Make the Rules

[cricket 3]

One of the best books I've ever read on the subject of "slang" is "Expletive Deleted". You wouldn't believe some of the common, everyday words that even the most righteous of us use--that should be considered slang.

Certainly, there could be a list of objectionable terms to include that MOST could agree upon.

[Woody 101]

Oh NO !!

I thought that my speech was pure. But I suppose that if I read that book I might discover I am not so pure after all. No. I don't think I want to read that book. Let me live in my fantasy.

[Woody 101]

One of the best books I've ever read on the subject of "slang" is "Expletive Deleted". You wouldn't believe some of the common, everyday words that even the most righteous of us use--that should be considered slang.

Certainly, there could be a list of objectionable terms to include that MOST could agree upon.

I used to work in the Rehabilitation Department of a Hospital. For 17 years I worked with stroke patients. One of them was a nun. Her family said she was as pure as the driven snow. But after the stroke ... she used words that would shock the most rough of individuals.

She had no control over her words. It was not her fault. It is just interesting how the brain works. I don't know if the words were repressed over the years of being so kind ?? or what ?

These words just came out automatically without a reason. She would be walking around and the words were just flowing.

[Lil Star 0]

Just tagging on and not in response to anyone's comment.

When we say stop rehashing old issues, is that for everyone?

If not can we have a list who can?

When we say do not make it personal, who does that mean?

If someone goes after another when nothing has been said either to or about them, can we expect to have them stopped cold on the forum as was recently done?

Can all or just a few allowed to do this?

[Lil Star 0]

We could always refer people to Ellen White. She has a few "clarifying" rules.

I make a habit of doing this and thus I am not so popular.

[Neil D 22]

I once quoted Ellen White here on the forum and some person complained to my employor over it because they did not like what I quoted. LOL

Which brings me to another rule. Keeping C/A here safe...that means, anyone who contacts an employer due to a member's writing here, and gets the member fired, that whistle blower/tattletale is banned for life of the board once it is confirmed by administrative investigation.

I don't want some pastor getting fired for espousing/exploring views. I want C/A a place to grow as well...and that means exploring and sometimes espousing views not held by all.

I don't mind admitting a tattle tail to C/A, provided s/he is place on one year probation automatically. But you do it to one of our members, you are out of here...

[Woody 101]

I guess we could define what we mean by wanting CA to be a "safe" place.

[Neil D 22]

As far as rules ... I would like to propose that No Slang be allowed. It is offensive to many and is just not necessary.

Whatcho talkin' 'bout, boy? Ya'll wanta make some of us creative types speakin' plain?

[bonnie 784]

Just tagging on.

I think there is something in scripture about "Be sure your sins will find you out. Yup even on the internet.

Perhaps Stan is right, those that might object strongest to speaking to an employer hoping for negative consequences might have been guilty themselves.

[Woody 101]

OK. You asked.

This Redwood Snippet is the reason ....

Quote:

"The tongue that utters perverse things, common things, slang phrases , that tongue needs to be treated with the hot coals of juniper .--MS 17, 1895. {2MCP 577.3}

OUCH. I don't wouldn't want to wish that on anyone.

[Woody 101]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

We could always refer people to Ellen White. She has a few "clarifying" rules.

I make a habit of doing this and thus I am not so popular.

BUMP

[Amelia 0]

I could never understand why a person would go so far as to call a persons employer over something done here on CA. It's beyond outragious. Where do they get off? What makes them think they are so rightious?

My rule would be: if a member contacted another members employer, pastor or family member (must have proof) whatever their intent; that member would be emmediately banned. And I would urge them to get as much info as they could and take out a restraining order against them.

[Woody 101]

You are right Amelia. That person would certainly lack credibility in my eyes.

[bonnie 784]

I could never understand why a person would go so far as to call a persons employer over something done here on CA. It's beyond outragious. Where do they get off? What makes them think they are so rightious?

My rule would be: if a member contacted another members employer, pastor or family member (must have proof) whatever their intent; that member would be emmediately banned. And I would urge them to get as much info as they could and take out a restraining order against them.

As this seems to be a long past issue that now needs to be addressed again and again and you have rendered judgement perhaps I will be allowed to answer.

First take into account that at times those that bring it up again and again have done same. You certainly would not wish to bann them

Secondly, you are without a clue as to any circumstances leading up to and finally carrying thru. If I am wrong it would be helpful for you to state what you know of why such an act would occur.

Restraining order, nah, not possible. All actions were taken with full legal advise . Also when the act that has you so incensed was done it was not with a surprise that notification was given that others had done same. As soon as it was complained about and acknowledged several did acknowledge same action with no results

When an employer is already aware of actions,and does not act themselves, they assume certain liabilities.

In time then this gives them a certain incentive to act.

I will also assume that you are in full possession of the knowledge of motive as I have seen you state many times not to be so quick to judge the motive of others. In fact quite a frequent reoccurring theme here by many.

Your knowledge of motives places you in a position of being able to judge the motives of another apparently

[bonnie 784]

Also Amelia, before you become so incensed it might be helpful to ask of all those doing so much handwringing.

Are you without sin in this area? If so cast the first stone

And always be aware that the true answer to that can come from the most unexpected places

[Amelia 0]

Bonnie, you seem to think my comment was aimed at you. It was not. It was not aimed at anyone. It was just a general comment about an action that a member said had happened and my opinion of a "rule" to counter the action.

[Amelia 0]

Bonnie, IMHO you sould take that persecution complex to the doctor and have it looked at.

[bonnie 784]

You are right Amelia. That person would certainly lack credibility in my eyes.

Be careful of that redwood, the wrath may descend on those you would least want it to. certainly should not be rushing to an opinion or judgement with out all facts at your disposal

[bonnie 784]

Of course, I should have seen that,

Thank you

Something that was provided for me after the past week for my informational purposes. maybe help with C/A and them trying to figure out rules

http://www.carter-ruck.com/FAQs/Libel%20and%20Slander%20Cases.html

For you amelia

http://www.website-law.co.uk/resources/website-libel.html

[Guest Artiste]

Someone has not eaten their toad this morning.

[bonnie 784]

Don't eat toads, so you are correct. I prefer to know and reject

that which is not good for me.

[Stan 1,950]

Someone has not eaten their toad this morning.

Some days you just never know what will be posted..

[lazarus 320]

Quote:

some days you just never know what will be posted..

[olger 19]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

We could always refer people to Ellen White. She has a few "clarifying" rules.

I make a habit of doing this and thus I am not so popular.

Not everyone cares for Ellen White. I once quoted Ellen White here on the forum and some person complained to my employor over it because they did not like what I quoted. LOL

It might be time to let this old story go. I vote for it.

[Woody 101]

The last I heard ... we were suppose to rehash old things. So, i am just really confused. Can anyone help my confusion?

When is it time to re-hash and when is it not time to re-hash?

Can we have a hash committee Stan?