Posted by AF [AF] on November 03, 1999 at 23:45:58 {eZOTANvCI61EwaxRomAMdaOt1gg/Zk}:
In Reply to: RE: Stafford Issues posted by Mod101 on November 03, 1999 at 22:28:54:
: While I wasn't involved in the removal of any threads in this regard I do understand the strict interpretation of the FPP made by one of the moderators/Administrators.
I completely disagree with your assessment, for reasons I stated to Rick after I later saw his response to Gedanken below. There was not in any sense of the word a "strict interpretation" of the FPP. On the contrary, the administrator who removed the thread violated express language in the FPP that precisely fit the situation - a 2nd screen name is perfectly ok when the poster is afraid of posting under his 1st screen name.
: From a human perspective I am glad that they were removed. ... So I think should we consider these elements when deciding how vitriolic our missives should be in this regard.
I understand your perspective. However, look at the upset this ridiculous and "illegal" removal has caused. Now when people want to know what happened, they have no way of deciding for themselves if the strong criticisms in other posts is warranted. The rogue administrator has severely damaged H2O's administration's credibility in the eyes of most onlookers, I'm certain. I don't believe that this administrator would have removed a similarly embarrassing thread posted by anyone else on this forum. The proof is that such posts have often remained on the board.
: I understand where Greg panicked. I faced inquiries as to my activities on the Internet by the powers that be and at the time was very concerned about my spiritual career/reputation. I can see where he would easily go into a "protect thine own butt" mode. I don't think this moment of panic should detract from his decision to make a defense here over the past weeks nor do I feel that we should continually rub his nose in the fact that he freaked for a moment.
I agree that people should not keep rubbing Greg's nose in his foolishness, as long as he makes a public apology, but he also deserves what he gets. Remember that he could have just not posted anything, which would have been easiest of all. But what was his first reaction to being called on the carpet by his PO? Was it to do something honest? No! It was to issue a deceptive post where he tooted his own horn about how wonderful he is. A person's first reaction under unusual stress is often a very good indicator of his underlying personality.
Greg's reaction reminds me of the utterly stupid kneejerk shenanigans the Governing Body pulled back in 1980 when they panicked and booted a number of loyal JWs out of Bethel. For their public stupidity they've publicly been called to account. I see no reason that Greg's actions should be swept under the rug by an H2O administrator. He's a big boy and if he wants to cook in the kitchen he's going to have to take the heat.
: There are greater abusers of the multiple posting rules than Greg. (Please be warned that once enough proof is evidenced against them action will be taken.)
I agree that these yoyos should be censured according to the FPP.
: I would simply ask that everyone here simply take two deep breaths, put themselves into Greg's position and reflect. Yes there were better alternatives available to him but he made a mistake. I think he has been chastised enough, don't you?
I'll reserve judgment, and wait to see if he makes some kind of apology.
It's kind of interesting that in one of his recent responses to my posts, he claimed that the Governing Body is willing to apologize for its mistakes. Of course, he gave no examples and we all know the reason why. Let's watch and see if Greg acts according to his praise for the GB, or to what they actually do.
: I too am sorry that he feels compelled to stop his free posting to this forum.
So am I in one way, but I'm pleased in the sense that it showed the true colors of Greg under stress, and of the Society engaging in its normal business. What better way to show their true colors than to castrate an ardent defender?
: I think he can feel some comfort in the fact that he has received this kind of response. He was obviously respected by many and thus the subsequent shock.
Good point. What will he do to make amends and regain a measure of respect?
: Nobody raises a fuss when another certain participant has conversations with himself.
Not so; a number of people have complained. It's just that such other participants are widely thought of as nuts.
: I think the disappointment speaks volumes as to the reputation greg had built up. I just don't think that one mistake should ruin a man.
Again, it all depends on how he cleans up his act. If repentence is not shown, should forgiveness take place? Perhaps, but without repentance Greg will be seen as unreasonably arrogant and above correction, much like Watchtower leaders who must be literally drowned in evidence of their foolishness before they'll change their minds about some policy.
: Shall we get back to issues and away from personalities?
That would be great. Greg should also take your advice.
AF