or obscene, hateful, harassing, threatening, invasive of a person’s privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

 

[Ahuaeynjxs]

Exactly, and I brought this up a few months ago, and everyone agreed, and they all stopped antagonizing me, for a while...

Which connects back to other things I have been saying.

If it's so easy to create a diversion where everyone forgets something everyone agreed on, how much power do you leave me.

We must all think for ourselves, while being in service... I'm not about to take "god"s place in anyway, its just too rich and meaningful to depends just on me.

 

[spice]

Guys, sorry, you can't have a democratic website.


Why would you want to?


So 51 people can enforce their will upon 49?????



Here's my opinion (I know no one asked but, there you go.....)

You don't ban individuals for saying things.

You lock threads when objectionable (against the 'disclaimer') and you ENFORCE the damn policy.....actively.....lock it again, if necessary.

It's like living in a place where the speed limit isn't enforced, everyone drives like an idiot.....

Everyone has a different 'line in the sand'


Being an asshole isn't a crime.

 

[spice]

But the disclaimer itself is an abstraction......requiring a degree of interpretation.

"You agree that you will not use this website nor its forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, excessively vulgar or obscene, hateful, harassing, threatening, invasive of a person’s privacy, or otherwise violative of any law."

Who determines defamatory?

what's excessively vulgar?

Obscene??? ('I know it when I see it'....see Supreme Court of U.S. famous obscenity ruling)

etc.etc...