For all to see starting with you right now.

I see that 3 people have voted to delete this... IMO, its a silly post, with just a -hint- of a spammish smell - to my mind that is just cause for ignoring it, but not deleting it. As a huge proponent of the self-moderation I also think it should be used with care and some open discussion.

Am I wrong to think we should keep posts like this?

Why are people voting to delete?

I would -love- to hear from the three people who voted to delete, either by private mail, or posting here, on why you feel this way.

Hmmmm.... I've heard some people are boycotting the moderation system because they think its censorship. I disagree, but if you want to fight unfair censorship, you could vote to -keep- postings which don't break the rules or the community standards.

Okay, now FOUR people have voted to delete, and still no one is willing to public state -why- they are voting to delete.

I do not know why anyone wants to delete it. I haven't even understood the topic yet???(perfect place for a "scratching head icon")I am not too happy with this moderation thing anyway. I see it as being a control tool for those that wish to push "their way" on us. Not the owners of the site, but the members. We should have the right to speak, and then if it is THAT wrong, members will have a way of taking it down themselves. Mean bunch, you know?

I'm with you massage.
Kat

i guess mercy is not reining here with 4 anywhos



but i agree 100%

with massagetrade's comments

maybe other reason should be done away with and a 4 word
fill in the blank be inserted

Thank you guys for commenting! I thought I was missing something obvious, or maybe taking this too seriously.

Kat, when you see specific examples where you feel people are using it as a control tool, and if the thread actually gets deleted, maybe you should cut'n'paste the thread and post it in feedback? I can 'keep' the thread untouched in one tab, so it will still be there (for you) after it gets deleted.

Mike said that people who abuse the system will have their moderation ability taken away, and thats part of how this system is supposed to improve over time.

Let Mercy do whatever she chooses. I don't have a beef with her.

Let mercy do whatever ' ' ' ' ' '.

Massage, I am still reading and re reading it to find anything there??? I mean anything?? I'm soooo confused....

Kat

Would it be the picture?? "Thank you Mr. Bush"??

Kat

Kat, I didn't even read the sign; between your comments here and a comment I received in private mail, I think you may be right. People may confuse the post as having political significance, and saw this as the wrong forum. Hmmm.....

i didn't vote to delete...but i think it shouldn't be here.

i prefer posts with some substance in the religion and current events areas.

people are definitely abusing it because i have seen many threads that shouldn't have been deleted that get deleted and i have seen many that should have been deleted that are not getting deleted. it's going bothways

Well Mr. Activist - I am apparently a very dense Wench at the moment. I tried to see if there was a play on words with your choice of spelling of Rhein, not finding that. Due to my inability to understand exactly what you want to begin with us here in this forum, I humbly request you state your motive much more obviously.

Wench

I think this might be a good place for 'sanity intolerance'. Even though we make the disclaimer in our spiritual meetings that there is a such a thing as religious intolerance of spiritual principles; That we are not a religious group but a spiritual group and that nobody doesn't has to attend our meetings if they don't want to still we find that a judge was sued by a newcomer for the judge giving him the choice of coming to our meetings or going to prison. The newcomer sued and won because just the word 'God' was mentioned in our meetings. So the group leader asked if any one was offended by the word 'God' before the meeting started today.

Interesting that he won. It would seem to me that either way would create a freedom of something or other issue.

I think it created the ability to have freedom from freedom because after he sued he had the option to go to prison since our meetings was his only other option.

It just makes me wonder if churches will have to make similiar disclaimers because of this case that happened in Arkansas this month. I wonder if a person will have to sign a waiver before they enter a church.

they won't have to sign a waiver but i think that most of the seperation of church and state lawsuits are bull****. some of these people are as intolerant as a religious fanatic.

King - do you make comments or ask questions when you see it happening? Sometimes, it could be an honest misunderstanding.

Lulu - as a matter of personal preference, I totally agree with you. Which is why I would ignore it, unless someone else posted something interesting in response.