Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Matthew on August 09, 2013, 12:00:36 PM
-
I'm not familiar with the concept -- you join a forum, spend practically ALL DAY there, but you CAN'T STAND the owners?
Here is the breakdown of downvotes for the forum owner and his wife:
Matthew: PaxRomanum18 (25.71%, or 27 downvotes) Telesphorus (23.81%, or 25 downvotes). From there, it goes to 12.3%, then 4.7%, then it trails off.
MaterDominici: Telesphorus (40.74%, or 11 downvotes) PaxRomanum18 (18.52%, or 5 downvotes). From there, it drops to 7.4%, and the list ends very quickly soon thereafter.
Let it be noted that my wife is much more pleasant than me, and consequently she only has 10 unique critics total. On the whole board. Going back several months.
But to fully understand these numbers, I have to say a few things:
1. These two are by far the biggest critics. Out of the entire forum, no one else feels anywhere near as strongly against the two of us.
2. These numbers would be much higher if I hadn't programmed in a "circuit breaker" to prevent one person from exceeding 25% of a given victim's downvotes!
Again, it can't be emphasized enough that this is the ENTIRE FORUM we're talking about. CathInfo doesn't just have 1 or 2 dozen active members. We have hundreds. And none of them see the feminism or liberalism that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum apparently see. Therefore, they are extreme and are "off", since they are quite alone.
Even on a hard-core, anti-liberal, anti-feminist, serious Trad board like CathInfo.
Do you understand the significance of this? Even their friends (assuming they have any) don't agree with them! Or they would be close behind them in downvotes. But no, the hypothetical friends of these two individuals must just be giving them lip service and/or changing the subject -- because they certainly don't see the "issues" that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum see.
-
If anyone asks "how can someone get more than 25% of the downvotes? I thought that wasn't possible?"
It's because the first 20 downvotes are a "freebie" -- When a person has less than 20 downvotes, it's "anything goes". The circuit breakers don't trip in until the person has a certain number of downvotes.
-
So not only do you reveal who posts anonymous posts, but now you reveal who is downrating you, because you're stung by my downrates?
You should appreciate having someone to downrate you.
It's not as though I don't uprate you.
-
You've uprated me 18 times, and MaterDominici 5 times, yes.
I don't have a problem with "critics". As you can see, I have 28 of them from the past few months. It's part of the game. But I'm saying that you take it too far.
If my posts were that deserving of criticism, you would have more competition being "#1" among my critics. But the point of the OP is -- you don't.
The point is that you are head-and-shoulders above everyone else when it comes to seeing a "problem" with me or my posts.
Ergo, the problem is all in your mind and doesn't exist.
-
I'm not familiar with the concept -- you join a forum, spend practically ALL DAY there, but you CAN'T STAND the owners?
Here is the breakdown of downvotes for the forum owner and his wife:
Matthew: PaxRomanum18 (25.71%, or 27 downvotes) Telesphorus (23.81%, or 25 downvotes). From there, it goes to 12.3%, then 4.7%, then it trails off.
MaterDominici: Telesphorus (40.74%, or 11 downvotes) PaxRomanum18 (18.52%, or 5 downvotes). From there, it drops to 7.4%, and the list ends very quickly soon thereafter.
Let it be noted that my wife is much more pleasant than me, and consequently she only has 10 unique critics total. On the whole board. Going back several months.
But to fully understand these numbers, I have to say a few things:
1. These two are by far the biggest critics. Out of the entire forum, no one else feels anywhere near as strongly against the two of us.
2. These numbers would be much higher if I hadn't programmed in a "circuit breaker" to prevent one person from exceeding 25% of a given victim's downvotes!
Again, it can't be emphasized enough that this is the ENTIRE FORUM we're talking about. CathInfo doesn't just have 1 or 2 dozen active members. We have hundreds. And none of them see the feminism or liberalism that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum apparently see. Therefore, they are extreme and are "off", since they are quite alone.
Even on a hard-core, anti-liberal, anti-feminist, serious Trad board like CathInfo.
Do you understand the significance of this? Even their friends (assuming they have any) don't agree with them! Or they would be close behind them in downvotes. But no, the hypothetical friends of these two individuals must just be giving them lip service and/or changing the subject -- because they certainly don't see the "issues" that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum see.
I don't disagree that they are wrong. I have not followed them. But your argumentation is faulty:
We have hundreds. And none of them see the feminism or liberalism that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum apparently see. Therefore, they are extreme and are "off", since they are quite alone.
What is the therefore there for? Extremism is counted by vote. Say 99 out of 100 believe abortion is okay at least for some reason. Does that make the 1 an extremist? For a convincing argument you have to give a sound reason, something apart from how many agree with them or not. Are we not out numbered by the novus ordo 1 billion to like 100,000 or something? Does that make us extreme? We are called extreme but we are far more orthodox than they. They are extreme in their acceptance of heresy and faulty liturgy. We are not. It is not the numbers that make one extreme.
And 7 billion do not consider themselves Catholics while 1 billion do. Does that make us extreme.
Your argument about "how many agree with them" follows the same faulty reasoning.
Again you probably have come to the right conclusion but your reasoning behind that conclusion being valid is faulty.
Do you see my point?
-
You've uprated me 18 times, and MaterDominici 5 times, yes.
The point is that you are head-and-shoulders above everyone else when it comes to seeing a "problem".
Ergo, the problem is all in your mind and doesn't exist.
That is based on the assumption that other people who have a problem with your actions necessarily resort to negative rep.
-
No, you are wrong, because we're talking about CathInfo.
CathInfo is already the "truth", the minority.
When even other hardcore Trad Catholics think you're extreme, you're extreme.
Sometimes, when you're a minority of 1, you're just crazy. That's the truth.
No one has started a chocolate-covered cheeseburger restaurant yet! I'm a genius! I'll be rich!
...or, maybe there's a reason no one thought of it yet.
-
No, you are wrong, because we're talking about CathInfo.
CathInfo is already the "truth", the minority.
We're talking about YOU personally.
When even other hardcore Trad Catholics think you're extreme, you're extreme.
The majority here doesn't have a problem with me.
Sometimes, when you're a minority of 1, you're just crazy. That's the truth.
"minority of one" - who are you kidding?
-
No, you are wrong, because we're talking about CathInfo.
CathInfo is already the "truth", the minority.
We're talking about YOU personally.
When even other hardcore Trad Catholics think you're extreme, you're extreme.
The majority here doesn't have a problem with me.
Sometimes, when you're a minority of 1, you're just crazy. That's the truth.
"minority of one" - who are you kidding?
I know you're talking about me, and no I'm not kidding anyone.
You are a minority of 2, in having a problem with my posts (or me).
No one else has that much problem with me.
-
That I excite great hostility here is nothing new.
That you start to side with those hostile over you being neg-repped is pretty silly.
No wonder people don't negrep you, if you post threads whining about it!
you obviously take it personally.
-
someone just told me:
I saw that. It's funny actually.
You know
if you have a problem with somebody personally like that
you contact them privately.
You don't create threads about it.
Obviously Matthew is very sensitive about it.
I've down-thumbed him before.
I don't downthumb very often, however.
so much for being alone
-
That I excite great hostility here is nothing new.
That you start to side with those hostile over you being neg-repped is pretty silly.
No wonder people don't negrep you, if you post threads whining about it!
you obviously take it personally.
I only looked it up because it's an objective measure of "obsession".
I was thinking that you've become quite obsessed with disliking me and my wife lately.
And boy was I right!
I just got to thinking the same thing as Fr. Rostand, "Why do you come here, if you dislike the organization so much?"
I guess you have to respond with many in the Resistance, "Where else can we go? You still have the best thing going."
-
I was thinking that you've become quite obsessed with disliking me and my wife lately.
Disliking your posts, like this thread?
I wonder why?
Seriously, I think you misapprehend what's going on for whatever reason.
Maybe you're feeling stung, I don't know.
-
I have a question for you Tele.
You regularly accuse people on this forum of being liberals, ungodly or pretend Catholics. But it's impossible to notice your post count, both under your own name and anonymously and the fact that when I post at 7-8am in the morning before I start work, you are often replying within minutes, in the middle of the US night there in Cincinnati. You do, it seems, spend inordinate amounts of time posting to this forum. So much, in fact, that I and many others, wonder what else you do with your life.
As a single man in relatively good health how do you square posting all day and all night (and I think Matthew's stats would confirm this) with being a staunch and serious Catholic? Surely, even if you cannot get a job, there are day-time masses, devotions and all sorts of charitable works you could be doing which would preclude you replying immediately to posts or making the number of posts you do.
How do you justify spending the time here that you do?
Do you think any resistance priest would condone the amount of time you spend on here or would they tell you to quit and go and do something more productive with your life?
-
I have a question for you Tele.
You regularly accuse people on this forum of being liberals, ungodly or pretend Catholics. But it's impossible to notice your post count, both under your own name and anonymously and the fact that when I post at 7-8am in the morning before I start work, you are often replying within minutes, in the middle of the US night there in Cincinnati. You do, it seems, spend inordinate amounts of time posting to this forum. So much, in fact, that I and many others, wonder what else you do with your life.
It's pretty simple. It's called doing what is best with my time, since I am shunned by people who support those who make false accusations, as you do, attacking the reputations of betrayed Catholic family men, speaking of a "welfare, homeschooling and gardening lifestyle"
Posting on this forum is a great advantage to me. I have many opportunities for friendship and advancement I otherwise wouldn't have.
As a single man in relatively good health how do you square posting all day and all night (and I think Matthew's stats would confirm this) with being a staunch and serious Catholic? Surely, even if you cannot get a job, there are day-time masses, devotions and all sorts of charitable works you could be doing.
How do you justify spending the time here that you do?
It's quite simple:
when people who say that they have reservations about what might have changed in the Catholic religion go on to promote liberalism on a Catholic forum, they need to be opposed. Someone has to oppose liberals. I have the intellect and the means to do it.
Do you think any resistance priest would condone the amount of time you spend on here or would they tell you to quit and go and do something more productive with your life?
I think the amount of time I would spend in such occupations would be greatly reduced if people here were doing their job.
-
advancement I otherwise wouldn't have.
What sort of advancement?
-
I could easily have a job teaching traditional Catholics mathematics if it weren't for people like ggreg, who never miss an opportunity to accuse trad men of wrongdoing.
Guys like you send your children to public schools and ridicule trads on these boards because you're anti-Catholic.
And your posts about the religion being altered prove it.
-
advancement I otherwise wouldn't have.
What sort of advancement?
One thing I've learned is to NEVER tell malignant trads positive things that happen to you.
NEVER.
They are spiteful, petty creatures.
-
s2srea sent a woman here a slanderous post about me, that she revealed to me.
He is an extremely malicious person.
-
The OP has three downrates.
So much for Matthew's theory.
-
One thing I've learned is to NEVER tell malignant trads positive things that happen to you.
NEVER.
They are spiteful, petty creatures.
Get over yourself.
s2srea sent a woman here a slanderous post about me, that she revealed to me.
He is an extremely malicious person.
Anything I've said in private about you, is what I would say in public.
-
One thing I've learned is to NEVER tell malignant trads positive things that happen to you.
NEVER.
They are spiteful, petty creatures.
Get over yourself.
s2srea sent a woman here a slanderous post about me, that she revealed to me.
He is an extremely malicious person.
Anything I've said in private about you, is what I would say in public.
You're a cowardly liar.
-
One thing I've learned is to NEVER tell malignant trads positive things that happen to you.
NEVER.
They are spiteful, petty creatures.
Get over yourself.
s2srea sent a woman here a slanderous post about me, that she revealed to me.
He is an extremely malicious person.
Anything I've said in private about you, is what I would say in public.
You're a cowardly liar.
And here we go.......
-
And here we go.......
You know you're a slanderer who makes fake apologies.
-
And here we go.......
You know you're a slanderer who makes fake apologies.
The Telegizer bunny. Just keeps going.
(http://wae.blogs.starnewsonline.com/files/2013/02/bunnies-energizer1.jpg)
-
I wonder if Matthew is proud of this baiting thread, or if he thinks it deserves the downrates it has received.
I downrate people who make bad posts, and that includes you. If others don't, I don't blame them, seeing your reaction to it.
-
Gentlemen, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I will say that this is unbecoming a Catholic forum - trad or otherwise. It doesn't matter who initiated it, but please take it to PM. I came here to get away from Fish Kill.
-
Gentlemen, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I will say that this is unbecoming a Catholic forum - trad or otherwise. It doesn't matter who initiated it, but please take it to PM. I came here to get away from Fish Kill.
Charlemagne, I guess I'd better not use the rep function against Matthew anymore, except to uprate him, since otherwise it hurts his feelings.
Also, he suggests there is an "obsesssion"
Wow, sounds like something Vox would say. Seriously.
-
In an earlier post, just in case you believe Matthew's excuse that this is about my "obsession" - Matthew said that my rep score was fraudulent.
I wonder what he thinks of the opinions of the people hostile to me here who are siding with him downrating my posts - when he sees that his OP barely breaks even? What does that rep mean, when the forum owner starts a baiting thread complaining about being neg repped? I mean, would he really think the opinions of those siding with him outweigh in integrity those appalled by his crude posts?
Not that rep matters as to who is right and wrong. I wouldn't claim something dumb like that, unlike others.
-
Surely, even if you cannot get a job,
Shame on you Ggreg. You do not have good intentions, just out to devalue descent folks who reject your godless values.
-
People are afraid of the moderator.
-
Gentlemen, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I will say that this is unbecoming a Catholic forum - trad or otherwise. It doesn't matter who initiated it, but please take it to PM. I came here to get away from Fish Kill.
I would tend to agree with this post.
-
but you CAN'T STAND the owners?
Just to make something clear, it's obvious I can stand the owners, otherwise I wouldn't be here. If I couldn't stand the owners, I wouldn't uprate them either.
Do I sometimes vehemently disagree with the owners? Yes of course.
The sad reality is that it's not that I'm hostile to Matthew, he interprets my opposition to his actions as hostility to his person, which is not the case.
I can honestly say that. If I didn't like Matthew and Mater Dominici I wouldn't have posted at this forum for years, or visited their family.
They are nice people that I like a lot.
I hope Matthew tries to step back and objectively evaluate his motivations.
-
Surely, even if you cannot get a job,
Shame on you Ggreg. You do not have good intentions, just out to devalue descent folks who reject your godless values.
Tiffany, these people try to destroy reputations and it has nothing to do with wishing the best for others, it really does have to do with wishing the worst for them, which is so obvious.
The contempt ggreg exhibits towards many trads, not just me, is palpable. You don't say a trad reminds you of "jihadis" without having something of the thought patterns of secular Jews and anti-Christians. It is such a bizarre statement, it beggars belief someone who was really trad would say it.
He has revealed that he has for 20 years held heterodox views on FE.
-
And while I can stand what is going on, it's apparent that others are tired of it:
Well, I am sick of CathInfo.
I like that I've been able to get to know people there
but I could do with much less drama.
It's too bad.
And don't think it's only one, or Pax Romanum, etc.
-
Well, I am sick of CathInfo.
....
I could do with much less drama.
Me too!
History suggests it'll probably be better in a week or so, but right now: :faint:
Way too much drama for my liking.
-
Mathew,
Your point is not factoring in that some of us are aware that you, as the owner and moderator, are privy to knowledge that the rest of us aren't. So, these people act accordingly. If I were you, I would have left that bit of mystery alone for the people who don't know it. Now, everbody is aware.
Pax
-
Mathew,
Your point is not factoring in that some of us are aware that you, as the owner and moderator, are privy to knowledge that the rest of us aren't. So, these people act accordingly. If I were you, I would have left that bit of mystery alone for the people who don't know it. Now, everbody is aware.
Pax
Something to observe in this thread is that the downrates (against our side) aren't based on anything wrong with the post. They are based on personal hostility towards me, an attempt to exert peer pressure against anyone who speaks honestly, unless they criticize me.
-
As Telesphorus has been to your home, he is obviously one, you can vouch for so this should be discussed offline.
It's the same for the English and Ashmolean. Lamentably, Ashmo and I didn't speak when our paths crossed a few weeks ago but that is a reality now. I deemed it best not to speak with him.
-
One shouldn't get worked up about matters on these internet fora.
Napoli makes a good point below. It was the same for Patricius,Clare and Sarto on Ignis Ardens. They know those involved.
Mathew,
Your point is not factoring in that some of us are aware that you, as the owner and moderator, are privy to knowledge that the rest of us aren't. So, these people act accordingly. If I were you, I would have left that bit of mystery alone for the people who don't know it. Now, everbody is aware.
Pax
-
I have a question for you Tele.
You regularly accuse people on this forum of being liberals, ungodly or pretend Catholics. But it's impossible to notice your post count, both under your own name and anonymously and the fact that when I post at 7-8am in the morning before I start work, you are often replying within minutes, in the middle of the US night there in Cincinnati. You do, it seems, spend inordinate amounts of time posting to this forum. So much, in fact, that I and many others, wonder what else you do with your life.
As a single man in relatively good health how do you square posting all day and all night (and I think Matthew's stats would confirm this) with being a staunch and serious Catholic? Surely, even if you cannot get a job, there are day-time masses, devotions and all sorts of charitable works you could be doing which would preclude you replying immediately to posts or making the number of posts you do.
How do you justify spending the time here that you do?
Do you think any resistance priest would condone the amount of time you spend on here or would they tell you to quit and go and do something more productive with your life?
It is nobody's business what Telesphorus does with his offline life. No reason to justify anything.
-
Mathew,
Your point is not factoring in that some of us are aware that you, as the owner and moderator, are privy to knowledge that the rest of us aren't. So, these people act accordingly. If I were you, I would have left that bit of mystery alone for the people who don't know it. Now, everbody is aware.
Pax
How can you not like this post? I am pointing out only what is obvious to a person with average intellect.
-
It is nobody's business what Telesphorus does with his offline life. No reason to justify anything.
True, but the same should go for Telesphorus, no? Please, feel free to comment the next time he seeks out pictures of those engaging in immoral activity, offline.
-
:fryingpan:Okay, who's down-thumbing my Bp. W. posts? The more I get, the more graces! I suspect Telesphorus.
Frances, the :dancing-banana:!
-
Well, I am sick of CathInfo.
It's rather boring. So many threads of surprise regarding the Church of Bishop Fellay.
-
It is nobody's business what Telesphorus does with his offline life. No reason to justify anything.
True, but the same should go for Telesphorus, no? Please, feel free to comment the next time he seeks out pictures of those engaging in immoral activity, offline.
That was a few years ago and about girls who attended the SSPX and acted like tramps. The uncomfortable truth. Girls boozed out and tramping around. Did some feature in a John Vennari video? That is old news and hardly strange that SSPX girls in Ireland attend nightclubs or wear trousers or attend university.
A girl famously rebuked a friend of mine.She attends both Indult/SSPX yet wanted to be a SSPX girl.
Even a few ladies in SSPX London attend the Oratory.
-
I posted a public link, I didn't upload photographs.
It's just an example of what is publicly acceptable among trads, under their parents' roofs, in their parents presence.
Well stated. SSPX folk love to pass themselves off as 'Holier than thou'.
-
Surely, even if you cannot get a job,
Shame on you Ggreg. You do not have good intentions, just out to devalue descent folks who reject your godless values.
Tiffany, these people try to destroy reputations and it has nothing to do with wishing the best for others, it really does have to do with wishing the worst for them, which is so obvious.
The contempt ggreg exhibits towards many trads, not just me, is palpable. You don't say a trad reminds you of "jihadis" without having something of the thought patterns of secular Jews and anti-Christians. It is such a bizarre statement, it beggars belief someone who was really trad would say it.
He has revealed that he has for 20 years held heterodox views on FE.
It didn't surprise me that he recently posted a very memorable slam against Catholics that was posted by Vox's doppelganger Jenn (who used to run the Incorruptibles forum).
These people just don't like Catholicism. It's very simple.
But they're too wimpy to just leave the Church, so they try to refashion Catholicism into something it isn't.
Ggreg has a Jew mind. He's 70% pro-Israel.
Which is pretty remarkable when you consider that he's been running in SSPX circles for 30 years. He acts bewildered that anyone could be anti-Jєωιѕн. He never heard Lefebvre criticize Jews?
Lefebvre wrote to John Paul in 1985: “all the reforms carried out over 20 years within the church to please heretics, schismatics, false religions and declared enemies of the church, such as the Jews, the Communists and the Freemasons.”
The founder of the society he belonged to was outspokenly anti-Jєωιѕн, and ggreg expresses bewilderment with Catholics who are anti-Jєωιѕн? He makes zero sense.
He grew up in a Jєωιѕн neighborhood. It's tempting to call him a Jєωιѕн plant, but I don't have enough information to make that charge.
As for this thread I think it would have been better if Matthew resolves his differences with you (and Pax) through PM, especially since you two used to be (still are?) friends.
-
As for this thread I think it would have been better if Matthew resolves his differences with you (and Pax) through PM, especially since you two used to be (still are?) friends.
Agreed.Particularly when tele has been to their family home. The thread is unfair.
-
I posted a public link, I didn't upload photographs.
It's just an example of what is publicly acceptable among trads, under their parents' roofs, in their parents presence.
Well stated. SSPX folk love to pass themselves off as 'Holier than thou'.
Hope you weren't implying me. I was merely stating that if what Tele does offline is off-hands, he should do the same for others. Those photos may have been public, but I don't' think they were meant for him, and certainly weren't intended to be placed on this site. I know quite a bit more about this subject, as does Tele, but will leave it at that; for now. The facts are, as I understand them, that he harassed that girl and her family. He has a thing for vengeance, then when he's called out on it, he cowers and plays the role of a victim.
I've said it before, I"ll say it again: Chesterton has done an excellent job describing Telesphorus:
Orthodoxy[/url]]The madman's explanation of a thing is always complete, and often in a
purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly, the
insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this
may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of
madness. If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against
him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that
they are conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators would do. His
explanation covers the facts as much as yours. Or if a man says that he
is the rightful King of England, it is no complete answer to say that
the existing authorities call him mad; for if he were King of England
that might be the wisest thing for the existing authorities to do. Or if
a man says that he is Jesus Christ, it is no answer to tell him that the
world denies his divinity; for the world denied Christ's.
Nevertheless he is wrong. But if we attempt to trace his error in exact
terms, we shall not find it quite so easy as we had supposed. Perhaps
the nearest we can get to expressing it is to say this: that his mind
moves in a perfect but narrow circle. A small circle is quite as
infinite as a large circle; but, though it is quite as infinite, it is
not so large. In the same way the insane explanation is quite as
complete as the sane one, but it is not so large. A bullet is quite as
round as the world, but it is not the world. There is such a thing as a
narrow universality; there is such a thing as a small and cramped
eternity; you may see it in many modern religions. Now, speaking quite
externally and empirically, we may say that the strongest and most
unmistakable _mark_ of madness is this combination between a logical
completeness and a spiritual contraction. The lunatic's theory explains
a large number of things, but it does not explain them in a large way.
-
That's exactly the sort of quote someone would use to criticize members of the resistance.
-
That's exactly the sort of quote someone would use to criticize members of the resistance.
Thumbs up- that was funny!
-
Surely, even if you cannot get a job,
Shame on you Ggreg. You do not have good intentions, just out to devalue descent folks who reject your godless values.
Tiffany, these people try to destroy reputations and it has nothing to do with wishing the best for others, it really does have to do with wishing the worst for them, which is so obvious.
The contempt ggreg exhibits towards many trads, not just me, is palpable. You don't say a trad reminds you of "jihadis" without having something of the thought patterns of secular Jews and anti-Christians. It is such a bizarre statement, it beggars belief someone who was really trad would say it.
He has revealed that he has for 20 years held heterodox views on FE.
It didn't surprise me that he recently posted a very memorable slam against Catholics that was posted by Vox's doppelganger Jenn (who used to run the Incorruptibles forum).
These people just don't like Catholicism. It's very simple.
But they're too wimpy to just leave the Church, so they try to refashion Catholicism into something it isn't.
Ggreg has a Jew mind. He's 70% pro-Israel.
Which is pretty remarkable when you consider that he's been running in SSPX circles for 30 years. He acts bewildered that anyone could be anti-Jєωιѕн. He never heard Lefebvre criticize Jews?
Lefebvre wrote to John Paul in 1985: “all the reforms carried out over 20 years within the church to please heretics, schismatics, false religions and declared enemies of the church, such as the Jews, the Communists and the Freemasons.”
The founder of the society he belonged to was outspokenly anti-Jєωιѕн, and ggreg expresses bewilderment with Catholics who are anti-Jєωιѕн? He makes zero sense.
He grew up in a Jєωιѕн neighborhood. It's tempting to call him a Jєωιѕн plant, but I don't have enough information to make that charge.
As for this thread I think it would have been better if Matthew resolves his differences with you (and Pax) through PM, especially since you two used to be (still are?) friends.
You don't have to ever post here to have the same rep power as anyone else.
So you have a lot of absentee "posters" with an axe to grind. Thus you see a lot of the mindless ratings without comment.
-
We have hundreds. And none of them see the feminism or liberalism that Telesphorus and PaxRomanum apparently see. Therefore, they are extreme and are "off," since they are quite alone.
What is the therefore there for?
LoT -- that gave me a good chuckle. Thanks. :roll-laugh1:
I must have missed where PaxRomanum18 and Telesphorus
have explained that the reason they have 'downthumbed'
Matthew and MaterDominici is because they're not in
agreement with their Feminism or Liberalism.
I mean, who knows? Maybe PR18 and Tele think the Mods
are not Feminist or Liberal ENOUGH! :rolleyes:
-
.
Now, here's another benchmark that other members can strive
to catch up to ..... only problem is, you have to look so hard to
find any posts by Matthew or MaterDominici that you can justify
giving a thumb down for, therefore.
-
I just hope none of Cathinfo's good posters leave here due to these arguments.
-
but you CAN'T STAND the owners?
Just to make something clear, it's obvious I can stand the owners, otherwise I wouldn't be here. If I couldn't stand the owners, I wouldn't uprate them either.
Do I sometimes vehemently disagree with the owners? Yes of course.
The sad reality is that it's not that I'm hostile to Matthew, he interprets my opposition to his actions as hostility to his person, which is not the case.
I can honestly say that. If I didn't like Matthew and Mater Dominici I wouldn't have posted at this forum for years, or visited their family.
They are nice people that I like a lot.
I hope Matthew tries to step back and objectively evaluate his motivations.
Looking at this whole affair, for years, really, it gives me the
impression that there is more to the thumb feature than what
members are led to believe. It really couldn't be all that
important. Therefore, it at least gives the IMPRESSION that
some kind of deal is operational, whereby the reputation value
that the forum owner has is somehow a component for some
other thing, such as frequent flyer miles, or a factor in the ad
value compensation, or a status mark on someone's scorecard
whereby various benefits are dispensed, or perhaps even
something as mundane as a private wager with a friend. There
has got to be an underlying reason that these up-thumbs and
down-thumbs are so seriously significant to someone who has
much better things to do than worry about numbers on a graph.
Up-thumbs or down-thumbs are not virtues, vices, sins or works.
They don't count for grace or merit in the eyes of God.
You don't have to confess them to a priest or ask for absolution.
You can't take them to the bank.................. or,,,,,,,,, can you?
Maybe it depends on who "you" are.
I just hope none of Cathinfo's good posters leave here due to these arguments.
Very well said, Matto. It is quite unbecoming of Catholic behavior
to be obsessed with a measly pittance of ridiculous nonsense like
thumbs up or down. WHO CARES?
Is this Facebook or something?
If so, maybe it's time to leave. The stupid thumbs don't even do
what they're supposed to do. Most of the time when someone
likes or dislikes a particular post, it doesn't occur to them to rate
it with a thumb. And not infrequently, the thumb is voted not because
of the content of a particular post but because of the ID of the
member who posted it REGARDLESS of what was said.
So the thumbs are largely a JOKE. They don't WORK. Why USE THEM?
-
Gentlemen, I don't have a dog in this fight, but I will say that this is unbecoming a Catholic forum - trad or otherwise. It doesn't matter who initiated it, but please take it to PM. I came here to get away from Fish Kill.
I agree. This crap belongs on I(gnorant)A(**h***s) or F(ag)E(nablers).
The potential of CI imploding to become something it's not or of posters having some kind of nervous breakdown is becoming apparent.
-
advancement I otherwise wouldn't have.
What sort of advancement?
Yes, what sort?
-
I just hope none of Cathinfo's good posters leave here due to these arguments.
Maybe, maybe not but it will make everyone think twice now before we thumb down the moderators of the forum -- that they are keeping track somehow.
Apparently it means something to them if they are willing to make a public topic about it.
-
You don't have to ever post here to have the same rep power as anyone else.
So you have a lot of absentee "posters" with an axe to grind. Thus you see a lot of the mindless ratings without comment.
I'm fairly convinced that there are lurkers who never post, and
just page through the threads giving thumbs as they please, not
because they like or dislike the post, or even the member who
wrote it, but because they like to make readers confused. It's
just a game. You know, like another video game.
If they had to pay something, like a penny, for each thumb vote,
they might think twice about throwing them around like that.
Now there's food for thought!! 20,000 thumbs - that could have
been $200............................. :scratchchin:
Since they don't have to explain the reason they're making a
vote one way or the other, nor do they have to show any
consistency in their voting record - how could they, because
they might change their mind every day or two - so they can
vote up or down all they want and nobody is the wiser.
Only there are those who might be staring at the stats and
groping at straws trying to extract some kind of meaning from
it all WHEN THERE ISN'T ANY.
Tee-hee-hee ----------- see how fun that is? :facepalm:
-
Apparently it means something to them if they are willing to make a public topic about it.
From whence comes the "they"?
-
o.k. get ready to thumbs down me..
in defense of matthew and wife....
I get the purpose of the tally and the"right" to an opinion.
I can not but interpret a vendetta here against them... or minimal at best you set on not liking a good portion of what they say.
the posts in spots are far from godly (but I guess that's o.k. if you go to confession right? sarcasm here)
Matthew has a full right to bring this out into the open.... contrary to belief any message board is not a democracy... and the fact that Matthew and wife have not booted you off shows that they are willing to tolerate other opinions.....
I am not here to argue with you. I will not read what you have to say because I really don't care what you have to say.
I am frankly sick to my stomach the ungodliness that I have read because of ones
right to free speech...
(and if you need it spelled out... I mean rudeness, lack of charity. it must be apart of our lives.... even if we do not see it in return.)
we all need to be in prayer to be a good Catholic witness.
-
Maybe he got dislikes partly for the Tele is a scary man in a dungeon type of statements?
Secondly disliking a post does not mean there is a vendetta, this is sounding like catty women drama. Either we are BFF or enemies.
-
Maybe he got dislikes partly for the Tele is a scary man in a dungeon type of statements?
Secondly disliking a post does not mean there is a vendetta, this is sounding like catty women drama. Either we are BFF or enemies.
please note tiffany I did not do the thumbs down.
since you are not them..... I answer " I REST MY CASE"
my response was an opinion .... yours to mine was rude and lacked charity.
I will continue to support Matthew and his wife.
done posting on a thread that is sadly useless.
Matthew keep up the good work.
-
I just dropped by to get one of those chocolate covered hamburgers that everybody is talking about.
-
A lot of things have been said in this thread; impossible to address them all.
Let me clarify my reasons.
1. I have noticed lately that, from Telesphorus' point of view, I can do no right. My wife told me that she is in the same situation vis-a-vis Telesphorus. That spoke loudly to me.
2. The down-thumbs aren't the issue, but they are the closest thing to an objective standard of criticism that I can point to easily.
3. Once I looked it up (which takes all of 10 seconds for me), I was surprised at how lopsided the "criticism" was.
4. I expect to get some disagreement (down-thumbs) since I get involved in a lot of heated topics on here. I'm not going to ban someone because they down-thumb me here and there.
5. If a person has a months-long pattern of "long-suffering" at the hands of the moderator he disagrees with all the time, and never publicly agrees with -- I am forced to wonder why he's here.
6. I strongly disagree that Telesphorus is the only one "willing to do what needs to be done" in vocally opposing me (oh, and down-thumbing too, which means nothing). He would claim that he's my only "true friend", and that hundreds of other members are cowering in fear at my moderator power, afraid to oppose me by word or even down-thumb. Yeah. Right.
However much I deserve the criticism, because I'm a guy and I get involved in harsh discussions, my wife does not. When I saw that she got the same treatment by the same 2 people, I got angry. Plain and simple.
Telesphorus has only visited my house once. We only know each other from each other's posts online over the past 4 years.
I hope this clears some things up.
-
1. I have noticed lately that, from Telesphorus' point of view, I can do no right.
Why would I uprate posts of yours if "[you] can do no right?"
-
I have a question for you Tele.
You regularly accuse people on this forum of being liberals, ungodly or pretend Catholics. But it's impossible to notice your post count, both under your own name and anonymously and the fact that when I post at 7-8am in the morning before I start work, you are often replying within minutes, in the middle of the US night there in Cincinnati. You do, it seems, spend inordinate amounts of time posting to this forum. So much, in fact, that I and many others, wonder what else you do with your life.
As a single man in relatively good health how do you square posting all day and all night (and I think Matthew's stats would confirm this) with being a staunch and serious Catholic? Surely, even if you cannot get a job, there are day-time masses, devotions and all sorts of charitable works you could be doing which would preclude you replying immediately to posts or making the number of posts you do.
How do you justify spending the time here that you do?
Do you think any resistance priest would condone the amount of time you spend on here or would they tell you to quit and go and do something more productive with your life?
ggreg it is because of men like you and your WASP values, that God allowed Vatican II to take place.
By the way, do you retract these evil and blasphemous anti-Catholic statements you made on another forum?
October 18, 2011, 07:11:AM
At that stage I'll think I'll read the Gospel from start to finish with a pair of fresh eyes and an honest intention. I still think Jesus was real enough and that the Gospels are a great code for living your life. There are pearls of Wisdom in the Gospel that are either Divinely inspired or way about any morality I could come up with...
Frankly for the last 20 years I've had serious reservations about what has been taken from the Gospels and leveraged and what has been ignored and left out. Christianity seems to have been heavily influenced by the emperor Constatine who as far as I understand it wasn't even a converted Christian until his deathbed.
For example, Jesus seems to make multiple statement that poverty is good and holy and that Christians should seek to have just enough and then give the rest to the poor. Give your coat to a man who needs it and trust in providence.
Hardly any Christians do this however, myself included and the Church has been pretty quiet on the subject for the last 1500 years, and seems to mostly have sided with the Lords and Nobles and Kings, who were little more than the local warlords and mafia strongmen...
Conversely I've got friends who are evangelical Christian types, Baptists and Methodists who are very pleasant people to have around. They have good sized families, their children love them, they are always willing to come over and help you paint your house, weed the garden etc. Some of them are models of virtue. This leads me to believe that their lives on earth must be pleasing to God...
I certainly DO have a problem with the idea that 90%+ of people who reach the age of reason are damned to Hell for all eternity. God designed the system. He new what humans were before the fall and understood what their nature would be like after the fall. Any God who creates intelligent beings without asking them first and then damns most of them to hell is to my way of thinking an evil monster.
-
And ggreg, you contradict yourself when you say you want to read the gospels with a "pair of fresh eyes and with an honest intention," yet you also have a problem with a "Monster" God that damns the majority of humanity. If you would have truly read the gospels honestly, you would see how Christ repeatedly warns of hell, and mentions it much more than heaven.
Matthew 7:13-14
"For small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and few who are that find it."
It is actually the words of Christ that you have a problem with.
-
What's the point of having anonymous posts/voting, if the moderator is going to "out" you if you say something he doesn't like?
-
Matthew
Telesphorus has only visited my house once
I do take the side of Matthew over tele but do sort this out offline. It was the same for the English over on Ignis Ardens. They could have easily called Ashmo to order but didn't.
-
I accept Matthew wasn't to know but I can verify via Skype that what I posted was factual and that Rapheala made a mistake.
I am not going to tolerate lies and smears about me.Why should I?
-
I have a question for you Tele.
You regularly accuse people on this forum of being liberals, ungodly or pretend Catholics. But it's impossible to notice your post count, both under your own name and anonymously and the fact that when I post at 7-8am in the morning before I start work, you are often replying within minutes, in the middle of the US night there in Cincinnati. You do, it seems, spend inordinate amounts of time posting to this forum. So much, in fact, that I and many others, wonder what else you do with your life.
As a single man in relatively good health how do you square posting all day and all night (and I think Matthew's stats would confirm this) with being a staunch and serious Catholic? Surely, even if you cannot get a job, there are day-time masses, devotions and all sorts of charitable works you could be doing which would preclude you replying immediately to posts or making the number of posts you do.
How do you justify spending the time here that you do?
Do you think any resistance priest would condone the amount of time you spend on here or would they tell you to quit and go and do something more productive with your life?
ggreg it is because of men like you and your WASP values, that God allowed Vatican II to take place.
By the way, do you retract these evil and blasphemous anti-Catholic statements you made on another forum?
October 18, 2011, 07:11:AM
At that stage I'll think I'll read the Gospel from start to finish with a pair of fresh eyes and an honest intention. I still think Jesus was real enough and that the Gospels are a great code for living your life. There are pearls of Wisdom in the Gospel that are either Divinely inspired or way about any morality I could come up with...
Frankly for the last 20 years I've had serious reservations about what has been taken from the Gospels and leveraged and what has been ignored and left out. Christianity seems to have been heavily influenced by the emperor Constatine who as far as I understand it wasn't even a converted Christian until his deathbed.
For example, Jesus seems to make multiple statement that poverty is good and holy and that Christians should seek to have just enough and then give the rest to the poor. Give your coat to a man who needs it and trust in providence.
Hardly any Christians do this however, myself included and the Church has been pretty quiet on the subject for the last 1500 years, and seems to mostly have sided with the Lords and Nobles and Kings, who were little more than the local warlords and mafia strongmen...
Conversely I've got friends who are evangelical Christian types, Baptists and Methodists who are very pleasant people to have around. They have good sized families, their children love them, they are always willing to come over and help you paint your house, weed the garden etc. Some of them are models of virtue. This leads me to believe that their lives on earth must be pleasing to God...
I certainly DO have a problem with the idea that 90%+ of people who reach the age of reason are damned to Hell for all eternity. God designed the system. He new what humans were before the fall and understood what their nature would be like after the fall. Any God who creates intelligent beings without asking them first and then damns most of them to hell is to my way of thinking an evil monster.
This is incredibly disturbing.
-
A poster "Denise" on IA has so far posted twice on the BpWilliamson/Fr Meramo issue:
No offense intended (although I'm sure it will be taken) but the resistance is disintegrating into a Lord of the Flies operation.
<cut>.....As for the Lord of the Flies comment, certain elements, such as another forum, having successfully driven out most of their membership are now cannibalizing each other. I hope no non Catholic or non trad sees that behavior and thinks it Catholic. It is diabolical mob.gif.....
-
It's silly to confuse cathinfo with the resistance.
-
A poster "Denise" on IA has so far posted twice on the BpWilliamson/Fr Meramo issue:
No offense intended (although I'm sure it will be taken) but the resistance is disintegrating into a Lord of the Flies operation.
<cut>.....As for the Lord of the Flies comment, certain elements, such as another forum, having successfully driven out most of their membership are now cannibalizing each other. I hope no non Catholic or non trad sees that behavior and thinks it Catholic. It is diabolical mob.gif.....
SSS and chrstnoel1 do not constitute "most of the membership".
I really don't mind honest criticism, even if it stings. But huge, baseless, wild lies? Of course I have a problem with that, being a huge fan of the Truth.
Most of the membership is "cannibalizing" each other? We're eating each other's flesh now? Give me a break.
Oh, I know they don't mean it literally. They are trying to say there's strife, disagreement, and arguments going on. Let's see, that's been the case since, oh, about 2007. Welcome to the concept of a Traditional Catholic message board!
-
Pax Romanum has been banned.
1. Taking the moderator to task publicly.
2. Signing up for multiple accounts (He signed up for a dozen or more accounts in the past; he was friends with a past (banned) member who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
3. Being a racist (and I choose that term carefully, since I am a race realist myself)
This forum is not going to turn into Stormfront. Their kind is not welcome here. It's guys like him that give CathInfo a reputation for being a hive of racists.
Though that reputation is not DESERVED, it is somewhat UNDERSTANDABLE when guys like Pax Romanum are allowed here.
PR, go back to Stormfront where you belong.
-
This thread shocks me. I wish it would be removed immediately.
-
I just hope none of Cathinfo's good posters leave here due to these arguments.
Maybe, maybe not but it will make everyone think twice now before we thumb down the moderators of the forum -- that they are keeping track somehow.
Apparently it means something to them if they are willing to make a public topic about it.
Oh for heaven's sake.
I have down thumbed Matthew many times, and I still post here unmolested. I don't recall ever down thumbing Mater, but as Matthew himself has pointed ourt she is a much nicer person than he is. :wink:
-
.
When I came to this page, 17, there were no posts on it.
So I went back to the thread, on p. 15 and 16, and then returning
again to page 17, again I found no posts on it. Very weird.
I've never seen this before on CI.
-
I certainly DO have a problem with the idea that 90%+ of people who reach the age of reason are damned to Hell for all eternity. God designed the system. He new what humans were before the fall and understood what their nature would be like after the fall. Any God who creates intelligent beings without asking them first and then damns most of them to hell is to my way of thinking an evil monster.[/i]
And ggreg, you contradict yourself when you say you want to read the gospels with a "pair of fresh eyes and with an honest intention," yet you also have a problem with a "Monster" God that damns the majority of humanity. If you would have truly read the gospels honestly, you would see how Christ repeatedly warns of hell, and mentions it much more than heaven.
Matthew 7:13-14
"For small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and few who are that find it."
It is actually the words of Christ that you have a problem with.
It's really a more fundamental flaw, IMHO. It seems ggreg
would have God obey ggreg's rules on how to run the universe,
because ggreg thinks that God should ask everyone's opinion
before He creates them.
But ggreg's universe is impossible. How could God ask
permission of anyone before the person exists? Based on one
tiny error in philosophy, ggreg goes forth to build his false
mirage of fantasy, much like all the modern philosophers of the
past 500 years, that is, ever since the protestant deformation.
Therefore, ggreg is basically protestant.
-
How about removing altogether the like/dislike facility?
-
Pax Romanum has been banned.
1. Taking the moderator to task publicly.
2. Signing up for multiple accounts (He signed up for a dozen or more accounts in the past; he is the one who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
3. Being a racist (and I choose that term carefully, since I am a race realist myself)
This forum is not going to turn into Stormfront. Their kind is not welcome here. It's guys like him that give CathInfo a reputation for being a hive of racists.
Though that reputation is not DESERVED, it is somewhat UNDERSTANDABLE when guys like Pax Romanum are allowed here.
PR, go back to Stormfront where you belong.
This is unfortunate, I actually enjoyed some of his posts, especially his responses against тαℓмυdic Jewry, Israel and Zionism. The whole "racism" thing I don't know about, because this "racism" thing is completely out of hand everywhere on the Internet like it is in the real world. To me, it's grossly overplayed and it seems to mean whatever that particular person wants it to mean in order to gain the upper hand in an discussion or debate.
As far as your list for banning PR;
1. I never seen that personally, it's probably true, but I have seen others that were not banned in the process, not saying it didn't happen , in what context or the level he was going public.
2. When you say "multiple" accounts, does that mean all at the same time? I don't know much about that stuff, I never had more than one at any forum and more than a dozen I couldn't even comprehend personally, who'd have the time? And Hitler a "saint"? Wow, that's quite a reach, you might be able to pull off as some kind of secular martyr against the International banksters , moneylenders, Marxists and Jewry, but a a "catholic" saint I don't think so. But hey, they want to make JPII a "saint" these days so go figure.
3.I am also a "race realist", I have dealt with the reality of racial issues all my life and some things are undeniable, but if merely pointing this out makes one a "racist" then so be it. I don't really go parading about racial superiority, but you might call me more of an ethno-centrist, I do defend my ethnicity and European ancestry, especially these days when everyone damn well knows we're under attack and that includes our Catholicsm as well. I don't see any inherent sin in all that, actually my ancestors went out of their way in preserving it, that is where our nations, lineage, language and heritage all comes from as well as an insulator and protector of the Church herself. We all see how less a culture becomes ethno-centered the less moral and "catholic" in becomes as well.
I don't see this as a "racist" forum at all, maybe some ethno-centrism, tribalism and evena fervor for Nationalism but all within the confines of Catholic teachings, traditions and doctrines. What I do see on this forum, is the allowance of dialogue about such issue as race, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity and Jєωιѕн themes that are basically verboten on just about every other "catholic" forum out there.
Anyway, my .02.
-
accounts in the past; he is the one who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
Matthew retracted that statement.
-
accounts in the past; he is the one who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
Matthew retracted that statement.
Didn't catch that.
I vaguely remember some obscure poster coming on and peddleing that notion.
The first thing I thought of was that this guy's got to be some kind of Jew troll or ADL clown, he certainly wasn't some kind of neo-net "nαzι". Hitler being a Catholic saint is about as far away from their set beliefs that you can get.
"St. Adolf" says the National Socialist.........yea right. :rolleyes:
-
One thing all forums with a healthy amount of activity have in common is that not everyone is on the same page. Most people like to argue. Most of the activity comprise arguments, sometimes civil and sometimes not so civil. That necessitates allowing a certain mix of people. I've always thought Matthew does a great job at keeping this balance. I've heard Matthew accused of purely wanting a popular forum with lots of traffic. As if he has no standards and is some kind of attention-hungry sociopath. That's not accurate.
I've always perceived that he doesn't mind people with heterodox views posting here, just so long as they don't "tip the balance." I think that's a sensible approach.
I've never followed the antagonism between Tele and Matthew very closely. Their confrontations seem to happen on threads I don't read, usually involving feminism. But there is something troubling going on, when Matthew outs Tele in the "anonymous" forum and starts this thread.
In the past I thought their antagonism towards each other was merely a personality clash rather than a clash over fundamentals. But I may be wrong.
By their fruits ye shall know them. This forum has always produced mostly good fruit (and has been my favorite forum for years), so I hope it stays that way.
-
accounts in the past; he is the one who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
Matthew retracted that statement.
Didn't catch that.
I vaguely remember some obscure poster coming on and peddleing that notion.
The first thing I thought of was that this guy's got to be some kind of Jew troll or ADL clown, he certainly wasn't some kind of neo-net "nαzι". Hitler being a Catholic saint is about as far away from their set beliefs that you can get.
"St. Adolf" says the National Socialist.........yea right. :rolleyes:
Especially since he committed ѕυιcιdє. And I've heard from David Irving that he stopped attending Church regularly around 1920.
-
accounts in the past; he is the one who kept saying that Hitler was a saint.)
Matthew retracted that statement.
Didn't catch that.
I vaguely remember some obscure poster coming on and peddleing that notion.
The first thing I thought of was that this guy's got to be some kind of Jew troll or ADL clown, he certainly wasn't some kind of neo-net "nαzι". Hitler being a Catholic saint is about as far away from their set beliefs that you can get.
"St. Adolf" says the National Socialist.........yea right. :rolleyes:
Especially since he committed ѕυιcιdє. And I've heard from David Irving that he stopped attending Church regularly around 1920.
I don't think Hitler was an atheist in the classic sense, but he was disturbed in his perception by how much of the clergy and ecclesia was working in tandem against Germany's best intetests, particulary when it came to the Jєωιѕн question. At any rate, after becoming dissalussioned and even apthetic to the Church, he formed his own conception of the Divine and "providence" in his life. I really believe that he still thought he was doing "God's will" and the right thing for Germany and Europe in general, especially in his war against Jewry and the commuists, a sort of two-headed beast attached to the same body that was infecting the continent. Appearntly history has proven him correct. but his methods and even his mental capability late in the war clouded his judgement and decision making.
But back to his alleged "sainthood" by another poster, a highly unlikely proposition by either any "catholics" or National Socialists.
That kind of allegation comes from a source looking to slander both Catholics and "nαzιs".
-
Hitler was a Deist ( believes there is a God ) and described himself as a Catholic, but did not live according to Catholic morals, and in his "table talks" he ridicules Catholic morality ( about things like modesty in dress etc.)
I don't think he was a saint. Whether he was right was not what people were asking. Many NS are traditional in beliefs, and its not uncommon for them to convert to the church, and take with them the truth about history and political situations that they have learned from NS circles. Unlike the Marxists, there is no automatic badness in them, rather a desire for the truth and an admission that truth is extreme, and a willingness to follow the truth regardless of personal consequences or controversy.
I think it would not be a waste of time to send a crusade to an NS forum to win converts, although the enemies of the church always looking to call trads nαzιs and so on to discredit them would have a problem with that.