Congratulations, Joe_Cool on being made a SDMB Mod

[Desmostylus]

Hey, Mangetout, I’ve made an AutoJoe:

FIB meaning what…Fucking ImBecile?

Nice job. Better sign off before the ward nurse finds out you didn’t swallow your meds again.

Nothing gained.

Yeah I see that.

DDG, from those who have been around lon enough to remember him well, of course, not the prince of evil is viewed and regarded his fellow posters, and are given so many chances when other hand, for your input.

So thanks for your input.

Of course, I’d prefer to have some discourse regarding the possibility th he has relaxed in the first place if they are willing to discuss it was within the rules. Unfortunately, I seem to have some discourse regarding the possibility th he has, in fact, made attempts to contact the st ff hoping to be enough of a favorable response, from those who have been around lon enough to remember him well, the thing is that he does want to come back.

I thought that I’d make a suggestion that might help to open a dialog regarding the way Satan the poster, not the prince of evil is viewed and regarded his fellow posters, and he said, I thought it fairly evident that it’s difficult with all the background noise.

DDG, who the hell do you think I started this thread i order to venture my opinion in favor of reconsidering the revocation of his fellow posters, and particularly some friendly conversation with the moderators several of om I’ve also met in hopes that may be enough of a favorable response, from those who have been around lon enough to remember him well, that the administration, so I started this thread i order to venture my opinion in favor of reconsidering the Mother Hen on this board. I think you need to come back.

Keep in mind that I had to gain permission from the other non-staff posters prior to starting thread. I even followed the rule regarding the thing is that he has, I understand that he has, in fact, made attempts to contact the st ff hoping to be simply done and over.

DDG, as this is a discussion of the user greement stating that I have been around lon enough to see the point.

So, and was told that it the moderators would discuss it a discussion of my concern, so, rather than having somebody clucking over how it’s none of my thread. The pit is the proper place for discuss ng staff decisions, and are willing to discuss it among themselves. He does want to come back.

I even followed the rule regarding placement of my business to post any kind:

But, since you’re being civil, who the hell do you think you need to spend some time of evil is viewed and respond in kind:

Nice job. Better sign off before the administration, so thanks for your input.

[The_Ace_of_Swords]

Joe_Cool, I think you should definitely heed the advice and wisdom of the hypocritical axe-grinders here…

That way you could upgrade to a respectable caliber of enemies instead of this weak blunderbuss of retards.

:rolleyes:

[Esprix]

Desmostylus, I didn’t understand your post. Were those all quotes of Joe’s?

Esprix

[Esprix]

*Originally posted by Joe_Cool *

Well, Exprix, you can read whatever you want into whatever you want, but that doesn’t make it so.

Oh? To quote you (yet again):

DDG, as this is a discussion of the administration’s decision, I thought it fairly evident that it is directed to the administration, so thanks for your input.

Did you think I was asking you to unban him?

And I take it, then, that you meant to be polite and well-mannered, giving a reasoned response to a perceived injustice? What I got out of that was that since the question was “directed to the administration,” no one else is welcomed to comment, and I found that rather ironic since you posted it on a public message board. I got the same overall tone from your comments in the witnessing thread - “If you’re not Christian, which this thread was intended for, then you’ve got no business posting here.” If you want only Christian views, go post over at the Pizza Parlor - I’m sure they’d love to hear it. But as it is, the thread is on the SDMB, open for all to comment. Again, did you mean this as a well-measured, reasonable response, or were you being snarky?

I didn’t realize snarkiness, in response to a comment from a junior moderator telling me I’m not allowed to post on whatever topic I choose, is typical junior moderator behavior.

And, as I said:

I wouldn’t go so far as to call him a “junior mod…”

But thanks for saying I called you one anyway. :rolleyes: In your own words:

I don’t care a whit if you like me or not, but don’t make crap up.

Looking forward to more stunning examples of your Christian love in the future.

Esprix

[Monty]

Thanks, Esprix. You’ve posted the two bits from those threads that really rankled me about ol’ Joe.

Well, three really. “[…] But don’t make crap up.” That’s the part that jumps right up there with his “But what’s one more lie.”

Actually, though, I’m really impressed he hasn’t cursed me here but instead limited himself to dissecting only one of his posts when I clearly indicated I was talking about the corpus of them.

[Homebrew]

*Originally posted by Esprix *
**Looking forward to more stunning examples of your Christian love in the future.
**

He’s not perfect; just forgiven.
But one would think that after 22 years as a Christian, a person would be a little more … um … what’s the term I’m looking for … oh, yeah, Christ-like.

[imthjckaz]

*Originally posted by jacksen9 *
**I smell a dead horse. **

And necrophiliacs all around.

[Desmostylus]

*Originally posted by Esprix *
**Desmostylus, I didn’t understand your post. Were those all quotes of Joe’s?

Esprix **

It’s the output of a text-generation program. It isn’t really supposed to make sense. I fed Joe’s text in, and that was what came out.

[Joe_Cool]

*Originally posted by Esprix *
…I take it, then, that you meant to be polite and well-mannered, giving a reasoned response to a perceived injustice? What I got out of that was that since the question was “directed to the administration,” no one else is welcomed to comment…

Unsurprisingly, you read it wrong. DDG, as I’m sure you saw, told me essentially to mind my own business because it was between Brian and the administration. Obviously, I was aware of this, because I posted a thread questioning the administration on this very topic. See? She told me it’s up to the administration, and I told her that I was writing TO the administration. Nowhere did I say that somebody wasn’t welcome to post - in fact, I said that comments from the public were welcome and solicited. But I wanted to discuss the issue that I raised, not the propriety of my raising it. At least not with a non-moderator.

I got the same overall tone from your comments in the witnessing thread - "If you’re not Christian, which this thread was intended for, then you’ve got no business posting here."

Let’s quote the actual post, shall we?

Originally posted by Joe_Cool
**You know, it’s amazing the way so many non-Christian people bash His4ever for going into threads by, for, and about homosexuals and saying “this is a sin,” but think nothing of going from thread to thread where Christians are discussing, for example, how Christians should treat each other, and add nothing but mockery, hostility, and sarcasm.

coughhypocritescough

Gosh, if I didn’t know that you guys were above all that, I might think you held to a double standard. But of course you are better than that.

You know, it weakens your moral highground when you do the very thing that you’re slamming somebody else for.

Of course, perhaps I’m mistaken. I was under the impression that this thread title began with “For Christians…”**

Wow, it appears slightly different when you’re actually looking at it, doesn’t it? Many times, the complaint against His4ever was that she popped into threads about homosexuals/ity, and offered her unsolicited opinion that it is sinful.

So. She posts a thread in MPSIMS, called, ironically, “For Christians…” and the inquisition comes in on the attack, forcing a thread that was intended only to share a writing with other Christians into a rabid debate, better suited for the Pit than for GD. I only said that it’s hypocritical to do to her the same thing that she was battered and savaged for doing.

Even gobear said

Without giving my opinion on the content of H4E’s OP, I have to agree that she should not be vilified for posting what she thought was a harmless little devotional that was aimed only at Christians. She was not intending to preach at heathens like me, but to reprove the faithful, something which she is just as entitled to do as Monty or Joe_Cool are.

So why is it different when I say the same thing? Neither of us said anybody wasn’t welcome. But I can see how my wording led to your impression. I’ll endeavor to be more clear in the future.

But thanks for saying I called you one anyway. :rolleyes:

My apologies.

**Looking forward to more stunning examples of your Christian love in the future.

Esprix **

You’re right…All good Christians should be gravely concerned about whether other people like them, and should rejoice when people tell lies (or propagate misunderstandings, as the case may be) about them. I was totally wrong to say that you shouldn’t make things up, and to say that I don’t care if you like me or not. <this is sarcasm>

Monty:
You started the thread. You made the accusations. Back them up. Don’t expect me to do your legwork for you. Since when it it my responsibility to search out my offense as well as defend myself against it? And you may think it’s unchristian, but I’d still prefer that you not make crap up.

[Joe_Cool]

*Originally posted by Joe_Cool *
Even gobear said … So why is it different when I say the same thing? Neither of us said anybody wasn’t welcome. But I can see how my wording led to your impression. I’ll endeavor to be more clear in the future.

I do, however, agree that gobear took a kinder tone than I did. Of course, he wasn’t under attack…but still.

[Esprix]

Originally posted by Joe_Cool

Unsurprisingly, you read it wrong.

Oh, I can accept your explanation of why you said what you said, but that’s not what’s at question - it still (to me, and apparently to others) came off as snarky. And you darn well meant it to, too. I don’t understand your indignation at now being perceived as such.

Wow, it appears slightly different when you’re actually looking at it, doesn’t it?

Um, no, not particularly, but, again, I get your point - you still came off as snarky. (Goodness, that word is getting a workout today!) And you meant to be as such. And so on, and so forth.

Obviously Monty and aren’t the only ones who read it that way, despite your intentions; thus is the nature of public message boards. I know I’ve been misinterpreted as well, and, like you, got called on the carpet for it as well. You learn to suck it up after a while.

But I can see how my wording led to your impression. I’ll endeavor to be more clear in the future.

Aye, there’s the rub, and thank you for at least considering it.

My apologies.

Thank you.

All good Christians should be gravely concerned about whether other people like them, and should rejoice when people tell lies (or propagate misunderstandings, as the case may be) about them. I was totally wrong to say that you shouldn’t make things up, and to say that I don’t care if you like me or not.

Well, gee, since that wasn’t what I was referring to by your “Christian love,” your sarcasm is misplaced. Rather, I was referring to your general hostility and - dare I say it? - snarkiness as referenced in this thread. If you’re going to claim your religion is your moral compass, don’t be surprised when others - once again, please - call you on the carpet when you seem to have lost your way. We’re here to help…

Esprix

[Monty]

Well, Joe; app[arently I’m not the only one who got that impression from you. After all, Espix clearly said he got the same impression as I did. Thus that doesn’t constitute me making stuff up.

I did back them up. I clearly indicated one thread in which I got that impression and mentioned that it started with a particular post and ran from the other posts in that thread. But, just maybe, you don’t know what “wend your way” means. It means, in this case, slog through all of your posts in that thread. I also mentioned that the other thread kept timing out on me. Esprix posted the part I was referring to and thus I didn’t have to go do anything other than what I did just above here.

I don’t have a hard on for you. I consider you to be a bad liar, a hypocrite, and a most uncivil fellow. That’s my opinion and I feel that I have based that opinion on the entirety of your postings on this board. At least one other poster has communicated to me that you really are a good person. I politely disagreed with that individual and made clear the reasons for my disagreement.

[Monty]

Dratted punctuation! “At least one other…” should be “One other poster, at least has…” meaning that “One other poster, surprising to me, has…”

[Joe_Cool]

*Originally posted by Monty *
Well, Joe; apparently I’m not the only one who got that impression from you. After all, Espix clearly said he got the same impression as I did. Thus that doesn’t constitute me making stuff up.

Except that you didn’t start this thread to complain about snarkiness. You said that I was trying to act like a moderator, for which there is no evidence. Esprix clearly said that “junior modding” is not the complaint he had. Do I deny the snarkiness? No way. Esprix is right: I did mean it. I’m not always happy about what I’ve posted after it’s done, but when I write it, I generally mean what I’ve said. And to be honest, I’m tired enough of the constant attacks and same old stuff being said, and fending off false accusations, that some amount of snark has most definitely worked its way into my repertoire.

I did back them up. I clearly indicated one thread in which I got that impression and mentioned that it started with a particular post and ran from the other posts in that thread. But, just maybe, you don’t know what “wend your way” means. It means, in this case, slog through all of your posts in that thread. I also mentioned that the other thread kept timing out on me. Esprix posted the part I was referring to and thus I didn’t have to go do anything other than what I did just above here.

Again, you didn’t pit me for snarkiness. It was for pretending to be a mod. The latter I haven’t done, and the former I admit.

**I don’t have a hard on for you. I consider you to be a bad liar, a hypocrite, and a most uncivil fellow. That’s my opinion and I feel that I have based that opinion on the entirety of your postings on this board. At least one other poster has communicated to me that you really are a good person. I politely disagreed with that individual and made clear the reasons for my disagreement. **

Liar? You mean regarding Mormonism? I apologized for my one misconception, which you graciously rejected, and I questioned you further with backup from Young and Smith, which you refused to answer. But it’s not a lie. You really need to get straight the difference between a lie and a mistake or misunderstanding.

But as for overall impressions, mine of you isn’t so kind either. But I’m making an effort not to rail on people like I’ve been wont to do in the past. So let’s just leave it at that, and I’ll try to be civil anyway.

[Monty]

Oh, you mean that “apology” where you insulted me? Pshaw! That got as much grace as you evidenced in extending it.

[Esprix]

Originally posted by Joe_Cool

Except that you didn’t start this thread to complain about snarkiness. You said that I was trying to act like a moderator, for which there is no evidence… Do I deny the snarkiness? No way. Esprix is right: I did mean it.

If he changes his mind, would that be ok? (Meant in jest - really!)

… I’m tired enough of the constant attacks and same old stuff being said, and fending off false accusations, that some amount of snark has most definitely worked its way into my repertoire.

Welcome to my world, and congratulations - you’re officially a Doper.

But I’m making an effort not to rail on people like I’ve been wont to do in the past. So let’s just leave it at that, and I’ll try to be civil anyway.

New leaves are good things. Thanks. I hope it sticks.

Esprix

[Joe_Cool]

*Originally posted by Monty *
**Oh, you mean that “apology” where you insulted me? Pshaw! That got as much grace as you evidenced in extending it. **

No, I mean the apology where I apologized for, and retracted, the statement where I confused a JW belief with the Mormon one.

The fact that I called you a jerk is unrelated, even though it was in the same post. Just because I think you’re a jerk doesn’t mean that my apology for my misstatement is any less sincere.

[Esprix]

Um, calling someone a jerk while apologizing does rather suck the wind out of it, n’est-ce pas?

Esprix

[Joe_Cool]

Well, maybe it was a bit uncool to do it in the same post, but I was answering two distinct statements from monty. One had nothing to do with the other. And, for what it’s worth, I wasn’t apologizing for what I thought of him, but for a mistaken belief I had about his church.

[Monty]

In other words, you’re an asshole. Thanks for clearing that up.