I do point out the error of "dogmatic Sedevacantism" -- it's called Schism, and I ban such a one.
One cannot be a member here, and yet consider virtually all the members to be non-Catholics.
Look up "Schism" in the dictionary.
It means to cut off -- to hack-and-slash at the Mystical Body, cutting off members that you disagree with about some issue, or members you don't get along with. It's calling "non-Catholic" what is objectively "Catholic".
Adding new dogmas to the body of the Catholic Faith -- in this case, "The man Bergoglio is not the Pope" -- in such a way as to make those who DENY THIS "DOGMA" into heretics and outside communion with the Catholic Church -- is a grave error.
All the Sedevacantists on CathInfo can see this.
Furthermore, despite each of our firm convictions in the matter -- our decision about which group is the best, where to go to Mass, etc. -- when it comes right down to it, we could turn out to be wrong. Because none of us can rely on Catholic Dogma, advice from the Saints, or personal advice from Our Lord or Our Lady to give us absolute certainty.
We're going on Prudence, here. But Prudence is only as good as the data you have about the situation. Prudential decisions can end up being "wrong", due to our faulty human grasp of any situation. Of course, if we do our best we won't be culpable, as we DID make the best decision based on our current knowledge (the very definition of Prudence).
The Conciliar Crisis simply has never happened before. We've had things close to it, which give us HINTS (the Great Schism, Arianism, etc.) but never quite this bad. So we have to EXTRAPOLATE what this or that saint would do, based on a SIMILAR situation in the past. We all have good reasons and justifications for what we each do. But that doesn't change the fact that none of us has spoken with Our Lord personally about this, nor have we found any documents that describe this Crisis perfectly, and then go on to describe what we must do!
Oh, and I should also point out that none of the current "positions" has won over all Traditionalists in a landslide, or single-handedly healed the great fissure in the Church. So perhaps they're all flawed in some way? That doesn't mean we should stop being Traditionalist, but it does mean that the only way to cure the Crisis is for God to send us a Pope who will build up rather than tear down the Church. A Pope who is truly Traditional.
Arguing over "which lifeboat is best" is kind of silly. None of them have flush toilets. The only solution is to repair/rebuild the Barque of Peter which is critically damaged and half under water.
I don't mind a bit of friendly family rivalry and strife on this board -- 2 vs. 2 and 1 vs 1. But when it's 1 vs. the entire board -- I'd say that "1" simply doesn't belong here. It's simple.
Because even if I don't mind being considered hell-bound, I'm quite positive that many others here would get sick of that REAL fast -- like after 5 seconds.
It's not worth driving even ONE good member away, in favor of such a theologically-messed-up member.