Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Matthew on May 16, 2018, 01:59:13 PM
-
I just modified CathInfo so that I can switch on/off each subforum from appearing in the Recent Posts, Recent Topics page, and the front page Recent Topics.
Right now, I turned off "Flat Earth" topics from appearing in these places.
But since I wrote this modification "the right way", I can easily add any other subforum(s) to this "2nd class" status in the future.
-
This seems like it will be a significant improvement. Thank you. I am looking forward to seeing it in practice.
-
This seems like it will be a significant improvement. Thank you. I am looking forward to seeing it in practice.
You won, Jayne. Congratulations. :applause:
Now you can focus on topics that really matter, instead of being stuck in the flat earth ghetto most of the time.
-
You won, Jayne. Congratulations.
I've wanted to be able to block subforums from the "topics list" for some time. Her bringing up the topic again (nicely) was just the straw that broke the camels' back -- the incitement for me to say, "you know what? I'm going to look into fixing this RIGHT NOW."
Let's face it -- I moved various unpopular (and frequently complained about) topics to their own subforums for YEARS. So I was already on board, as it were. However, I never took the time (before today) to complete the process by making such topics not appear in lists of recent topics, recent posts, and the homepage widget.
For some people, that is the main way they browse CathInfo. If the topics aren't excluded from those lists, the topics might as well not be segregated at all. So I fixed that today.
-
Great upgrade!
-
Honestly, I don't think it's going to help to attempt to "hide" the overwhelming popularity of the flat earth topic.
The traffic helps pay your bills, no?
-
Good move!
-
Honestly, I don't think it's going to help to attempt to "hide" the overwhelming popularity of the flat earth topic.
The traffic helps pay your bills, no?
.
Forums don't pay bills, they are a bill.
-
.
Forums don't pay bills, they are a bill.
CathInfo, being a successful, well established forum, at least pays its own expenses. But it barely qualifies as a side income at this point. It earns enough to pay the Internet bill, and part of the electric bill. That's it.
The income is about 40-50% of what it once was. Note I didn't say traffic, I said income. I'm not exactly running a blog or website that talks about technology, visited by gadget freaks with money to donate, spend, etc. :)
Even Indult or Novus Ordo Catholics have better incomes, more money, and are more worldly (as a group) than the "serious, 7-day-a-week Trad Catholics" I target here on CI.
Trads are notoriously old, broke and un-materialistic as a group. Keep in mind, Trads don't practice birth control, and they are more likely than average to believe in, and practice, traditional gender roles (read: SINGLE INCOME HOUSEHOLD). Serious Trad Catholic beliefs close off many (more lucrative) employment opportunities which a Novus Ordo Catholic wouldn't have a problem pursuing. Long story short, Trads usually have many other goals besides "make as much money, and live as well, as I can!" They know when to say "enough" where money is concerned. They are more likely to homeschool (which costs money). I could go on with many other reasons why Trads are statistically poorer than most.
If I was looking for a way to earn money, I should have chosen ANY OTHER MARKET than the Trad market. Obviously this group is close to my heart (because I'm part of it) or I never would have bothered.
That's why I have to laugh at the idiots here and there who claim it's all about the money for me. They have no idea how little CathInfo earns, or how much time & trouble it has cost me over the years. They are simply ignorant and don't know what the ...heck... they're talking about.
-
Flat earth has been relegated to the nosebleeds for centuries. This is no surprise.
-
Honestly, I don't think it's going to help to attempt to "hide" the overwhelming popularity of the flat earth topic.
From my perspective, it's not about hiding this topic. There's an entire subforum dedicated to it; it's easy to find and go there whenever you want.
This change is more about giving the "little guy" (i.e. the random, odd, or unusual topic) a chance to be seen in the "recent" list. Some people don't spend the time to go through each forum to see "what's new", so this is a way for new threads, which might die under the old rules, to live another day. Which will hopefully spur more traffic and varied conversations and more unique posts.
-
From my perspective, it's not about hiding this topic. There's an entire subforum dedicated to it; it's easy to find and go there whenever you want.
This change is more about giving the "little guy" (i.e. the random, odd, or unusual topic) a chance to be seen in the "recent" list. Some people don't spend the time to go through each forum to see "what's new", so this is a way for new threads, which might die under the old rules, to live another day. Which will hopefully spur more traffic and varied conversations and more unique posts.
Of course you don't think its about hiding the topic since you oppose flat earth. The 'recent topics' makes all subjects available to everyone easily. Those who favor globalist science bombed the flat earth forum with new topics, and in far greater numbers than flat earthers. Apparently, the constant barrage of new topics to the forum on that subject was intentional; for the purpose of getting the topic sidelined. Otherwise, leaving a topic available on recents reveals what's hot and what's on people's minds. In that way, Catholics are exposed to a variety of things they might not otherwise bother to investigate or hear about. There's no doubt it's an attempt to quash information or it wouldn't have been done.
-
Great move.
Part of the electric bill and Internet bill, huh? Lots of time into this. Looks like my second online job ain't so bad.
-
Of course you don't think its about hiding the topic since you oppose flat earth. The 'recent topics' makes all subjects available to everyone easily. Those who favor globalist science bombed the flat earth forum with new topics, and in far greater numbers than flat-earthers. Apparently, the constant barrage of new topics to the forum on that subject was intentional; for the purpose of getting the topic sidelined. Otherwise, leaving a topic available on recents reveals what's hot and what's on people's minds. In that way, Catholics are exposed to a variety of things they might not otherwise bother to investigate or hear about. There's no doubt it's an attempt to quash information or it wouldn't have been done.
.
There is no need to suppress flat-earthism because it fails on every front by its own inadequacy and manifest falsehood.
.
If anything it's a move to save flat-earthers from embarrassing themselves every day at the forum's expense.
Even though some flat-earth trolls (q.v.) are gluttons for punishment and self-abuse.
.
Case in point: flat-earthers (q.v.) who persist in abusing the term globalist when it objectively means quite something else.
IOW flat-earthers who persist in falsifying what they say can't complain when the chickens come home to roost.
-
Brilliant upgrade, Matthew!
-
Matthew,
Wouldn't it make more sense to allow people to individually ignore certain threads? More difficult but necessary because the recent topics is a good way for people who ARE interested in the topic to see if it is there.
I think you have allowed a vocal, vicious minority to sway your opinion.
But I'm not surprised because you do not accept flat earth, so I predicted this would come.
The nastiness of the the globe earthers is enough in itself to bring people to our cause. This issue will never go away, no matter how much they want it to.
-
Brilliant upgrade, Matthew!
It really is. After less than a day, I can already see what a difference it makes. Casual observers and newcomers to the forum no longer receive a distorted first impression that flat earth is a matter of general interest or belief. Established members no longer have to wade through junk posts to find what they are actually interested in. One needs to deliberately seek out flat earth posts to see them so they are easily ignored and yet the option remains for those who wish to discuss it.
Probably the best part is that it is a solution to a general problem, not simply flat-earthers. The forum has always been vulnerable to being dominated by a handful of posters with time and an obsession. There is now a mechanism in place that can effectively deal with this situation whenever it arises.
I thought it was a good idea as soon as I heard about it, but seeing it in action, I am even more impressed by the elegance of this solution.
-
I would propose that, if it's technically possible, to limit it so that only ONE THREAD from each subforum could appear in recent. I agree that you don't want 12 out of 13 threads in "Recent" to be dominated by any given topic. Someone could easily take over the Recent list just by bumping threads. LoT used to do that a lot in the BoD subforum.
But I do like to know what's going on in some of these Sub-Forums, and whether there's been recent activity on some of the threads I'm following.
I have no real horse in the Flat Earth debate, but I find it extremely interesting and regret that I can't quickly see recent activity on the topic at a glance when first arriving at the Forum. At the same time, even though I find the topic to be of great interest, even I don't want to see 10 threads clogging up the Recent area. I would like to see only the one or two most recent and most active threads. This would also avoid the perception that CI is dominated by Flat Earth discussion and that very little else goes on here. Similarly, I wouldn't want 13 BoD threads or 13 Resistance threads ... or whatever ... clogging up Recent so that I can't see what's going on in the other forums that I might be interested in.
-
Let's look at it this way. I very much enjoy the "Moon Landing" thread as well. Now, what if we had ten "Fake Moon Landing" threads? You could eliminate them all to keep them from clogging up the Recent list ... but then I'd be disappointed that I can't find at least the most recent and most active thread ... because I enjoy this topic. I feel the same way about Flat Earth. And, similarly, with Moon Landing, a lot of people could conclude that Traditional Catholics are nutty ... as with other topics like Fake Sister Lucy, Imposter Paul VI, etc. Lots of people think that Geocentrism is as nutty as flat earth ... and yet many Traditional Catholics have that view.
-
Now, what if we had ten "Fake Moon Landing" threads? You could eliminate them all to keep them from clogging up the Recent list ... but then I'd be disappointed that I can't find at least the most recent and most active thread ...
When this hypothetical becomes a reality, including:
1. A lot of activity on the topic
2. The topic is enjoyed by only 8 users or so, out of hundreds
3. The proponents are obsessive about it, which is the only reason there are so many topics on it (not because of general popularity! this is a very important point)
4. The topic has already been put into its own ghetto by the owner, for reasons 1, 2 and 3
5. > 10 people complain about the forum seeming to be dominated by the topic, whereas that is completely not true, not even on a % of posts basis.
Then we'll talk. Until then...
-
When this hypothetical becomes a reality, including:
1. A lot of activity on the topic
2. The topic is enjoyed by only 8 users or so, out of hundreds
3. The proponents are obsessive about it, which is the only reason there are so many topics on it (not because of general popularity! this is a very important point)
4. The topic has already been put into its own ghetto by the owner, for reasons 1, 2 and 3
5. > 10 people complain about the forum seeming to be dominated by the topic, whereas that is completely not true, not even on a % of posts basis.
Then we'll talk. Until then...
Well, apart from a desire to punish these folks for bad behavior, limiting it to one thread in Recent would address most of the practical complaints you have against them (in particular dominating the Recent list and making it appear as if CI is dominated by the topic).
-
Of course you don't think its about hiding the topic since you oppose flat earth. The 'recent topics' makes all subjects available to everyone easily. Those who favor globalist science bombed the flat earth forum with new topics, and in far greater numbers than flat earthers. Apparently, the constant barrage of new topics to the forum on that subject was intentional; for the purpose of getting the topic sidelined.
Happenby made the same observation and her post was not deleted.
-
It really is. After less than a day, I can already see what a difference it makes. Casual observers and newcomers to the forum no longer receive a distorted first impression that flat earth is a matter of general interest or belief. Established members no longer have to wade through junk posts to find what they are actually interested in. One needs to deliberately seek out flat earth posts to see them so they are easily ignored and yet the option remains for those who wish to discuss it.
Probably the best part is that it is a solution to a general problem, not simply flat-earthers. The forum has always been vulnerable to being dominated by a handful of posters with time and an obsession. There is now a mechanism in place that can effectively deal with this situation whenever it arises.
I thought it was a good idea as soon as I heard about it, but seeing it in action, I am even more impressed by the elegance of this solution.
Says the woman who posts more in the ghetto than any other subforum.
So she is a contributor to the alleged problem but then is overjoyed at hiding her own activity there.
Thou art a hypocrite!
-
Well, apart from a desire to punish these folks for bad behavior, limiting it to one thread in Recent would address most of the practical complaints you have against them (in particular dominating the Recent list and making it appear as if CI is dominated by the topic).
What's really interesting is that the bad behavior (flooding topics) was caused by the same people who went to admin and complained about the subject! Check out the number of those flooding the flat earth forum. Far more globers than flat earthers were starting new topics. And they were the ones complaining to the admin! Even if I hated the subject, if people tried to manipulate my forum that way, I would have gone after the right people. However, the one thread max in Recent isn't a bad idea.
-
Let's look at it this way. I very much enjoy the "Moon Landing" thread as well. Now, what if we had ten "Fake Moon Landing" threads? You could eliminate them all to keep them from clogging up the Recent list ... but then I'd be disappointed that I can't find at least the most recent and most active thread ... because I enjoy this topic. I feel the same way about Flat Earth. And, similarly, with Moon Landing, a lot of people could conclude that Traditional Catholics are nutty ... as with other topics like Fake Sister Lucy, Imposter Paul VI, etc. Lots of people think that Geocentrism is as nutty as flat earth ... and yet many Traditional Catholics have that view.
Some forums handle repetitions of the same topic by merging similar threads and/or by locking threads which have not had any new posts in over a year. While this strategy prevents the habit of bumping necrotic threads, it also encourages people to be more responsible and to take the time to search for a news event or topic before starting a new thread.
-
Probably the best part is that it is a solution to a general problem, not simply flat-earthers. The forum has always been vulnerable to being dominated by a handful of posters with time and an obsession. There is now a mechanism in place that can effectively deal with this situation whenever it arises.
Any yet you also seem to dominate the flat earth forums. Evidently, you also have "time and an obsession" with the subject, being that you're obsessively against it. It really isn't honest for you to portray and accuse others as having "time and obsession" with the subject when you yourself spend so much time on the FE subforum.
-
Any yet you also seem to dominate the flat earth forums. Evidently, you also have "time and an obsession" with the subject, being that you're obsessively against it. It really isn't honest for you to portray and accuse others as having "time and obsession" with the subject when you yourself spend so much time on the FE subforum.
That's actually a very good point. I bet if you did a Post Count on the flat earth threads, you'd find 2 globe earth folks among the top 5 posters. I don't understand why some of them are so upset by the flat earth theory. If I believed something was lunacy, I'd probably just ignore it. If there were a thread on Elvis still being alive, I wouldn't bother clicking on it ... must less posting.
Just did a quick survey. Of the top 15 threads in the Flat Earth sub-forum, 9 of them were started by people who are against Flat Earth. So the Flat Earthers are being unjustly singled out for "flooding the forum" with flat earth threads.
-
This is not a flat earth website; it is for Catholicism in general, news, prayers, organization and theological discussion. 'Flat earth' has its own subforum, for crying out loud. What more do they want?
-
That's actually a very good point.
When was the last time Meg and Ladislaus agreed on something?!! Ha ha.
-
That's actually a very good point. I bet if you did a Post Count on the flat earth threads, you'd find 2 globe earth folks among the top 5 posters. I don't understand why some of them are so upset by the flat earth theory. If I believed something was lunacy, I'd probably just ignore it. If there were a thread on Elvis still being alive, I wouldn't bother clicking on it ... must less posting.
If Elvis is alive, it makes no difference to moi... :sleep:
-
When was the last time Meg and Ladislaus agreed on something?!! Ha ha.
I was thinking the same thing when I wrote that.
-
There is no need to suppress flat-earthism because it fails on every front by its own inadequacy and manifest falsehood.
Then why do you spend so much time attacking it? I wouldn't spent five minutes of my time arguing against something that's manifestly false ... that reptilian aliens from the Pluto have taken over the Vatican.
Despite its manifest falsehood, Neil, you have yet to produce a single piece of concrete proof of its falsehood ... which should be pretty easy to do if it were THAT OBVIOUSLY false. Instead you produce tons of wind and rhetoric.
-
I wouldn't spent five minutes of my time arguing against something that's manifestly false ... that reptilian aliens from the Pluto have taken over the Vatican.
Maybe I should give a REAL example. There was the poster who claimed that Paul VI is still alive and waiting to reclaim the Holy See and restore the Church. Why would I spent hours and hours of my time trying to refute that?
-
This is not a flat earth website; it is for Catholicism in general, news, prayers, organization and theological discussion. 'Flat earth' has its own subforum, for crying out loud. What more do they want?
Except that Flat Earth DOES have to do with Catholicism inasmuch as God created the earth and everything in it.
But even if you don't believe that FE has anything to do with Catholicism, there are still other subjects that are discussed on the forum that don't have to do with Catholicism. Are those subjects to be censored as well?
-
I was thinking the same thing when I wrote that.
;D
-
Here are some numbers. Sorry I don't know how to make a proper table for them. The order is by number of topics started in the last hundred threads on the FE subforum. The letters stand for flat and globe. The numbers are (from left to right) topics started in the subforum over the last hundred, number of posts to the subforum, total posts to CI. I left out everyone who started less than 4 threads, with the exception of Meg since she is a major poster.
Smedley Butler (F) 13 643 778
TruthisEternal (F) 11 843 1713
Neil Obstat (G) 11 2022 5874
An Even Seven (G) 8 556 2124
WholeFoodsTrad (F) 7 421 508
kiwiboy (F) 7 348 499
Jaynek (G) 5 723 2415
cassini (G) 4 154 1327
happenby (F) 4 1491 2226
Ladislaus (?) 4 487 13930
Meg (F) 1 640 2350
In order of total posts to the subforum:
Neil Obstat
happenby
TruthisEternal
jaynek
SmedleyButler
Meg
AnEvenSeven
Ladislaus
WholeFoodsTrad
kiwiboy
cassini
Among these posters approximately 4100 posts were by flatearthers and 3500 by spherists and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
-
Then why do you spend so much time attacking it?
I can't speak for Neil, but I spend so much time on it because most of them are claiming that there is an obligation for all Catholics to believe the earth is flat. That is a lie about the Church, whatever shape the earth has.
-
But even if you don't believe that FE has anything to do with Catholicism, there are still other subjects that are discussed on the forum that don't have to do with Catholicism. Are those subjects to be censored as well?
You are not being censored. You can still write what you want in the proper subforum. You are being made easier to avoid by the people who wish to do so.
I have been involved in online discussions for over 25 years and seen a lot of moderators/ forum owners. I don't think I have ever seen one who would allow a place for flat earth discussions. The typical reaction is that it's wrong, it's stupid, and it makes one's forum look bad.
This forum is different because Matthew's vision for it includes a wish to allow "fringe" topics even when he himself disagrees with them. People don't call Cathinfo "the Wild West of trad forums" just because the owner is from Texas. I don't know of another trad forum that would allow you to post on flat earth as you have.
Instead of showing gratitude the flatearthers are complaining about how they are mistreated and censored, maligning Matthews motives, and implying he made this forum upgrade because he was stupid enough to get tricked into it.
-
Yesterday I posted, and it was deleted, that of the 20 threads on page 1 of the ghetto, 14 were started by globetards, 6 by flats.
So who is causing the so-called popularity problem again??
-
You are not being censored. You can still write what you want in the proper subforum. You are being made easier to avoid by the people who wish to do so.
I have been involved in online discussions for over 25 years and seen a lot of moderators/ forum owners. I don't think I have ever seen one who would allow a place for flat earth discussions. The typical reaction is that it's wrong, it's stupid, and it makes one's forum look bad.
This forum is different because Matthew's vision for it includes a wish to allow "fringe" topics even when he himself disagrees with them. People don't call Cathinfo "the Wild West of trad forums" just because the owner is from Texas. I don't know of another trad forum that would allow you to post on flat earth as you have.
Instead of showing gratitude the flatearthers are complaining about how they are mistreated and censored, maligning Matthews motives, and implying he made this forum upgrade because he was stupid enough to get tricked into it.
Jaynek has EIGHTY more replies to the ghetto than me, what irony!
I guess she was too dumb to realize every time she responds she kept the ghetto in the "recent threads" column. Then she complains about the problem she caused.
Ironic
-
Yesterday I posted, and it was deleted, that of the 20 threads on page 1 of the ghetto, 14 were started by globetards, 6 by flats.
So who is causing the so-called popularity problem again??
You need a larger sample size to get statistically significant results.
-
Jaynek has EIGHTY more replies to the ghetto than me, what irony!
I guess she was too dumb to realize every time she responds she kept the ghetto in the "recent threads" column. Then she complains about the problem she caused.
Ironic
I was aware that I created more traffic on the subforum. I faced a dilemma. I could leave their errors unopposed, possibly creating an impression that the flat-earthers spoke for all of Cathinfo. Or I could give all the arguments to show that they are wrong, possibly creating an impression that it was an interesting and important topic.
Given two undesirable choices, I picked the one that seemed less bad. This is one reason that I am so enthusiastic about the forum upgrade. I no longer am put in a position with no good options.
-
Here are some numbers. Sorry I don't know how to make a proper table for them. The order is by number of topics started in the last hundred threads on the FE subforum. The letters stand for flat and globe. The numbers are (from left to right) topics started in the subforum over the last hundred, number of posts to the subforum, total posts to CI. I left out everyone who started less than 4 threads, with the exception of Meg since she is a major poster.
Smedley Butler (F) 13 643 778
TruthisEternal (F) 11 843 1713
Neil Obstat (G) 11 2022 5874
An Even Seven (G) 8 556 2124
WholeFoodsTrad (F) 7 421 508
kiwiboy (F) 7 348 499
Jaynek (G) 5 723 2415
cassini (G) 4 154 1327
happenby (F) 4 1491 2226
Ladislaus (?) 4 487 13930
Meg (F) 1 640 2350
In order of total posts to the subforum:
Neil Obstat
happenby
TruthisEternal
jaynek
SmedleyButler
Meg
AnEvenSeven
Ladislaus
WholeFoodsTrad
kiwiboy
cassini
Among these posters approximately 4100 posts were by flatearthers and 3500 by spherists and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
So, roughly split down the middle as I had suspected. Thank you for looking up the numbers. 2 of the top 4, and 4 of the top 8 thread starters have been globe-earthers.
-
... and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
Now now, it's not that I don't WANT to take sides. I just haven't been 100% convinced of either side yet.
:)
-
Here are some numbers. Sorry I don't know how to make a proper table for them. The order is by number of topics started in the last hundred threads on the FE subforum. The letters stand for flat and globe. The numbers are (from left to right) topics started in the subforum over the last hundred, number of posts to the subforum, total posts to CI. I left out everyone who started less than 4 threads, with the exception of Meg since she is a major poster.
Smedley Butler (F) 13 643 778
TruthisEternal (F) 11 843 1713
Neil Obstat (G) 11 2022 5874
An Even Seven (G) 8 556 2124
WholeFoodsTrad (F) 7 421 508
kiwiboy (F) 7 348 499
Jaynek (G) 5 723 2415
cassini (G) 4 154 1327
happenby (F) 4 1491 2226
Ladislaus (?) 4 487 13930
Meg (F) 1 640 2350
In order of total posts to the subforum:
Neil Obstat
happenby
TruthisEternal
jaynek
SmedleyButler
Meg
AnEvenSeven
Ladislaus
WholeFoodsTrad
kiwiboy
cassini
Among these posters approximately 4100 posts were by flatearthers and 3500 by spherists and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
Your table is supposed to prove....what exactly?
-
How about a 3-10 day suspension for anyone hijacking a thread with flat/globe/earth comments and also those who respond to those comments.
-
Here are some numbers. Sorry I don't know how to make a proper table for them. The order is by number of topics started in the last hundred threads on the FE subforum. The letters stand for flat and globe. The numbers are (from left to right) topics started in the subforum over the last hundred, number of posts to the subforum, total posts to CI. I left out everyone who started less than 4 threads, with the exception of Meg since she is a major poster.
Smedley Butler (F) 13 643 778
TruthisEternal (F) 11 843 1713
Neil Obstat (G) 11 2022 5874
An Even Seven (G) 8 556 2124
WholeFoodsTrad (F) 7 421 508
kiwiboy (F) 7 348 499
Jaynek (G) 5 723 2415
cassini (G) 4 154 1327
happenby (F) 4 1491 2226
Ladislaus (?) 4 487 13930
Meg (F) 1 640 2350
In order of total posts to the subforum:
Neil Obstat
happenby
TruthisEternal
jaynek
SmedleyButler
Meg
AnEvenSeven
Ladislaus
WholeFoodsTrad
kiwiboy
cassini
Among these posters approximately 4100 posts were by flatearthers and 3500 by spherists and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
Another question: how long have you been working on the table above? It seems a little obsessive to me.
-
How about a 3-10 day suspension for anyone hijacking a thread with flat/globe/earth comments and also those who respond to those comments.
Well, flat earth was the only topic/subject mentioned in the O.P.
-
Your table is supposed to prove....what exactly?
People were making assertions about which side was starting threads and posting more. I thought it would be useful to have actual numbers to work with.
Another question: how long have you been working on the table above? It seems a little obsessive to me.
All the information was readily available so it did not take especially long.
-
People were making assertions about which side was starting threads and posting more. I thought it would be useful to have actual numbers to work with.
All the information was readily available so it did not take especially long.
Where was the information readily available from?
-
Where was the information readily available from?
Every member's profile has stats on it. I just clicked on the names of members posting to the subforum, selected stats and copied the numbers I wanted.
-
Every member's profile has stats on it. I just clicked on the names of members posting to the subforum, selected stats and copied the numbers I wanted.
Is this something you've done before? And under what circuмstance? Do you have experience gathering information and/or statistics regarding forums, blogs, (or forum members)?
-
Your table is supposed to prove....what exactly?
Matthew didn't so much care how many total posts from individuals are in the flat earth section, (at least he didn't say that was the problem) but that the 'Recent Topics' was getting bogged down with too many new topics for flat earth. Strangely, that translated to Matthew as trouble from flat earthers. Yet, most of the new topics were started by globers, who then went and complained to Matthew.
Sadly, the reason you had to ask the question about Jayne's post is because it's obvious that her diversionary chart is without pertinent information to the situation, but actually deflects from understanding of what actually happened.
-
Another question: how long have you been working on the table above? It seems a little obsessive to me.
ROFL
YEP, that's a burn...
Good one, Meg!
-
Is this something you've done before? And under what circuмstance? Do you have experience gathering information and/or statistics regarding forums, blogs, (or forum members)?
I look up publicly available profile information on forum members whenever I am curious about them. Most often it is because I suspect someone of being a troll. Occasionally it is to obtain information for a discussion about forum trends such as we are engaged in here.
-
Matthew didn't so much care how many total posts from individuals are in the flat earth section, (at least he didn't say that was the problem) but that the 'Recent Topics' was getting bogged down with too many new topics for flat earth. Strangely, that translated to Matthew as trouble from flat earthers. Yet, most of the new topics were started by globers, who then went and complained to Matthew.
Sadly, the reason you had to ask the question about Jayne's post is because it's obvious that her diversionary chart is without pertinent information to the situation, but actually deflects from understanding of what actually happened.
Yes, more threads in that subforum were started by globe earthers, rather than flat earthers.
-
I look up publicly available profile information on forum members whenever I am curious about them. Most often it is because I suspect someone of being a troll. Occasionally it is to obtain information for a discussion about forum trends such as we are engaged in here.
Do you work for someone who wants information about forum trends?
-
Jaynek is not creepy AT ALL.....
-
Jaynek is not creepy AT ALL.....
Big brother.
-
Do you work for someone who wants information about forum trends?
:facepalm: Of course not.
I'm a housewife with no paid employment. I suppose one could say I work for my husband. For the record, he does not want information about forum trends.
I am done with this interrogation. You are getting more and more ridiculous trying to make something nefarious out of checking forum stats.
-
Yes, more threads in that subforum were started by globe earthers, rather than flat earthers.
Reminds me of how most threads about sedevacantism are started by anti-sedevacantists.
-
JayneK was often attacked for mini-modding on other forums. IIRC one forum that was started by TMW89 specifically didn't allow her to join for that reason, among others.
Rather than rely on your memory of something that must have happened years ago, why don't you ask tmw89 to say for himself what he thinks? He is a member here.
But even if there were a past issue with mini-modding, why would that be relevant? Here is a definition for those unfamiliar with the term: "Acting as if in a position of power to ban, pointing out that a member has broken a rule, requesting a Moderator action publicly or any similar practices is called Minimodding."
This is pretty much the opposite of what I did here. I privately wrote to Matthew, expressed my concerns and asked him to pray and think about it. I didn't tell him what to do or even suggest any actions. Minimodding is about publicly being bossy, not privately discussing one's concerns with a moderator.
-
TMW89's last post was 3 years ago, though his last activity was a month ago, so I guess he still lurks here.
Not the kind of thing I'd bother him about. I have a very good memory of you being criticized regularly for being a busybody, and some used the phrase "mini-modding." Perhaps busybody is a better general-use expression.
-
It really is. After less than a day, I can already see what a difference it makes. Casual observers and newcomers to the forum no longer receive a distorted first impression that flat earth is a matter of general interest or belief. Established members no longer have to wade through junk posts to find what they are actually interested in. One needs to deliberately seek out flat earth posts to see them so they are easily ignored and yet the option remains for those who wish to discuss it.
Probably the best part is that it is a solution to a general problem, not simply flat-earthers. The forum has always been vulnerable to being dominated by a handful of posters with time and an obsession. There is now a mechanism in place that can effectively deal with this situation whenever it arises.
I thought it was a good idea as soon as I heard about it, but seeing it in action, I am even more impressed by the elegance of this solution.
Agreed.
-
This is an instructive thread to read over on SuscipeDomine to see some people's general view of JayneK:
http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=1065.0
It's because of JayneK that TMW89 proposes the anti-mini-modding rule on that thread--he was a moderator over there when the forum began. He later left that forum and started a couple different forums.
I'm not so sure JayneK is mini-modding on this particular issue, though. More like meddling and being a busybody. This view of her was common when she posted on Fisheaters as well. It follows her around.
-
Here are some numbers. Sorry I don't know how to make a proper table for them. The order is by number of topics started in the last hundred threads on the FE subforum. The letters stand for flat and globe. The numbers are (from left to right) topics started in the subforum over the last hundred, number of posts to the subforum, total posts to CI. I left out everyone who started less than 4 threads, with the exception of Meg since she is a major poster.
Smedley Butler (F) 13 643 778
TruthisEternal (F) 11 843 1713
Neil Obstat (G) 11 2022 5874
An Even Seven (G) 8 556 2124
WholeFoodsTrad (F) 7 421 508
kiwiboy (F) 7 348 499
Jaynek (G) 5 723 2415
cassini (G) 4 154 1327
happenby (F) 4 1491 2226
Ladislaus (?) 4 487 13930
Meg (F) 1 640 2350
In order of total posts to the subforum:
Neil Obstat
happenby
TruthisEternal
jaynek
SmedleyButler
Meg
AnEvenSeven
Ladislaus
WholeFoodsTrad
kiwiboy
cassini
Among these posters approximately 4100 posts were by flatearthers and 3500 by spherists and another 500 by Ladislaus who does not want to take sides.
Wow.
You need something else to fill your life!
-
This is an instructive thread to read over on SuscipeDomine to see some people's general view of JayneK:
http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=1065.0
It's because of JayneK that TMW89 proposes the anti-mini-modding rule on that thread--he was a moderator over there when the forum began. He later left that forum and started a couple different forums.
I'm not so sure JayneK is mini-modding on this particular issue, though. More like meddling and being a busybody. This view of her was common when she posted on Fisheaters as well. It follows her around.
No wonder why I've never looked at DR before. Their "about page:
This site, which has been on the internet since 1996, is often used in RCIA programs, and is linked to from the websites of various parishes and chapels, cleric-run blogs and websites, the Catholic Encyclopedia, Latin Mass Magazine, Our Sunday Visitor, The Revealer and other credible, scholarly resources. It has been cited in Catholic Digest Magazine, dioscesan and parish newsletters, offerings from Circle Media, Inc. (publishers of the National Catholic Register andFaith and Family magazine), newspapers, and other such printed materials.
-
Maybe I should give a REAL example. There was the poster who claimed that Paul VI is still alive and waiting to reclaim the Holy See and restore the Church. Why would I spent hours and hours of my time trying to refute that?
What if there were six posters who claimed that? What if they posted about it so much that other members complained it was taking over the forum and so Matthew put into its own subforum to contain it? What if they posted that there was something wrong with Catholics who did not accept this and called the people who disagreed with them heretics? What if some of them were really nasty? What if they got together to downvote opposing views? What if it became seen as a major issue on Cathinfo such that people on other forums mentioned it? What if, even after being put in a dedicated subforum, it still seemed to dominate the forum by appearing so much in the Recent Topics? Would you still consider it something to ignore?
It is not always the credibility of positions that makes them problematic. Even the most absurd and obviously false positions can become a problem, depending on their proponents.
-
And a very condescending busybody, at that.
Since Jaynek got the result she "prayed" for in having flat earth removed from the "recent posts" function, I fully expect her to cease posting to the ghetto since the subject is such a detriment, in her view, to the forum.
I expect to post there much less, but to still do so occasionally. There may be some people curious enough about the topic to seek out the subforum. I want to have some posts there so such people can easily see that dogmatic flat earth is opposed and that there are strong (virtually conclusive) arguments against it. I have the background knowledge to know and be able explain just how wrong that position is. I feel this comes with a certain responsibility to oppose this error.
I am not one of those posters who is constantly involved in lots of forum controversies. Most of these are beyond me. Frankly, I am puzzled by how all these people arguing about things are so sure they are right. But on this one issue I can tell that people are saying something very wrong and that it is harmful to the Church (not just the forum).
-
I'm not so sure JayneK is mini-modding on this particular issue, though. More like meddling and being a busybody. This view of her was common when she posted on Fisheaters as well. It follows her around.
Before you dug up a five year old thread, nothing had followed me around. Most people form their opinions of me based on my current posting behaviour.
-
This is an instructive thread to read over on SuscipeDomine to see some people's general view of JayneK:
http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=1065.0
Anyone reading this thread should note that poster "Ben" (the one posting old quotes to make a case against me on that thread) is the same person as the one currently called "rum" on this forum.
He is not some objective observer of "people's general view of Jaynek". He was a key player in driving negative opinion of me in that thread. That explains why he was able to remember a thread from so long ago.
The poster "rum" under various names on various forums makes a practice of dredging up old posts and old threads concerning me. He either has an amazing memory or keeps a file on me.
-
Your reputation for being involved in controversies is real and apparently follows you for years across numerous boards.
It may be more accurate to say that a person intent on ruining my reputation apparently follows me for years across numerous boards.
-
All I know about the flat earth and moon landing hoax stuff is that the Jєωs don't fear it and often promote it.
Well, the same thing goes for other subjects (e.g. 9/11 conspiracy talk). They allow discussion of it to go on in various fringe regions of the internet with the express purpose of making it look crazy. So that's neither here nor there.
-
This is pretty much the opposite of what I did here. I privately wrote to Matthew, expressed my concerns and asked him to pray and think about it. I didn't tell him what to do or even suggest any actions. Minimodding is about publicly being bossy, not privately discussing one's concerns with a moderator.
Well, if your intent in asking Matthew to hide the Flat Earth threads was to prevent Traditional Catholics from looking bad, Matthew should likewise have banned all the threads in which you and other Trads were advocating wife-beating. Talk about something that makes Traditional Catholics look bad! In fact, I criticized you specifically on that count, that even if you felt in principle that some corporal punishment of wives by their husbands might be permitted, under some specific circuмstances, prudence nevertheless dictates that you should keep it to yourself and stop advocating the position publicly. Flat Earth talk PALES in comparison to how bad the advocacy of WIFE-BEATING makes Traditional Catholics look in the eyes of the world. Many other topics make Traditional Catholics look much worse in the eyes of the world than flat earth talk ... h0Ɩ0cαųst denial, nαzι sympathizing, advocacy of wife-beating, "racist" attitudes (all of which have been actively promoted here on CI). Even though I have certain opinions regarding some of these subjects that would certainly make us look bad to the world, I will not be very vocal about it to prevent this from being a stumbling block to someone who might otherwise be interested in Traditional Catholicism. Whether or not I agree with you on the wife-beating issue is secondary. Even if I did, I would shut up about it and not go on a crusade to promote it. Lots of people might say, who cares what the world thinks? Well, in certain non-negotiable doctrinal/dogmatic issues, certainly we cannot compromise. But what bearing on a person's salvation does the h0Ɩ0cαųst question have? Or does a husband who does not beat his wife risk his eternal salvation? Isn't that one of the greatest criticisms that you have regarding Flat Earth, that it isn't essential to the good of souls?
-
Well, the same thing goes for other subjects (e.g. 9/11 conspiracy talk). They allow discussion of it to go on in various fringe regions of the internet with the express purpose of making it look crazy. So that's neither here nor there.
No they allow 9/11 conspiracy talk that doesn't implicate them. It's called controlled opposition. Those areas of the internet that do implicate them are hushed up as much as possible.
-
Anyone reading this thread should note that poster "Ben" (the one posting old quotes to make a case against me on that thread) is the same person as the one currently called "rum" on this forum.
He is not some objective observer of "people's general view of Jaynek". He was a key player in driving negative opinion of me in that thread. That explains why he was able to remember a thread from so long ago.
The poster "rum" under various names on various forums makes a practice of dredging up old posts and old threads concerning me. He either has an amazing memory or keeps a file on me.
Yep, that's me. I guess I should have mentioned it, since you're insinuating that I don't want people to know that. A good number of the people on this forum know that I was ben over there. I didn't follow you anywhere. I've been here long before you came. There were comments on this thread that preceded my posts that had an eerie resemblance to past complaints about you, which is why I chimed in. And complaints of this nature about you have been made on this forum before as well. It's not a trait you stopped exhibiting long ago.
-
Casual observers and newcomers to the forum no longer receive a distorted first impression that flat earth is a matter of general interest or belief.
And yet casual observers and newcomers might get the impression that Traditional Catholics in general promote wife-beating, believe that Jєωs run the world, think that Hitler was a misunderstood good guy, don't believe that the h0Ɩ0cαųst happened, despise ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, and have racist attitudes. So now that flat earthism isn't the "first impression" someone might get of Traditional Catholicism, any one of these other topics might be the new first impression.
* NB ... I do not necessarily disagree with everything in the list of topics above, just pointing out that they make us look bad to "casual observers and newcomers".
-
So, you have a stalker, now?
It may be more accurate to say your constant feelings of superiority stem from narcisisstic personality disorder.
I don't have "constant feelings of superiority." I regret and am ashamed of many of the things I've said and done on trad forums. These have made me very aware of just how NOT superior I am. I do not mistake the sort of academic knowledge that I have for the prudence and wisdom that comes from good Catholic formation. I look at people like that with admiration and, I admit, some envy, hoping to learn from their example.
But I can often tell when people are making bogus claims about history, misunderstanding historical docuмents, and similar errors. I don't think it is an especially valuable skill but it is the one I have so I try to use it responsibly. When I point out the various mistakes that flat earthers make in the areas I know about, it does not come from thinking that I am a better person than they are.
While "rum" under various names does have a pattern of dragging up my past, I don't think that he actually follows me in order to do so. I did not intend to claim that he is a stalker and never used that word. I do resent that, no matter how hard I try to do better and live down my past mistakes, he is ready to jump into threads linking to things that happened years ago.
If you are truly concerned about my personality flaws, one thing I struggle with is an unhealthy attraction to being the center of attention. You could help by talking about the issues rather than making it a thread about me. My faults, past and present, have nothing to do with this.
-
And yet casual observers and newcomers might get the impression that Traditional Catholics in general promote wife-beating, believe that Jєωs run the world, think that Hitler was a misunderstood good guy, don't believe that the h0Ɩ0cαųst happened, despise ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, and have racist attitudes. So now that flat earthism isn't the "first impression" someone might get of Traditional Catholicism, any one of these other topics might be the new first impression.
* NB ... I do not necessarily disagree with everything in the list of topics above, just pointing out that they make us look bad to "casual observers and newcomers".
The worst posts of this sort tend to occur in the Anonymous subforum, an abuse of its intended function. I have posted in the past about my belief that reforms to that subforum would be useful. I even started a thread once for people to brainstorm on this topic, to see if we could come up with any helpful suggestions for Matthew. I wonder if it would also be improved by taking advantage of this forum upgrade.
Well, if your intent in asking Matthew to hide the Flat Earth threads was to prevent Traditional Catholics from looking bad, Matthew should likewise have banned all the threads in which you and other Trads were advocating wife-beating.
I don't think it is fair to characterize my position as advocating wife-beating. I was taking a historical perspective, trying to convey how our ancestors would have understood corporal punishment of wives within a completely different general understanding of corporal punishment. My point was that we should not to judge past Catholics by today's standards rather than to advocate corporal punishment of wives as a current practice. I explicitly said that was a bad idea in our modern setting.
-
And yet casual observers and newcomers might get the impression that Traditional Catholics in general promote wife-beating, believe that Jєωs run the world, think that Hitler was a misunderstood good guy, don't believe that the h0Ɩ0cαųst happened, despise ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, and have racist attitudes. So now that flat earthism isn't the "first impression" someone might get of Traditional Catholicism, any one of these other topics might be the new first impression.
* NB ... I do not necessarily disagree with everything in the list of topics above, just pointing out that they make us look bad to "casual observers and newcomers".
This wins for Post of the Day at CI.
-
I don't think it is fair to characterize my position as advocating wife-beating.
I know that. I use the term wife-beating to drive home the perception that it would create among those on the outside. Similarly with "h0Ɩ0cαųst denial", the position would more fairly be characterized as "h0Ɩ0cαųst exaggeration".
-
Agreed. As much as I hate to admit it, that was a very good observation by Ladislaus. Except that he left out "sedevacantism" from the list of possible first impressions. :)
While I myself lean sedevacantist (with my own nuances), I actually don't disagree that this creates a very bad first impression. People think you're as nutty if you think that Francis isn't pope as if you go around talking about a flat earth. I know some sedevacantist priests who refuse to directly answer the question of whether Francis is pope, and instead try talking around it, because they realize that it would scare people away due to this striking first impression.
-
Now, I don't know all the reasons behind this move, but if one of them is not wanting to make us look bad to the outside world, flat earth pales in comparison to some of the other things I listed.
Then, if the reasoning is not to take over the Recent Topics list, a compromise of listing just one thread in some of these subforums would seem to be in order ... although I can't say if it's possible with this particular forum software to do that.
-
Flat earthers don't really do that. We admit up-front what our views are. We don't care so much about what others think. Maybe that's where we are different. Nothing to hide.
I don't know. Some might not be so open about it.
By way of example, I don't readily come out with my views regarding 9/11 ... until I have had a chance to feel someone out first and perhaps drop some trial balloons. Much less would I just start openly and publicly talking about my views on the h0Ɩ0cαųst. It wouldn't take much for somebody to call CPS on my family and my kids ... just out of spite. I worked at NASA some years ago and nearly got fired for openly talking about being against the bombing of Afghanistan after 9/11. I have learned to pick my battles out here in the world.
And in my listing of subjects, I wasn't trying to single OTHER people out because I myself would be considered one of these "nutjobs" in the eyes of the world on the topics of: Moon Landing, h0Ɩ0cαųst, 9/11, Khazar Control of Governments and Infiltration of the Church, Possible Sedevacantism, and Possible Flat Earth ... not to mention with regard to my views that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a sin against nature. So much of my earlier list actually applies to me.
-
I know that. I use the term wife-beating to drive home the perception that it would create among those on the outside. Similarly with "h0Ɩ0cαųst denial", the position would more fairly be characterized as "h0Ɩ0cαųst exaggeration".
If we got rid of all the topics in which reasonable and nuanced positions might be mischaracterized as something that creates a bad impression there would be no forum.
-
If we got rid of all the topics in which reasonable and nuanced positions might be mischaracterized as something that creates a bad impression there would be no forum.
Right, but my point is that if we're going to hide flat earth due to the possible perception of casual newcomers and onlookers, then we should hide other topics as well. What may seem "reasonable and nuanced" to you may not seem that way to someone else. So, for instance, I don't consider flat earth theory to be unreasonable. I don't agree with them that flat earth is a teaching of the Church, but scientifically I'm not unwilling to entertain the possibility ... and some of the evidence appears to be rather credible.
-
By the way, most outsiders would consider Geocentrism to be NEARLY as crazy as Flat Earthism. And for some time Geocentrist threads were very prominent among Recent Topics.
JayneK, would you want Geocentrism to go the way of Flat Earth and be hidden from view? If so, why? If not, why not? If not, then what's the difference between Geocentrism and Flat Earthism that would justify treating them differently?
-
I don't know. Some might not be so open about it.
By way of example, I don't readily come out with my views regarding 9/11 ... until I have had a chance to feel someone out first and perhaps drop some trial balloons. Much less would I just start openly and publicly talking about my views on the h0Ɩ0cαųst. It wouldn't take much for somebody to call CPS on my family and my kids ... just out of spite. I worked at NASA and nearly got fired for openly talking about being against the bombing of Afghanistan after 9/11. I have learned to pick my battles out here in the world.
Well, yes, out in the real world we do have to be careful about what we talk about, especially 9/11 and the h0Ɩ0cαųst. But this forum provides a place to discuss controversial subjects. And other trad venues, such as the AKA Catholic blog, seems like it should be a place to admit of one's true beliefs, but that doesn't seem to be the case (for Verrecchio anyway).
It's possible that the subject of the flat earth is a relatively new one for trads, and as such, it's not being accepted as a legitimate thing to discuss. And it clashes with the scientific views that we all grew up with and accepted as being true.
We're used to the other controversial subjects, since they've been around for a long time now on trad venues. I realize that FE is a bit freaky for trads. But then so are other controversial subjects, as you have indicated.
When a man has to support a family, he has to be careful about what he says, as you indicated above with your job at NASA. Battles do have to be picked, I agree.
-
Right, but my point is that if we're going to hide flat earth due to the possible perception of casual newcomers and onlookers, then we should hide other topics as well. What may seem "reasonable and nuanced" to you may not seem that way to someone else. So, for instance, I don't consider flat earth theory to be unreasonable. I don't agree with them that flat earth is a teaching of the Church, but scientifically I'm not unwilling to entertain the possibility ... and some of the evidence appears to be rather credible.
I have never objected to them discussing it as a matter of science. It is reasonable enough to look at science arguments for and against it. My issue is the frequent denunciations of Catholics as heretics for believing the earth is a sphere. This is not a reasonable position and is easily proven wrong. There are no nuances or two sides to the story on this. This cannot be said of most of the other forum controversies.
-
By the way, most outsiders would consider Geocentrism to be NEARLY as crazy as Flat Earthism. And for some time Geocentrist threads were very prominent among Recent Topics.
JayneK, would you want Geocentrism to go the way of Flat Earth and be hidden from view? If so, why? If not, why not? If not, then what's the difference between Geocentrism and Flat Earthism that would justify treating them differently?
I think that (spherical earth) geocentrism is a reasonable position for traditional Catholics. It is the traditional view of Catholics and was the concensus position of the Christian world for about a thousand years. Based on my meager grasp of science, I think the science support is better for it too.
Depending on what aspects were discusssed, I would not want it hidden. Popular culture badly misunderstands what happened around the condemnation of Galileo, so it would be very helpful for people to be exposed to more accurate accounts of this. My personal experience of proponents of this view is that they tend to be intelligent and articulate, so I have fewer concerns about the forum being embarrassed by them. On the other hand, if there were a bunch of dogmatic geocentrists regularly pronouncing anathemas on those who disagreed with them, I would want that hidden.
-
Well, yes, out in the real world we do have to be careful about what we talk about, especially 9/11 and the h0Ɩ0cαųst. But this forum provides a place to discuss controversial subjects. And other trad venues, such as the AKA Catholic blog, seems like it should be a place to admit of one's true beliefs, but that doesn't seem to be the case (for Verrecchio anyway).
Yeah, forums are funny that way. I guess that because we (or some of us, since I don't) maintain our anonymity, we feel almost as if this is a private chat. But it really is a public venue ... and can affect someone's impression of Traditional Catholicism.
-
I have never objected to them discussing it as a matter of science. It is reasonable enough to look at science arguments for and against it. My issue is the frequent denunciations of Catholics as heretics for believing the earth is a sphere. This is not a reasonable position and is easily proven wrong. There are no nuances or two sides to the story on this. This cannot be said of most of the other forum controversies.
Well, the term "heretic" flies around this forum like it was going out of style. I know this first hand (don't ask me how). :) Yet I don't think anyone has ever called you a heretic for believing in globe earth ... a Satanist, yes, an apostate, certainly, but not a heretic ... per se. :laugh1:
As we've seen on this forum, one man's heresy is another man's dogma. LOL. We have several subjects in which a principle that one group holds as dogma the opposing group considers heresy. Very interesting phenomenon in its own right.
-
Then you believe that we shouldn't be allowed to discuss FE from a religious POV?
We are Catholics here. Just about everything should be considered from a religious point of view. The point of view is not the problem. It is the religious errors. There is no justification whatsoever for saying that belief in spherical earth is a heresy or that there is any obligation on Catholics to accept a flat earth.
This isn't like sedevacantism or baptism of desire where people can make good arguments on both sides. It is a totally baseless position.
-
We are Catholics here. Just about everything should be considered from a religious point of view. The point of view is not the problem. It is the religious errors. There is no justification whatsoever for saying that belief in spherical earth is a heresy or that there is any obligation on Catholics to accept a flat earth.
This isn't like sedevacantism or baptism of desire where people can make good arguments on both sides. It is a totally baseless position.
Well, while I don't agree with their position, I wouldn't call it "totally baseless". They cite quite a few Church Fathers who believed that the earth is flat and then invoke the principle that Patristic agreement on Scriptural interpretation has theological significance. You cite Leo XIII teaching what appear to be the contrary, but the fact that at one point the Church condemned geocentrism as heretical seems to go against that. So it's a stretch to call the position "totally baseless". Sometimes "totally baseless" depends on your point of view.
Some people would call the position that Baptism of Desire is heretical to be "totally baseless", etc. etc. Some people say that it's heretical to believe in BoD, while others say it's heretical NOT to believe in it.
-
But what bearing on a person's salvation does the h0Ɩ0cαųst question have?
Ladislaus, I value your opinion on many things and I realize that there are some, if not even many, Catholics who are embarrassed by those Catholics who publicly insist on the truth of geocentrism or insist on the falsity of the 6 million gas chamber version of what is commonly referred to as the h0Ɩ0cαųst. A good number of traditional Catholics may feel that it is highly imprudent to publicly assert these views because that will drive potential traditional Catholics as well as non-Catholics from coming to accept traditional Catholicism. Obviously, this is something which various Catholics of "good faith and will" can disagree on.
I, for the record, don't think that traditional Catholics should back away from publicly asserting the truth of geocentrism nor the falsity of the 6 million gas chamber fairy tale.
I think Catholics should realize that the Shoah Theology built around and on the 6 million gas chamber myth is a total sham which feeds an international extortion racket as well as a perpetual victim card for the modern day ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan, not to mention a vast brainwashing element in our society which works to legitimize anti-Christ тαℓмυdic Judaism while all the while marginalizing and even deligitimizing the Theology of Calvary. I think it is important that Catholics push back on this demonic lying hoax regardless of whether others are put off by it or not.
I think many Catholics simply undervalue -- if indeed they assign any value at all to it -- of the importance of the truth of geocentrism and of the importance of the falsity of the conventional h0Ɩ0cαųst narrative.
The "official" h0Ɩ0cαųst narrative has become a pillar of the modern ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan's anti-Christ religion. That is why I believe it is fair game to fight against it with all of our informed beliefs and wits on public forums such as this and others.
******************************************************************************************************************
You ask "what bearing on a person's salvation does the h0Ɩ0cαųst question have." I think that question represents the classical way Catholics and others use to put down discussion, and more specifically critiques of the h0Ɩ0cαųst question/narrative. My answer to your question is that the h0Ɩ0cαųst question is absolutely integral to the Jєωιѕн Question and the Jєωιѕн Question has indeed had a real bearing on people's salvation in the practical order of things down through the centuries. Traditional minded popes such as Pope St. Pius V were well aware of the immense danger Jєωs presented and they spoke and wrote about it and sometimes took strong practical measures against it.
The ignorance which so many Catholics seem to have concerning the Jєωιѕн Question is most unfortunate because by their ignorance they disarm themselves of the powerful defense of the truth. The h0Ɩ0cαųst as the world would have us believe is a despicable lie and it no ordinary lie. It is a lie which serves as a mainstay and mighty pillar to the demonic religion of Judaism. That false religion with all of its tentacles is at total war with Christianity. As soldiers of the Church militant we are called to fight back and part of fighting back is to boldly expose the falsity of that pillar of modern day Judaism known as the h0Ɩ0cαųst.
Pope St. Pius X: "In our times more than ever before, the chief strength of the wicked, lies in the cowardice and weakness of good men....All the strength of Satan's reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics." Pope St. Pius X didn't hesitate to tell the Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern day Zionism, to take a hike. He told him straight out that Catholics could not recognize the Jєωs because the Jєωs do not recognize Our Saviour Jesus Christ. Now in modern times we are supposed to recognize the centerpiece of modern day Zionism, the h0Ɩ0h0αx. The lie of the h0Ɩ0h0αx arose from hell and that is where it should be cast back with no apologies or qualifications whatsoever.
-
Ladislaus, I value your opinion on many things and I realize that there are some, if not even many, Catholics who are embarrassed by those Catholics who publicly insist on the truth of geocentrism or insist on the falsity of the 6 million gas chamber version of what is commonly referred to as the h0Ɩ0cαųst.
While I too understand the ramifications of the h0Ɩ0cαųst problem, my point was that I will not lose my soul if I happen to believe that 6 million Jєωs perished in the h0Ɩ0cαųst.
-
You should try to get yourself appointed moderator here, Jayne, like you did on the Fisheaters forum when you took the side of the sodomite tranny and Tracy forum owner who were against those of us who believe in Church teaching.
I never tried to get myself appointed moderator there or anywhere. There was once a post on CI that accused me of that. It came from a person "reading between the lines" of a Fisheaters post in which I responded to somebody else's suggestion that I be a moderator. I clearly rejected the idea and listed all the reasons why it was a bad idea. My accuser decided that I really meant the opposite of what I wrote. I can probably find the thread if you really want to see it.
It is true that I did take the wrong side on "Trannygate" at first. I eventually figured out that I was wrong, took a public stand against the forum owner's position and was banned. I regret that it took me so long.
-
I never tried to get myself appointed moderator there or anywhere. There was once a post on CI that accused me of that. It came from a person "reading between the lines" of a Fisheaters post in which I responded to somebody else's suggestion that I be a moderator. I clearly rejected the idea and listed all the reasons why it was a bad idea. My accuser decided that I really meant the opposite of what I wrote. I can probably find the thread if you really want to see it.
It is true that I did take the wrong side on "Trannygate" at first. I eventually figured out that I was wrong, took a public stand against the forum owner's position and was banned. I regret that it took me so long.
I remember it well. You were so sure that you were correct to support the sodomite tranny and Tracy, and that everyone who opposed them (and you) were wrong. I was one of the most outspoken against your view, and I was banned because of it. But that was okay, because I didn't want to be a part of a forum like that anyway.
-
Jayne, you obviously believe that we should not be able to use religion to back up our claim of a flat earth.
You want us to separate God from His Creation. That's what the progressives want too. We cannot comply with you rule.
Catholicism does not back up your claim of a flat earth and I object to you saying that it does. I have no objection to people backing up their claims with religion when they use factual statements about Catholicism. For example, I would have no problem with a person supporting traditional (spherical earth) geocentrism by appealing to Catholic teaching.
-
While I too understand the ramifications of the h0Ɩ0cαųst problem, my point was that I will not lose my soul if I happen to believe that 6 million Jєωs perished in the h0Ɩ0cαųst.
Do you believe the 6 million (mostly gas chamber victims) narrative? Do you think it was wrong for Bishop Williamson to have openly critiqued it?
-
Do you believe the 6 million (mostly gas chamber victims) narrative? Do you think it was wrong for Bishop Williamson to have openly critiqued it?
No, I do not believe the mainstream narrative regarding the h0Ɩ0cαųst. I do not think it was "wrong" per se for Bishop Williamson to publicly criticize it, but I do think that it was imprudent.
-
Why is your objection so incredibly important? What's so special about you that you have to always make yourself and your objections the center of the dialogue?
My objections are not especially important. You asked me to explain my view and misrepresented my answer so I clarified it. You'd think I would have learned not to answer your questions by now.
(http://movieboozer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/lucy-football.jpg)
-
I remember it well. You were so sure that you were correct to support the sodomite tranny and Tracy, and that everyone who opposed them (and you) were wrong. I was one of the most outspoken against your view, and I was banned because of it. But that was okay, because I didn't want to be a part of a forum like that anyway.
Thanks for the story.
Again, very revealing.
-
This topic has spun WAY off topic, so I'm putting it out of its misery. Start a new thread if you must -- in the correct subforum of course.