If you look back at for example, Bingowings's postings a few pages back, you will see how nasty and derogatory they were. In addition, Bingowings apparently wrote personal attacks on posters who contribute here and these presumably were disallowed from the Thread, so we haven't seen these. And that is why, according to the Moderator, Bwings was banned.
OK - i just searched for all the Bingowings posts left on here - just so I could "see" how "nasty and derogatory they were"...
here they are - all THREE of them... :
******* 1 *********
Happy Survivor: what are these "insane rules and regulations"? I've presumably been at the same meetings as you and I don't recall them being handed down. Are you just making stuff up? Again, exact quotes please and I will go away and check who said what
The question was directed at happy survivor and you have distorted it. There are no "rules" that I am aware of. If you are going to accuse people of being "insane" and "sheep like" you should have some evidence. It would be easy to get a recording of a specific sermon (it's not about going to "leaders"), and then go to the preacher and ask for clarification. or ask for a rule book which sets out membership requirements. You know there is no such thing, so stop the nonsense.
******* 2 ***********
Cbarb, to be honest, I've never read such an inaccurate representation of life in this church. There is no rule book and loads of members go on holiday and play sports, even as far back as the 80s. In fact Hugh black was very encouraging of it. Do you believe this stuff you write?
******* 3 ***********
Chesterk55. I'm not very interested in what you claim are the rules, but what they actually are. What insane rules did Mrs Gault hand down, when and how did she do it. Times, dates, people that can be verified. If that can't be done, where does that leave you?
I'm sorry but i seem to be missing something here - where exactly is the nastiness here ?
This mega-torrent of "nasty" posts - all THREE of them !! - must really be meeting some thin skins- because all I see here is a feisty riposte. Nasty ? really? I'm sorry - hardly - unless RRmoderator has deleted tons of other "nasty" responses from Bingowings - I fail to see anything remotely one cold consider nasty. We here have posted tons of stuff fired off in moments of emotion and for sure plenty of allegations directed at individuals too that in a court of law might even border on being libel. Just saying. If you guys want to seriously open up a debate here you need to get used to getting back like for like.
And heres a request to RRmoderator - I would be very interested to see those censored Bingowings posts in PM if oyu can send me them - just ot see how vile they were. Of course I would never repost them, but I really am curious just as to how "nasty" these personal deleted posts of her/him really got. Did anyone manage to see the posts before they were taken down ?
And seriously - wouldn't it have done our cause more good to leave the posts here - for everyone to see just how nasty the SMC apologists were getting ?
If this BingoWings truly WAS one of the pastors as suggested by one poster here - then it would have done her and SMC more PR damage to leave them here. In fact after a while I wouldnt be surprised if Bingowings later actually REQUESTED RRmoderator to remove her/his posts !.
Let the SMC nastiness be laid bare for all to see I say.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/11/2013 06:55AM by Clive.