Author Topic: Did you sign up for CathInfo but then quit? If so, why? (Read 2452 times)

Matthew · « **Reply #15 on:** March 27, 2013, 08:10:49 PM »

This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #16 on:** March 27, 2013, 08:19:20 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #17 on:** March 27, 2013, 08:30:15 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

They had a reputation of "zero" for good reasons.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #18 on:** March 27, 2013, 09:15:21 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

No, he's saying that when those holding the 'popularity contest' are sound-minded traditional Catholics, that the 'popular kids' are usually correct.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #19 on:** March 27, 2013, 09:46:00 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Kicked off without a reason? When? It seems to me that Matthew is pretty conscientious about explaining why people are banned.

And for goodness' sake, he has never banned me. That clearly means he can put up with a lot.

Oh yes, putting up with a well-behaved gentleman requires the patience of a saint.

:rolleyes:

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #20 on:** March 27, 2013, 10:01:47 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Guest

Sounds like a certain "dogmatic sedevacantist" got an account, again...

If a "dogmatic sedevacantist" (whatever that is) is in error, why fear him? Show him where he is wrong! Kicking someone off the site without showing them their errors makes it clear to the bystanders where the error lies. Great way to lose members.

We have shown the "dogmatic sede" how and why he is in error many times, but some people cling to anything that will cater to their emotions rather than consider logical arguments.

But the dogmatic sede always comes back to CathInfo... He just has to have the final word, even if it takes banning four different accounts.

It's kinda funny, but then it's not...

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #21 on:** March 27, 2013, 10:18:09 PM »

Maybe some of those who joined and then quit are those who were only here to monitor things for Men. in the first place, such as those seminarians we heard were given the job in their spare time. Now that the heat has died down a bit, they have found other things to do. There was a huge increase in traffic during last spring and summer.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #22 on:** March 27, 2013, 10:43:59 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

No, he's saying that when those holding the 'popularity contest' are sound-minded traditional Catholics, that the 'popular kids' are usually correct.

So to translate what you just said, you are saying, "You had better be pro-SSPX on this website are you won't be popular. And if you're not popular, well, you just won't last."

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #23 on:** March 27, 2013, 11:33:41 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

No, he's saying that when those holding the 'popularity contest' are sound-minded traditional Catholics, that the 'popular kids' are usually correct.

So to translate what you just said, you are saying, "You had better be pro-SSPX on this website are you won't be popular. And if you're not popular, well, you just won't last."

This site does not support the (modern day) SSPX, it supports Bishop Williamson and the Resistance, who remain faithful to the mission of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Also, there are many sedes here in good standing, the difference is they can respect those who hold the "R and R" position, and don't spew nonsenses about them being schismatics.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #24 on:** March 27, 2013, 11:37:14 PM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

No, he's saying that when those holding the 'popularity contest' are sound-minded traditional Catholics, that the 'popular kids' are usually correct.

So to translate what you just said, you are saying, "You had better be pro-SSPX on this website are you won't be popular. And if you're not popular, well, you just won't last."

You have obviously made up your mind on the issue, why do you continue to post? The answers you have been given are clear and reasonable enough, only by twisting them can you continue to reply to them.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #25 on:** March 29, 2013, 11:12:58 AM »

Quote from: Guest

Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Guest
Quote from: Matthew
This reminds me of the discussion about the Likes/Dislikes feature when it first came out. Everyone was like "Oh no, now it's a popularity contest" and all that.

But think about it -- when the "peers" are a bunch of serious, Trad Catholics -- you had better be "popular" or you have issues!

As experience has since proven, the Rep system is seldom wrong. I hardly ever see a valuable member with a score of 0, or a total misfit with a score in the thousands.

Almost everyone I've banned had a score around 0. There's the proof that the system works.

The system is near-infallible when you have mostly sane, devout, rational members -- like on CathInfo.

So Matthew, are you saying that being "popular" is a sign that someone holds the truth? Remember, the Novus ordo is far, far more popular than traditional Catholicism, in the eyes of the general public.

No, he's saying that when those holding the 'popularity contest' are sound-minded traditional Catholics, that the 'popular kids' are usually correct.

So to translate what you just said, you are saying, "You had better be pro-SSPX on this website are you won't be popular. And if you're not popular, well, you just won't last."

This site does not support the (modern day) SSPX, it supports Bishop Williamson and the Resistance, who remain faithful to the mission of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Also, there are many sedes here in good standing, the difference is they can respect those who hold the "R and R" position, and don't spew nonsenses about them being schismatics.

How can anyone "respect" the "R and R" position when the Church teaching on schism directly forbids it? Or is there some other pre-V2 teaching of the Church that you can quote that supports R and R? If so I would love to see it.

Änσnymσus · « **Reply #26 on:** March 29, 2013, 11:47:33 AM »

What bugs me when someone is banned for any reason is some of the member begin to CHEER about it: :rahrah:

With no regards for the feeling of the person who is banned, as if they are not even human. The was I see it, okay, they got banned now, Matthew for his own reason banned them, we don't have to give Matthew any kudos.

The banned person could still read the notes here, all they need is another venue.

Author Topic: Did you sign up for CathInfo but then quit? If so, why? (Read 2452 times)

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus

Änσnymσus