Author Topic: Ban Ladislaus  (Read 927 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr G

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 668
  • Reputation: +442/-47
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ban Ladislaus
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2019, 12:18:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sean, you do not have to leave, just do respond or engage in the particular debate. You can use CathInfo as a bulletin board to pass along news and other information.
    CORRECTION: That should be "DO NOT respond or engage in the particular debate"

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4553
    • Reputation: +3909/-365
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #16 on: October 09, 2019, 12:18:39 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • Interestingly, all of the charges made by SeanJohnson, except the Feeneyism, apply to the author himself.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4784
    • Reputation: +2831/-1298
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #17 on: October 09, 2019, 12:23:38 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    However, if you are sure that you don't want to post unless he is banned, then I'll do the same (not post anymore unless he is banned). 
    A two-for-one?  Is this Christmas?  ...I'm kidding!  I don't want anyone to leave; I just want people to get thicker skin.  It's a war zone sometimes.

    Offline Alexandria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2674
    • Reputation: +477/-113
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #18 on: October 09, 2019, 12:28:46 PM »
  • Thanks!4
  • No Thanks!0
  • A two-for-one?  Is this Christmas?  ...I'm kidding!  I don't want anyone to leave; I just want people to get thicker skin.  It's a war zone sometimes.
    If Sean wants to run for president, he had better get used to insults.  ;)

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #19 on: October 09, 2019, 01:08:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If Sean wants to run for president, he had better get used to insults.  ;)

    See the other sede thread; I have no intention of leaving!

    Ladislaus likes to get bold in his declarations of victory whenever he thinks the field is clear (usually beginning with an accusation of his opponents abandoning the thread because they got argued into a corner, but in reality because nobody without a pound of meth can possibly match the stamina of a sede-Feeneyite, and the fact that after 5-10 retorts, most normal people simply walk away, which is when he declares victory).

    Nope.

    I hustled him into admitting dogmatic facts are binding, and he must now show how a universally accepted pope is not a dogmatic fact.

    Plan on me being here for the next 40 years.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3266
    • Reputation: +1585/-930
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #20 on: October 09, 2019, 01:21:26 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • As such, this sede-Feeneyite toxic personality has chased off nearly all the R&R members from active posting, and colored Cathinfo’s internet identity as a bitter, mud-slinging free for all.

    This is the perception, and Ladislaus is singlehandedly responsible for more of that reality than anyone else on the forum.

    Cathinfo's identity as a free-for-all reflects the moderation policy of its owner.  Matthew deliberately minimizes his interventions in the forum.  As I understand it, this is both a philosophical position and a practical matter of not having time to do it any other way.

    A significant proportion of posters use the freedom created by this policy to engage in insults.  It does not seem reasonable to blame it on any individual.  Nor do I see any reason to associate it with any particular position on the Crisis or other theological views.  

    Singling out one person to ban for a behaviour engaged in by many does not seem just.  Retroactively making insults an offense punishable by banning, without any warning, also seems unjust.  

    I acknowledge that Ladislaus is not very nice and has a tendency to make arguments personal and unpleasant, but there are many others that would need to be banned if those were the criteria.

    I also note that Poche is one of the nicest posters on this forum.  In my recollection, he is also the poster who has had the most people comment that he ought to be banned.  Personally, although I appreciate his affability and even-temper,  I would find banning him a far more reasonable choice than Ladislaus.  Even so, I prefer that there be no public calls for banning.  I prefer leaving the question of bans up to Matthew.  

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #21 on: October 09, 2019, 01:30:40 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!2
  • Cathinfo's identity as a free-for-all reflects the moderation policy of its owner.  Matthew deliberately minimizes his interventions in the forum.  As I understand it, this is both a philosophical position and a practical matter of not having time to do it any other way.

    A significant proportion of posters use the freedom created by this policy to engage in insults.  It does not seem reasonable to blame it on any individual.  Nor do I see any reason to associate it with any particular position on the Crisis or other theological views.  

    Singling out one person to ban for a behaviour engaged in by many does not seem just.  Retroactively making insults an offense punishable by banning, without any warning, also seems unjust.  

    I acknowledge that Ladislaus is not very nice and has a tendency to make arguments personal and unpleasant, but there are many others that would need to be banned if those were the criteria.

    I also note that Poche is one of the nicest posters on this forum.  In my recollection, he is also the poster who has had the most people comment that he ought to be banned.  Personally, although I appreciate his affability and even-temper,  I would find banning him a far more reasonable choice than Ladislaus.  Even so, I prefer that there be no public calls for banning and leaving the question of bans up to Matthew.  

    Hi Jaynek-

    I agree with the entirety of your post.

    My banishment call was a debate tactic, and not sincere (though I must admit I would be quite happy had Matthew actually done it).

    Notice Matthew didn’t even take me seriously?

    Ladislaus smelled blood, where he should have smelled a rat, and like a dog locked in on a pheasant, got tunnel vision, and did not see where he was being led:

    The papacy of Francis and the last 6 popes is a dogmatic fact which he is obliged to accept, or be a heretic (and schismatic).

    If he wants to wiggle off the hook, he will need to show why the last 6 pontificates have not been dogmatic facts, despite the peaceable universal recognition of the Church, which is what makes them so.

    Ps: And since Lefebvre himself sometimes quoted this same doctrine, it ought to have shown Ladislaus that he did not properly understand Lefebvre and Williamson (just as he did not understand Chazal), or does he wish to imply Lefebvre and Williamson are heretics for denying dogmatic facts?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3266
    • Reputation: +1585/-930
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #22 on: October 09, 2019, 01:36:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The papacy of Francis and the last 6 popes is a dogmatic fact which he is obliged to accept, or be a heretic (and schismatic).

    I credit Francis with single-handedly making me sympathetic to the sede position.  While I have not been convinced by sede arguments, I wish they were right.  It is very hard to understand how he could be the Pope.


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #23 on: October 09, 2019, 01:40:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I credit Francis with single-handedly making me sympathetic to the sede position.  While I have not been convinced by sede arguments, I wish they were right.  It is very hard to understand how he could be the Pope.

    Jayne-

    I understand and share your misgivings at the level of the emotions (as perhaps Lefebvre did).

    Bishop Williamson even spoke about this emotional response in the introduction to my book.

    But at the level of the intellect we are obliged to accept and assent to the Church’s teaching on dogmatic facts (according to which, it is impossible that Francis could NOT be pope, who has been universally accepted as such).
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #24 on: October 09, 2019, 01:54:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pat, I mean Pakb-

    If Menzingen wanted a book, you only had to ask.

    Ps: I doubt your appeal to Matthew’s pride will create the division between us you were sent here to sow.  You see, in real life we are actually quite good friends.

    But like I said before your last ban, your presence signifies that the arrows have hit the mark (and not an hour goes by in which the eye of Sauron is watching).
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #25 on: October 09, 2019, 02:24:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LOL! You mean: A catalog of 101 conspiracies, counterfeits and corruptions...
    You still haven’t grasped context yet have you...  :o. As you know, there isn’t a single one that I can’t destroy...
    :baby:
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9603
    • Reputation: +3799/-886
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #26 on: October 09, 2019, 02:27:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • A two-for-one?  Is this Christmas?  ...I'm kidding!  I don't want anyone to leave; I just want people to get thicker skin.  It's a war zone sometimes.
    Ha ha! I agree. It's the different personalities that make for an interesting discussion forum. It'd be a very boring forum if all the posters said and thought the same thing all the time, especially when it comes to what is typically the most highly debated subjects.
     
    For a small gain they travel far; for eternal life many will scarcely lift a foot from the ground. - Thomas A Kempis

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4717
    • Reputation: +4134/-1447
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #27 on: October 09, 2019, 02:41:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That’s what happened with Loeman’s forum, it became a wasteland after Johnston became the de facto admin; nobody could post anything without his approval. Fortunately, thetradforum sent him packing.
    :baby:
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-

    Offline Bonaventure

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 151
    • Reputation: +66/-13
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #28 on: October 09, 2019, 02:52:11 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23067
    • Reputation: +20235/-244
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Ladislaus
    « Reply #29 on: October 09, 2019, 04:05:24 PM »
  • Thanks!8
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm locking this thread.

    I will ban whoever I decide to, and ONLY who I decide to.

    Banning users is MY business.

    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16