Posted by AF [AF] on November 03, 1999 at 20:31:32 {eZOTANvCI61EwaxRomAMdaOt1gg/Zk}:
In Reply to: **Let's Cut to the Chase posted by Rick on November 03, 1999 at 19:20:58:
: To avoid using multiple screen names to deceive others. A maximum of two separate screen names per visitor to H2O is considered acceptable use, provided that the second screen name is used to express views one would fear to express using the first screen name. Upon disovery of a participant using more than two screen names, moderators shall delete posts under the additional screen name(s) at their sole discretion based on trying to enforce the spirit of this site's policies. Upon receiving a warning to cease using more than two screen names, H2O reserves the right to ban participants who persist.
: The second screen name in question was not in harmony with this part of the FPP on the topic(s) in question.
What nonsense! You don't even have the decency to point out which part of the FPP with which you claim the 2nd name was not in harmony. Your claim is exactly like Stafford's multilevel obfuscations.
As anyone can clearly see, the above statements in red show the exact opposite of what you claim. Stafford himself later explained that he was afraid to use his regular (and only other) screen name because of the threat to his position in the congregation given through his PO.
So Rick, can you explain precisely which part of the FPP statement above you think was violated, thus justifying removal of the thread? Or can your precious moderator do so?
I don't think so. The fact is that your moderator only wanted to remove Stafford's ludicrously embarrassing shot-himself-in-the-balls faux pas, and found a ridiculous excuse to do so. I've developed a good deal of respect for you this past year, but unless you can provide a clear and honest answer instead of these dog-ate-my-homework excuses, you'll have lost it all.
AF