I ...... agree.....
Posted on 07/12/2010 3:01:35 PM PDT by the_conscience
For your consideration.
Caucus and other protected threads are cowardly, in my opinion.
If you can’t stand criticism, send a dang email or something.
Your input is appreciated.
10-4!
What do you think?
That’s why there are open threads. If you want the subject discussed on an open thread — wait for a while and post it as an open thread.
Now who is the coward?
“but my understanding is that any zotting has to do with being frictional or disruptive, not merely participating in a thread caucus relating to a faith one does not ascribe to.”
If you read some of the replies to the deleted posts you will see that some of those replies are actually in agreement with what the poster apparently wrote. It’s my impression from that that the poster was not being frictional or disruptive but rather some others had an axe to grind with said poster.
Folks who post threads under the "caucus" protection.
I thought I was quite clear.
Adding a word to the title prohibits folks fom disagreeing?
Pretty darn cowardly, I'd say.
That pretty well sums up why argumentative postings from that individual were removed. I'm guessing that the Hindu was not being argumentative but was being inquisitive.
The cyber-world being what it is, one needs to look at the Religion Moderator's illustration of a caucus thread as being like unto a group being in their own church setting. A disruptive person, member or non-member, is going to be found out of bounds.
It’s my impression from that that the poster was not being frictional or disruptive but rather some others had an axe to grind with said poster.The poster has not been in the past generous toward the Catholic faith. She came on to the thread to get it moved to News/Activism so that people would not have to talk via the Catholic Caucus rules. Her remarks when asked whether she was Catholic or not were immediately stricken by the Religion Moderator. They were not Christian in nature. The thread anyway was within minutes placed on a News/Activism post, which many then went to and posted. You were free to do the same.
And I believe that Catholics are doing it more and more because of the intemperant anti-Catholicism and almost outright persecution that is beginning to exist.
I ...... agree.....
Agreed. All threads should be open, over the top abuse should be smacked down, but disagreements should not be squashed.
The content of the posts was not inflammatory, controversial, or disruptive. They were in support of said professor and there were no negative connotations towards Catholicism in any of the removed posts on that thread.
The link is in the thread, to see if you’re thinking of the same one.
It appears you are questioning whether the Religion Moderator had cause to delete posts, however asking it of people who may not, and now can not, see the words of those posts.
In my occasional wanderings into Religion forums, I have NEVER been booted simply because I was not a member of the correct religion when posting in a Caucus thread. While the rules are clear that the caucus threads are for people who adhere to that faith, the PURPOSE of the rules are to allow people within a faith to discuss among themselves differences of interpretation of something in their faith, without having to deal with arguments about their faith vs other faiths.
Most caucus threads seem to invite people outside the faith who merely want to learn about the faith, just as a church might; while they reject the idea of people coming into their caucus threads to argue with them about their religion, something I’m sure they get enough of in the real world, and which they’d rather not have to put up with every single place they turn.
If the religion moderator deleted posts, I have no trouble believing it was because those posts made people feel unwelcome in their caucus thread.
The Caucus rules for religion threads are NOT rules that are to be adhered to “by the letter”. The Caucus rules themselves make this clear, noting that attempts to circumvent the spirit of the rules by applying legalistic interpretations of the literal words of the rules will not be tolerated.
That would most certainly include anybody claiming the right to post in a caucus thread because they were once members of the faith, and therefore while they have “seen the light”, by the tenets of that faith are “always” of that faith. It appeared your discussion above was suggesting that such an argument would have merit for participating in a caucus, and I reject that notion.
There have been times I thought a caucus was being overly protective by posting real news stories as caucus items. But if I cared, I’d just post the same news story as a regular thread, so the rest of us could say what we wanted about it. It’s not like people are limited to posting an article only one time here. :-)
Considering that that particular thread was about a legal, Constitutional issue, there was no need for it to be made a caucus thread.
Granted it involved a Catholic man, but it was NOT about Catholic theology or doctrine, or any other Church related issue. It could have happened to a Protestant or Jew or Hindu and it would still be as wrong.
I suppose next time, someone could just post the exact same link in News/Activism and just put up with the whining about it being a dupe.
You just can’t win with some people.
my my. The poor poster can check out but can never leave? Why kind of hell (or purgatory) is that? If that is the official dogma, then the poster has a right to post on said thread, it’s similar to a family reunion, if you don’t like one branch of the tree, eat at separate picnic tables but you can’t exclude them from the softball game
None of the deleted comments were argumentative.
If you read through the thread and look at posts which responded to the removed ones, you’ll see that.
Besides, I saved a screen shot of the first 50 posts. I just had this feeling.....
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.