Posted on 07/12/2010 3:01:35 PM PDT by the_conscience
No, I’m not that petty, but based on the warm welcome I received, it was just a hunch that it might be a worthwhile endeavor.
It was.
lol, good one
I’m sorry you find the rule of law a waste of bandwidth.
No, closed caucus threads are for those who want to discuss particulars about something with their faith as a basis for the discussion, without being sidetracked by discussions about whether that basis is valid or not.
Caucus could in that sense be interpreted as setting the assumptions for the discussion. Without assumptions, discussions can easily get off-topic and become useless.
I am happy to debate my religion in public. However, I would not have wanted an avid non-believer in my bible study group, because instead of discussing what a bible passage meant to us and how to apply it to our lives, we’d ahve spent all our time arguing over whether it was rational to try to apply the bible to our lives, or whether we could believe that the bible passage was true.
Those are good discussions, but not if you have decided already and now want to actually use the bible to help your life.
In that sense, a caucus thread could also be interpreted like a meeting of the Enterprise officers, after the captain has decided on a course of action and now wants to discuss how they will implement it. At that point, comments about the stupidity of the course of action are no longer welcome, and are not tolerated. And for good reason — at some point you make your decisions and move on.
Caucus threads are so people who want can have discussions with like-minded people who have moved on and want to discuss the IMPLICATIONS of their faith, without having to defend their faith.
Anybody is of course welcome to post any article or story they want in a non-caucus thread, so that the rest of the world can discuss it.
I can’t see anyone NOT supporting the man.
This is far more a Constitutional rights issue than a religious one.
exactly
I am not weak in my faith Vendome. Nor am I strong. But I work toward that goal. I do not care for the Catholic hate that is espoused on spiritual threads because the words hurt Jesus, and the spear carries right through Him to His mother. Hasn’t Christ (and His mother) been hurt enough?
I think you do a great job.
Non-sequitur. This is not your home, nor your church.
Analogy would culminate in hosting caucus threads on YOUR computer. Nobody would have a problem with that.
If you’re really worried about valuable bandwidth, go check out the Bloggers and Personal and look at the blog pimps who post thread after thread of material from their own failing blogs, and never get a response and don’t ever reply back.
One guy posts an average of 8-11 threads a day, with the max being 26. (I counted them. It was on March 9 of this year.)
There are protestant caucuses. I can’t name them all because I see the caucus ping and then don’t post to the thread. I just try to be respectful. But, berlieve me, there are many!
That behavior is finessing the guidelines, it is flame baiting. No dice.
Also, I have little to no tolerance for non-members of a caucus coming onto the caucus thread to challenge whether or not it should be a caucus. Gross disruption usually follows.
If you question whether the article is appropriate for a caucus designation, send me a Freepmail. I'll get to it as soon as I can.
Posters who are not members of a caucus but wander onto the thread without causing a disturbance are often "under the radar" of the mods. If we notice one and the regular members are welcoming him, we generally leave it alone.
Thank you.
What Catholic hate was displayed in my posts on that thread that were removed?
And how did that thread qualify as spiritual when it was a secular university and the man's Constitutional rights were violated?
And how does Mary play into that?
The rule of law applies to the judicial system moron
Excellent points. Maybe something like that needs to go on your profile page too.
Please consider it.
By and large, the ‘church’ concept is adequate to permit internal discussions minus disruptors. As such I generally have few issues, unless that caucus thread is being used to attack others - then as the RMs rules clearly state - the caucus protection is lost..
In this particular instance, some degree of thought should have been applied - the issue was one that, based upon FR profile of posters - would have had broad support across the board from all branches of Christianity. Instead of an issue that unity could have been formed around - it has now turned into one of division. This isn’t a judgement call on the poster’s motivations to do so to begin with - only an observation of which this current thread makes clear is the end result.
I’d say to all that some discernment should be made by the posters before applying the ‘caucus’ label to the thread.
Assuming the quote is accurate, the quoted comment was appropriately deleted. It was a metadiscussion which detracted from the caucus discussion itself. The suggestion made in the quoted comment was a good one, but that doesn't mean it was appropriate for a caucus thread.
Every indication that exists (and again, the posts themselves are gone, so all we have to go on is the responses to the posts), suggests that at least one and maybe more caucus members were being disturbed by the participation in a caucus thread by a non-caucus member.
And the rules are clear, non-caucus members are not allowed in caucus threads unless invited; and those rules are pretty strictly enforced when a non-caucus member disrupts the discussion.
The place to contact the original poster of a thread, if you are trying to be courteous while duplicating a post, would be in freepmail.
If I had been in that position, I would have duplicated the thread in a non-Caucus thread, put a link to the caucus thread in the comments of my posting, and then posted a link into the caucus thread saying merely that I had started a non-caucus discussion of the same topic for those who wished to join.
If I felt that the original poster might want an explanation, I would then have freepmailed the explanation, so as not to clutter the forum.
I ain’t got nothing to say about the Catholics but good.
I am sure, if I had a quick question, the Catholics wouldn’t mind helping me out.
A certain other Religion is totally closed.
If one is posting a closed caucus they should probably post in the Religion forums.
However, posts in the Breaking news area are not really closed in my mind.
I mean, if it is in the Breaking News, then one has an agenda for placing their caucus there over and over and over.
It is not veiled, it is preaching or missionary work and as such polite questions should be answered.
How else would one spread the word or invite, perhaps conversion or even fellowship?
That’s the way I see it and I don’t know anyone who has a problem with Catholics.
Then again I am in California. LOL
Sometimes when I’ve had comments of mine deleted, I have asked the moderators to delete responses that quoted my comments.
I can’t think of a time when they have not obliged.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.