Quote
"Malcom"
I'm a little miffed he hasn't written to congratulate me.....in using the term "pissed off"

Umm ok, Congradulations on saying "pissed off".

Seriously though, The only think I ever said about your writing was a passing comment about how I didn't understand what you were getting at in a post that mentioned me. It seemed like the metaphore you were trying to use took up so much of the post the point you were trying to make got lost. I just wanted to mention it so you'd know I didn't understand what you were trying to say. No big deal, maybe I'm just thick. But just like how I haven't ever chided you or congradulated you in the past for your posts, I don't plan on doing it in the future. Just so you know.

Quote
"Malcom"
I mean, I've been erudite to quote, not simply some hackneyed old phrase from the bible, but a veritable living Apsotle.......and someone who Josh defends as a "personal standard" for others!!

Where in the things I wrote do I even mention Dave? Much less defend him as a "personal standard" for others? (Where are we quoting from by the way?) I came here talking about what was said about Jinny and Glenn. What does that have to do with Dave?

Hello Malcolm (fellow immortal), Eragon, my friendly dragon steed, sends her greetings. I have sent forth my legion of darklings to direct the decisions of the Quakers based in USA as planned. And then, whilst soaring in the heavens above India I looked down to see the Corporation's Import/Export office and dropped a magic acorn upon it, which will, in time, grow to be a tiny tree nymph who will whisper in the ears of certain relevant officials closely connected with other officials of the customs department. Like a vine weaving it way through branches the word will spread rapidly.

Eragon truly enjoys the nights she swoops a certain suburb of Sydney to crack her wings above a funny little hobbits abode. The effect for those hobbits that live there is that their core motivation is highly enhanced, as the down draught from her wings magnify what it is that drives them. For those that live in this hobbits hump we noticed their fear turning to abject paranoia. Such is the revealing silent power of Eragon's wings.

Up, up, and away.

On the subject of rudeness:

Despite our rather vehement disagreement about the life and times of David McKay, I would personally wish PtolemyGlenn no ill, and would be very unhappy to see him fall in disfavour with his employees due to the opinions he expresses on the DavidSPEAK broadcast.

I have no doubt that Private Eyes is of the same mind, for in him we are able to see someone with considerable moral fibre (unlike David McKay who has of course threatened his critics on a number of occasions that he would prejudice their employment prospects in any way he could by stealthily revealing their “sordid past” to their current employers….. behaviour that of course David heartily concurred with at the time, and indeed demanded, when he saw himself benefiting from it)……

If you choose not to reference your life to the teachings of David McKay, I am very glad to hear of it and I in fact congratulate you Josh….(I suggest you encourage others to do so……However I do think I am quoting you accurately to say that you described Private Eyes discussion of Glens’ personal background as “rude” ….yet given the company Glenn has chosen to keep, why do you judge Private Eyes “rude” while we see not a word from you in criticism of David McKay….(you are free to draw out material here from the JC site in your defence, that I may have missed, given the infrequency with which I read it)

In particular those of us who are former members of the JesusChristians, will be well aware that David has stated on innumerable occasion that because many of us now work (for secular employers) we have thus starkly “proven” that we have done nothing more than “backslide” ever since our escape from the gulag…..

(Not that I any longer concur with sentiments in Davids’ poorly disguised attempts at taunts) yet…..having seen the details that Private Eyes has discretely provided (there were no specific names or addresses)….we may also note with interest that David has never had a word to say contrariwise to Glenn about his slavery to mammon…..but we all understand why, don’t we!……There are NO principles or ideals that David won’t compromise if someone is only prepared to commit to the ultimate truth that David really stands for….himself!

If like Glenn (and Josh?…..could you detail a little of the “many disagreements” you have had with David!) you are prepared to acknowledge that David is the “rightful sovereign” of the godless gerrymander he has instituted for his self glorification…..and even go so far as to humour him that he has some important “insights” to share with the world ..….why David will indulgently forgive you whatever indiscretions that he condemns others for (in vile endeavour to cause them to lose faith in what they are doing) ….

Hence, in relation to Glenn, Private Eyes would hardly seem “rude”…..rather more like “inspiringly conscientious”, I’d say……David is the “benchmark” for rudeness or viciousness or vanity and so on from the documented behaviour we have come to see from him…..Jinny and Glenn choose to defend this behaviour, hence they are criticized sharply in “passing” (….as I won’t to devote the overwhelming amount of my criticism to David)

David has created a gerrymander (members who don’t get on the “band-wagon” never become “leaders” and are usually subject to whatever humiliation is necessary to either break their will or get them to leave…..hence only those cowardly enough to kowtow to him remain in the “electorate’);

Where he thus controls the finances and the daily lives of those unfortunate enough to remain subject to his bidding in a twist (copied from the COG’s) on the old “pyramid scheme” swindles…..(Could you imagine a situation where someone decided that it was NOT God’s will for them to continue trying to persuade others to join the JC’s?...What is the extent of the legitimate debate that would ensue about that insigh,t do you think?)

Should the JC’s have transparent, external auditing and a legally enforceable mechanism to ensure that those who “forsake all” are not left penniless in the event that they leave the JC’s, Josh? Or should David automatically just have have it all for the taking?

What are the legal restrictions that should be imposed upon Davids' (or any “employers”) access to the personal lives of those who work for them, Josh? Can David, or his appointed leaders, be able to read the private mail of those who have chosen to subject themsleves to them?

This is definitely NOT a matter of David’s “opinion” vs “disgruntled ex-members opinions” Josh………(as David would attempt to mask the debate in order to avoid giving consideration to the points raised)

It is fundamentally the basis on which how you decide to apply the principle of the Sermon on the Mount in your life or (in David’s case) deny them…..?


You don’t mention “David”, Josh?? Or reference him as “personal standard” .....well I’m relieved to hear that…..you’ll then be happy to discuss some of the issues I have just raised! Commit yourself one way or another.

If you want to tell me that it’s just a matter of “different” points of view and that we former members are “exaggerating” the “injuries” we suffered out of “spiteful wrath” towards David (as Jinny has asserted) or even if you simply avoid answering the question….then that’ll me more all I need to know about how “independent” you are of David’s influence.

…….we’re all waiting!

Quote
"Malcom"
If you choose not to reference your life to the teachings of David McKay, I am very glad to hear of it and I in fact congratulate you Josh….(I suggest you encourage others to do so

Right I don't use Dave as my personal standard of goodness. Like many people claim to do I try to use Jesus as that standard. So it's true I don't use Dave, or you, or private eyes or any other man as my "personal standard". I use Jesus and whenever it comes up I hope I will encourage others to do the same. (I probably won't mention you or dave by name though when I say don't follow men, follow God. It seems more efficient than naming everyone on earth that SHOULDN'T be someones "personal standard")

Quote
"Malcom"
Hence, in relation to Glenn, Private Eyes would hardly seem “rude”…..rather more like “inspiringly conscientious”,

No, I think I'll stick with rude. How is mocking someones apearance or the fact that they have a blog "inspiringly conscientious"?

Quote
"Malcom"
why do you judge Private Eyes “rude” while we see not a word from you in criticism of David McKay

As I understand it everyone is free to post on the JCs forum. So if Dave is rude to you on that forum you can answer for yourself over there, you don't need me to do it for you. On this forum Jinny and Glenn aren't allowed to post so when someone is rude to them here they don't have the ability to respond. Still I didn't say anything when you guys were rude to people who couldn't respond.

Then Jinny wrote a letter to Rick requesting a link to be posted here to the JC forum where she could post a response to what was written and that was denied. That's when I said something since I had the ability to say something. That's why I spoke up here, because the person who was being treated badly didn't have to option to answer and when she requested to speak in her own defense it was denied.

If I was present somewhere and someone was saying bad things about you and you didn't have the ability to respond. Then you found out about those bad things and asked to respond, but that was denied I would hope I would speak up in your defense. It would be wrong of me if I didn't.

Quote
"Malcom"
Should the JC’s have transparent, external auditing and a legally enforceable mechanism to ensure that those who “forsake all” are not left penniless in the event that they leave the JC’s, Josh?

Quote
"Malcom"
What are the legal restrictions that should be imposed upon Davids' (or any “employers”) access to the personal lives of those who work for them, Josh?

That's a political question that I'm guessing we're probably not going to come to common ground on. I am personally pretty far to the right on most issues even for the United States so my personal views are that consenting adults can choose to join whatever club they wish with whatever rules they'd like and the government has no right to do anything about it or to demand certain forms be filled out so they can monitor the goings on inside the club. But like I said that's a political view. If you like a more powerful central government, vote for it. Your vote can cancel out mine.

Quote
"Malcom"
….then that’ll me more all I need to know about how “independent” you are of David’s influence.

Lol, you crack me up. How powerful do you think Dave is? Seriously, Dave is just some dude in Australia that I occasionally type to on the internet. What kind of influencial powers do you think he has over me? Just like anyone else if he says something that's correct I'll try and listen to it, if he says something false I'll reject it.

That's the same way I'm dealing with you. If you say something right I'll listen, if wrong I'll reject it. I wouldn't say you have powers of influence over me. I've never met Dave, but for all the powers attributed to him I wouldn't be surprized to find hypno-swirels in his eyes. :lol:

Josh,

Although this won't get through to you, just stop it. Use your rational mind and stop arguing a moot point. Stop, now.

When you want help, people will be here for you.

Josh,
no one likes rudeness. Generally people perceive rudeness- when other people are hurt by certain comments- that come across as blunt or flippant.
For many people who have been hurt by Dave's actions and comments- your own comments about " swirly eyes" or whatever are equally hurtful to people- including myself who have been hurt by Dave.
Dave has hurt a lot of people. Luckily- YOU, or JINNY, or GLENN have not been on the receiving end of it. There was a time that I also defended Dave and wondered what all the fuss was about.
Just to let you know- your own comments are painful to a lot of people- as they seem to minimalise and trivialise the hurt that Dave has caused to many.
I'm pleased he hasn't hurt you- but please spare a thought for the rest of us.

Dear Josh,

As you have been so kind as to have tendered your services here: (...you'll no doubt recognize yourself being quoted here!)


"If was present somewhere and someone was saying bad things about you and you didn't have the ability to respond. Then you found out about those bad things and asked to respond, but that was denied I would hope I would speak up in your defense. It would be wrong of me if I didn't"


I must express my gratitude….although I can’t actually recall you EVER speaking up in defence of me on the JC website (…or in defence of Apostate (entire discussion topics of calumny here) or in defence of Ashs’ or Joes’ parents or in defence of any other former member of the JC’s David has continued to slander..), but no doubt I just haven’t been observant enough to note these….why don’t you just “cut’n’paste” a few onto the RickRoss forum now…..then we will be able to appreciate just what a “knight in shining armour” you’ve been all along…..if you are unable to do this, can you imagine why some people might hesitate to take you more seriously….?

I of course, CANNOT respond, unless I care to have my posting “doctored” sufficiently that David is then able to “triumphantly” refute it…..many, MANY of the people who post here have had this experience Hence for you to say that “everyone is free to post on the JC forum is really a completely disingenuous observation……but you know that already, don’t you!

(If you haven’t had this experience personally, it is because, that to date, you have said nothing that actually challenges David!)

You have been of course quick to speak up on behalf of Jinny and Glenn, who as you point out are not able to “defend” themselves on this forum ….I would personally be happy to see them reinstated on this forum…but until such time….perhaps you could remind me why Jinny for example, was originally denied access to this forum…..(you know it gets harder for me to remember these things with age)…..I seem to remember that Jinny used multiple identities to make her points (something that denies the rights of others to a fair representation)….but of course I must be mistaken here….because that would mean that Jinny HERSELF, was responsible for putting her in the postion where she couldn’t “defend” herself…..it was NEVER the case that she was arbitrarily banned in order to prevent her from responding to her “accusers”…..however I must have misremembered what really happened here……


(…could you remind what really were the facts of the matter, Josh???)


While I appreciate that you are out there to “defend” me (….understandably on those rare occasions that I say something of any truth…..) as much as Jinny and Glenn, I must admit that we are still “miles apart” on the matters you consider “political questions”…..Cap’n David McKay believes that whoever becomes part of HIS crew, has “signed away” their individual rights, to his discretion…For my part I believe that the Rights of Freedom, Speech and Association, The rule of Law, the Separation of Powers (and the “restrictive” laws and regulations that enforce these and which David thus objects to) are NOT “political questions” that villains like David can “negotiate” according to circumstances….or that you can genuinely describe as “political” opinion” …..I see them as the very precursors to good governance itself……and in consideration of them we can clearly see the Christless tyranny of David over the lives of others exposed……(the MAJORITY of people who been through the JesusChristian experience have rejected him….you are on friendly terms with those of the MINORITY opinion…..!)….It’s NOT a political question and for you so to say that it is, is why I am foolish enough to imagine that you ARE in fact falling prey to Davids “wisdom”……

(Have you ever considered travelling to Somalia where on the streets of Mogadishu, you can experience a “government-less” nation first hand? Perhaps it might be closer to your ideals than the “repressive” laws I’d like to see enacted in the “powerful central government” I’d like to see empowered such that they could nip people like David in the bud! )


It is nevertheless reassuring to here that David is “just some dude in Australia that you occasionally type to…”…….It may surprise you to know that I have a somewhat similar outlook…….to me, David is just some DUD in Australia that I occasionally type about”

Were you to meet him, I doubt that you’ll find “hypno-swirls” in the eyes of David…..no, I think it’d be much more mundane…should you actually chance upon him one day I’m sure that you’ll find nothing more unusual in David than in that of a number of other people who are commonly discussed on this Forum …..nothing more really, than the simple unrelenting gaze of an outwardly smiling viper coldly fixed upon it’s next meal…

Ok, one at a time.

Quote
Vodnik
Although this won't get through to you, just stop it. Use your rational mind and stop arguing a moot point. Stop, now.

Why bother talking to someone you don't think will listen? I've said what I came to say I'd be happy to stop now. I don't see how the point is moot though. Someone was rude, they should not be rude in the future. That's the point.

Quote
Vodnik
When you want help, people will be here for you.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. What do you think you're going to help me with?

Quote
hello
For many people who have been hurt by Dave's actions and comments- your own comments about " swirly eyes" or whatever are equally hurtful to people- including myself who have been hurt by Dave.

Sorry that something I said hurt you. I wasn't trying to make reference to any experience you may have had.

What I was trying to get across was that I'm not being controlled by Dave. Maybe it's hard keeping track of who exactly everyone is over the internet, but I live on the opposite side of the earth from Dave, and have never even met him. Still everytime I post over here I'm accused of being a pupet for Dave. Even if I come talking about something that has nothing to do with Dave, he gets brought up as the mastermind behind what I'm saying. You have to understand to me that comes across as being pretty non-sensical.

But I didn't come here to talk about Dave and I'm very happy to not talk about him.

Quote
Malcom
I must express my gratitude….although I can’t actually recall you EVER speaking up in defence of me on the JC website (…or in defence of Apostate (entire discussion topics of calumny here)

Well I've never really talked about you at all on the JCs forum, because I don't really know you. However after the last time I posted on this forum I did say that I thought you and Apostate were both nice to me when I was on here and that I apreciated that when others were accusing me of being a troll.

Here's the quote.....

Quote
I
To be fair apostate was nice to me while I was over there. There was only once when he mischaracterised my views and when I said something he apologised. (Also Malcom was nice, but most of my interaction was with apostate) It would be a good idea for others on the Rick Ross to not be so quick to assume people are out to subvert their message board if they don't fall in line within a post or two.

What followed was Dave said he didn't think you guys were all that nice and then I said, somethink like well I don't think they're nice to you, but they were nice to me and I wanted to acknowlege that.


Other than that I try not to get involved in the dispute between you guys and the JCs 1. because I wasn't there so I don't really have anything to add to the discussion and 2. because both sides can speak for themselves.

Quote
Malcom
I of course, CANNOT respond, unless I care to have my posting “doctored” sufficiently that David is then able to “triumphantly” refute it…..many, MANY of the people who post here have had this experience Hence for you to say that “everyone is free to post on the JC forum is really a completely disingenuous observation……but you know that already, don’t you!

Are you saying that a forum where posts are sometimes severly edited before being posted is really not a worthwhile forum to spend alot of time on? I agree with that.

I haven't noticed any posts being edited on the JCs, except when Dave has changed the word apostate to Craig or adds little addendums on at the end in bold lettering stating that it is him who is saying the bold part. That doesn't really seem to affect the message the poster was trying to get across though. I can agree with you that that would be annoying for the poster, but it is something that I think is bearable if you want to answer some accusation you think is unfair. If Jinny and Glenn could have posted here but would have had gotten little addendums put on the end of their intact posts I wouldn't have ever said a word.

Quote
Malcom
(…could you remind what really were the facts of the matter, Josh???)

Both Jinny and Glenn were banned because they had previously posted using a different acount. To my understanding neither of them were using the acounts concurrently (but I'm not looking this up I'm going from memory). Glenn I do remember told someone he forgot his old password and they told him to re-open another acount and just use that one so that's what he did. They both did break the letter of the law and had posted on more than one acount. I personally don't think they were breaking the spirit of the law because they didn't have those acounts to pretend to be multiple people, it was because they forgot their old password. In that case I think the rule was misused.

Quote
Malcom
I must admit that we are still “miles apart” on the matters you consider “political questions”

I honestly would really love to have this conversation about the proper role of government. I find it much much more interesting than an endless conversation about Dave. However I'm pretty certain the proper role of a central government is definitly not the subject of this thread so I'll refrain from it. If you'd like to talk about politics (in general, NOT ABOUT DAVE) somewhere else, I'd be happy to do that.

Just to let you know- on the JC website posts are not only edited- but deleted. A friend of mine who posted as a guest had his name changed to " fearful" and was then attacked. I've also had the experience that a JC who said insulting things about me, had THEIR posts deleted- so it looked as if I was being unreasonable for no reason.
Dave also had his own posts about hallucinating a demon edited- to it being a dream. Even though myself and several other people saw it.

Dear Josh,

I stand corrected....thank-you for at least questioning David about the manner in which Apostate and I were being discussed.....I appreciate that. You have indeed acted as a "whitish" knight in this instance. I will be less critical of your own observations, although you will have to forgive for remaining as critical as ever of David.

It would hardly seem improper (to me!) for this site to devote itself primarily to commentary that assessed David rather negatively.......the Forum IS after all, pointedly devoted to a critical assessment of a number of morally dubious individuals from those who have experienced their perfidy first-hand .....

......if you'd like to have a more "positive appraisal" of David broadcast over the net Josh, that doesn't seem something too difficult to hope for......you'd only need to find those ex-members who remember their experiences with David fondly, ....you know the former members who relished the time they spent with the JesusChristians and who have maintained a "positive" communion with them since that time......That's all you need to do! Nothing more difficult than that!!

How many happy, contented ex-members could you expect to find to participate in some nature of cyber conversation that politely "explored" the spiritualty of the Jesuschristians?.....there must be dozens, musn't there?

......because if nearly EVERY ex-member only ever speaks poorly of David (and the ONLY response you ever have from David is to explain to you how that's not very "nice" of them all, for one "good reason" after another.....)

.....well....that of course, sort of suggests something doesn't it......



(Hmmm....but David doesn't think that I'm "nice" does he.....we could perhaps just summarize that thought a litle more succinctly altogether couldn't we...in a nutshell, David doesn't THINK......once David has put every penny he owns at my disposal, and has agreed to spend every waking hour at my whim (...all "democratically" engineered through the "numbers" I have of existing members, who realize that to challenge me is to risk expulsion from the only life they know).....once David has been "broken of his pride" by "humbling" himself before God....(which in practise is of course would be to faithfully live out whatever interpretation of the scriptures best suit me...naturally if he so much as contradicts me, well then I'll know that David's still not sincere "enough" and I''ll set about humilating and ridiculing him, for his own good, before the entire population of the little world he now inhabits and then if need be I'll have him sent off with food to fast until he learns to overcome being so consistently "out of the spirit"....)

....after a few years of such a "life", then David would will be in a position to judge me, or other former members, "nice" or not.....until such a time, he knows (and he KNOWS he knows!)....shit!!