Posted on 08/25/2014 1:06:58 PM PDT by Welchie25
I didn't say I work on the staff. I said I'm a member of the Archdiocese of Baltimore. That is to say, I am a Catholic who lives in the Archdiocese of Baltimore.
As a lifelong member of the Archdiocese, I personally guarantee you, on my honor as a 14 year member of Free Republic, that the Catholic Review is not interested in marketing to the people who frequent this site. They are a very liberal bunch. That being said, they do post interesting articles from time to time.
It is a diocesan newspaper. Not the kind of place that is going to fish for hits from the likes of us. No way. Whatever his motives for posting only from the Catholic Review, that one seems to be one of the most implausible I can imagine.
I suggest you just let it go. It is a legitimate news source, he posts articles that are of legitimate interest to members of Free Republic, and he has not violated any forum rules I know of. In my opinion, there is no reason to question his motives.
Posting from but a single source not only implies a motive, it defines a motive.
Were content of material the goal, there would be more than one source.
The monolithic sourcing indicates a motive beyond content.
When a pandemic hits the US stories of cannibalism will become commonplace.
I disagree. What if all his news needs are met by that single source? No motive implied at all. Perhaps he just has a lack of intellectual curiosity. Perhaps he simply lacks time to scan multiple news sources. Perhaps The Catholic Review is just his favorite news source.
Were content of material the goal, there would be more than one source.
He posts on a variety of topics. That, to me, implies that that the content is what he finds interesting and hopes to spark discussion about. I don't see the logical connection you're making.
The monolithic sourcing indicates a motive beyond content.
It would seem to me that you're implying a nefarious motive. Otherwise his motive would not bother you. So I don't agree that the "motive beyond content" is either indicated or relevant. If I were interested, I could probably think of at least a half dozen motives for the single sourcing than I've already listed, none of which implies any nefarious motive.
I glad you didn’t monitor my early posts here on FR.
Implying, no.
Pointing out and accusing yes.
Note that the pimp is unaware of any comments and fails to defend itself.
Why would that be, do you think?
LOL. I appreciate your frankness. I didn't want to impute such a motive to you.
Note that the pimp is unaware of any comments and fails to defend itself. Why would that be, do you think?
Perhaps he has work to do and doesn't have the time to defend himself. Perhaps he is shy and doesn't like confrontation. Perhaps he doesn't feel the need to defend himself because he has done nothing wrong. Perhaps he's just enjoying himself watching you and me go toe-to-toe. Perhaps he's a just a wimp instead of a pimp. None of those would violate the rules of the forum.
And then perhaps you're right all along. Even if you are, what rule is he violating? He's still posting articles that are of interest to FReepers. Not everyone has to use this forum for the same reasons you and I do, nor in the same way.
It's dinner time here in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, so I'm going to sign off for a while and have a nice glass of Merlot with my lovely wife. I'll check back later for your response to my response to your response to my response to your response to my ....
If the story is worth reading, why should I care if they get a hit? How does that make it a “scam”? And who made you the posting police anyway?
Usually the case, which is a puzzlement.
Perhaps he's a just a wimp instead of a pimp.
Maybe he's a brain-sucking Zombie Robot funding the destruction of mankind by scoring blog hits from Free Republic.
Wouldn't that suck?
None of those would violate the rules of the forum.
Wearing saggy pants with your butt hanging out doesn't violate the rules, most places.
Still.. decent people don't do it.
I'm going to sign off for a while and have a nice glass of Merlot with my lovely wife.
Mt best to you both and a fine evening..
Pointing out facts makes me the "Posting Police"?
And didn't you just do the same thing, by objecting to my post?
Who made YOU the posting police?
Why would that matter? Catholics have lay people on the ground that are seeing first hand what is happening there and we can get that news from them...good for them! This coming from a Protestant.
You miss the point, Mrs. Crane.
Homey posts only from ONE source.
That isn't the slightest bit curious to you?
I’m responding to content of your comment. You are attacking someone for posting an article because of the source, which has nothing to do with content. Anyway, why shouldn’t an organization that reports the news, whoever they may be, get money from hits? How is that a scam? Whether you choose to go and read the whole article is entirely up to you.
Negative, multiple points.
I've attacked nobody, number one.
I've pointed out someone's article history, which I had no hand in creating.
If you squint your eye and try real hard, you'll see that I've criticized the poster for posting from a single source, not because of any one article.
Anyway, why shouldn’t an organization that reports the news, whoever they may be, get money from hits?
Why should they be let to use Free Republic as a free advertising tool?
Those of us who support this site do not do so in order to provide free advertising for anyone who wants it.
“They are a very liberal bunch.”
Yes, they shut down the Frederick Academy of the Visitation.
What a sorrow.
“I’ve attacked nobody, number one.”
Really? Calling someone a “pimp” isn’t an attack?
Me dear sainted mother held that “pimp” was both the dirtiest word in the English language and the foulest depth to which a man could sink.
I agree.
Really. Pimp it is and pimp I call it.
How else do you explain posting only from a single source?
Pimping, plain and simple. Trying to get some hits off Free Republic's traffic.
Your mom was right, pimps suck.
You are such a douche. I have seen you drag this stuff up again and again. And in all of those arguments are the same.
In the end, you are a douche. That never changes.
Thank you. Elementary school name-calling brings back fond memories.
I have seen you drag this stuff up again and again.
I applaud your powers of observation.
And in all of those arguments are the same.
You're losing your English a bit, but I endeavor to be consistent.
Anyway, this sounds more plausible to me than The Catholic Review pimping for the few hits they'd get from a conservative web site.
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.