Posted on 03/16/2025 6:09:41 AM PDT by Lazamataz
“But the most intolerant are such as oppose FR owner’s statement that FR is”
You are spinning the context of “intolerance” completely 180 backwards from what I said and it is not honest. That statement is a prime example of intolerance. Jim’s statement is a disclaimer of intolerance for those who do not hold the exact same lockstep purist values. And those like yourself use it with intolerance to persecute against anyone who even hints of not being an absolute purist to each and everyone of those purist mandates in the list.
Thankfully Jim IS a wise and intelligent tolerant person. He does understand that humans are just not going to be completely in agreement with everyone of those items in the list like uniform robots without some personal deviation or compromise about certain values. I mean get real, who would expect everyone to believe in everything on that check list without any coloring outside lines at all period. He is intelligent and wise enough to know this is just not possible...
And those who want to use that check list to judge and determine who should be here and who should not be here are being selfish and not considering the welfare of the site and domain it’s self. They are only concerned about their own personal wishes and fetishes and not what is best for the site and domain as a whole. Think about it. If you went strictly by that check list and got rid of everyone who was not absolutely pure and did not stand absolutely lockstep with every item in that checklist there would only be about five pure good old boy members left here...
Are five good old boy purists going to keep the site supported and up? No... So for good reason Jim is tolerant even though the purist members are not and want to get rid of anyone and everyone who does not “think lockstep just like them”. I mentioned this I think yesterday. If the FR just banned everyone somebody thought was a troll at their persoanal word then there would not be anybody left. Every member here has their own personal “troll” they would like to be banned. So everyone is a personal “troll” to someone else on the board just because they “do not think exactly the same as they want then to”.
But in all this the main point is everyone selfishly and personally cares more about themselves than they do about the domain, site, and community as a whole. They do not consider the end cause and effect of getting rid of everyone who does not follow the herd ideology absolutely lockstep item by item. Thankfully Jim is more intelligent than all these selfish users and understands the negative ramifications and end product if he did do that. It is his best virtue from what I have observed here. His tolerance is backed by real example. Too bad many users here do not learn from his own wise example of tolerance.
We should trust his wise example of tolerance. If he is not cracking down on everyone who violates even one of those items then there is a reason why. We should trust his judgement and reasons why. Not continually put him on the spot to “do something about this guy” just because we personally do not like another user because they do not follow that checklist exactly. I really do not believe he meant for that checklist to be absolutely lockstep. Because it would be self defeating and he is much more intelligent than that.
He knows that he may as well close the doors because there would be no one left to support it if he did. So we should follow his wise example and think of the domain as a whole before we think of ourselves or we are going to lose it with our own personal selfishness.
I know he is extremely busy with the Credit Card issues right now and I do not expect any replies. But I am going to tag him in on this because it is important to me that he does not get this exchange and conversation after it has been twisted completely out of context and used against me later. Because someone will... They always do.
Thank you for your wisdom Jim...
Suing people is expensive and difficult.
Their and Them are perfectly good, long-time English references when the sex of a person is unknown.
Rather, it is your own intolerance of disagreement that resulted in your lengthy 700 word lecture. What part of "FR is far more mature with its judicious moderation than any other forum i have been on" did you miss? And it is you reaction that examples what i proceeded to state: "But the most intolerant are such as oppose FR owner's statement that FR is..."
And those like yourself use it with intolerance to persecute against anyone who even hints of not being an absolute purist to each and everyone of those purist mandates in the list.
Meaning those who manifest a knee jerk reaction of intolerance against anyone who even hints of commending the statement of what FR represents, as opposed to a purist position of tolerance of contrary views? If FR does not stand for what it says, while allowing much leeway, it might as well be HuffPo.
Thankfully Jim IS a wise and intelligent tolerant person.
Indeed, Which is why this is not the DU or Reddit, yet neither it is "Catholic Answers."
He does understand that humans are just not going to be completely in agreement with everyone of those items in the list like uniform robots without some personal deviation or compromise about certain values.... the purist members are not and want to get rid of anyone and everyone who does not “think lockstep just like them”.
What is this? Just how do you get that I am proposing a "perfect solution" ethos? Which posts flowed from a matter of security, and it remains that "being an officially pro-God (of the Bible), pro-Constitution etc. conservative site, then pushers of the contrary are usually zotted or must key a low key on those aspects, though if anything in that regard, I see it too tolerant of some."
As regards the latter, you can only imagine that this refers to anyone who does not hold to some "purist" position of agreement with that warranted FR position statement, or with myself.
Meanwhile. i have many times commended that RM wise moderation.
And in which he states (for that forum)
Open threads are in a town square format. Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected Posters may argue for or against beliefs, deities, religious authorities, etc. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule. “Open” RF debate is often contentious.
It requires thick skin. A poster must be able to make his points while standing his ground, suffering adverse remarks about his beliefs - or letting them roll off his back... If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in “open” RF debate. You should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.” "If the other guy is throwing spitwads at you on an “open” thread it probably means he has run out of ammunition. Take it as a backhanded compliment. You won, walk away.
And if you read my posting history, your could see that I engage many type of posters in extended threads. But some (esp. certain cult devotees) abuse the liberty, while others have an animus against anyone who opposes them, while as regards issues, a forum should ideally be a place of objective analysis of arguments and evidence. Which FR enables more than other I know of, thank God for that.
That is all.
Sorry that I neglected to ping you to the post, as i forgot I had made reference to you. And we both can thank you for the good that FR enables, while may you find God’s grace in your trial of affliction, as you trust in the risen Lord who will make all things new in His time.
Remember most of the fraudsters are paid shills - paid for by democrat war rooms, George Soros, Non-profits and/or 'Foundations'. In short the folks with LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY and a strong desire to keep their lies and liars secret.
Suing trolls would be like a tree that grows hundred dollar bills. Plus the corrupt biased press would have to cover it. It's a win, win, win, win and win.
Remember most of the fraudsters are paid shills - paid for by democrat war rooms, George Soros, Non-profits and/or 'Foundations'. In short the folks with LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY and a strong desire to keep their lies and liars secret.
Suing trolls would be like a tree that grows hundred dollar bills. Plus the corrupt biased press would have to cover it. It's a win, win, win, win and win.
Remember most of the fraudsters are paid shills - paid for by democrat war rooms, George Soros, Non-profits and/or 'Foundations'. In short the folks with LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY and a strong desire to keep their lies and liars secret.
Suing trolls would be like a tree that grows hundred dollar bills. Plus the corrupt biased press would have to cover it. It's a win, win, win, win and win.
I doubt it would be that easy to win in the context we’re discussing.
Those people are intentionally working at destroying a private business...and driving away potential ‘customers’. AND they’ve been asked to sign a statement they ARE NOT working for a democrat, progressive or political organization or ANY organization paying them in any fashion to post or reply or comment on the site - including but not limited to ad agencies, and nonprofits hired by political operatives. I’m guessing lawyers would be standing in like to take these cases.
Once again all I read there is that it is all about YOU and what YOU want here. You are real good about thinking of yourself over all.
In the mean time you engaged me first with a question. I answered that question fairly and honestly with a cordial reply. Then you proceeded to start an argument with me about intolerance and yet the previous conversation had absolutely nothing to do with intolerance AT ALL. You put me in a position where I had to defend myself then you dishonestly twisted my self defense into “intolerance”. I was supposed to just take whatever aggression you pointed at me and not even defend myself or I am being “intolerant”?
I don’t know what alternate reality you live in. But self defense of individualism is not “intolerance”.
You wanted to bring it up and dog me with it because you do not like the truth I share here. You do not like that I do not stay on the rails and follow strict in the box group think. Is this place supposed to be a “one mindframe only never have a personal original thought of your own” platform? You do not like that I respect individual independence of opinion as dictated BY THE CONSTITUTION? So you respect the Constitution but only when it is herd approved ideology?
So yes I am intolerant to someone who would do that with no just cause and who spins everything around backwards from what it really is... Yes I am intolerant with those who live in an alternate reality. Yes I am intolerant with those who ONLY selfishly think of themselves and what they want others to be. And yes I am intolerant with those who tell me I am not allowed to be an individual without group think and I need to stay in the box or else.
Humor me... Read this article and maybe you will get some idea how many others and myself operate. We are ANTI- LEFTIST-GROUP-THINK.
and you are telling me that the rules of the site dictate we HAVE to follow group think or we are intolerant?. Really? Isn’t that a bit hypocritical?
https://ardelles.com/why-most-people-have-no-clue/
Your extreme extrapolative reaction to my posting the FR position statement - which does not mean to me all that you have me to make it mean - and my response to your attack on me (which is which indeed one of intolerance) indicates that there is something else driving you that renders any kind of real or perceived counter view to be intolerable, as if advocating "group think."
Which reactionary response discourages attempts at unreasonable exchange of views, as such may provoke another prolix protest, and thus I will leave you be until reasonable exchange can be had.
THANK YOU...
This is it?? two days later and 354 posts and you’re all done yelling and screaming? Pitiful.
Do you want to be called a obscene clapper-clawed contriver?
Or about as steady as a chameleon in a bag of Skittles?
But yeah, this is kind of tame. Back in our day we would have threads with people hurling insults that lasted for a couple of weeks. Even a whole month.
And if you were talking the civil war threads possibly years.
Young posters today have no stamina.
Lol, especially in the crevo threads . Those threads sent on for hundreds of lakes, sometimes 1000’s- got so bad a few evos left the site for a liberal one and went and grumbled about freerepublic non stop.
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.