Please use this thread for (and only for) alerting admins to moderation issues and for raising complaints arising from particular decisions. We remind participants that TSZ is a benign dictatorship, the property of Dr. Elizabeth Liddle. All decisions regarding policy and implementation are hers alone.
keiths,
Citations?
Where are these excuses? What is my job? How are you so certain, oh sage of uncertainty? Why are you such an arsehole? More questions for you not to answer while getting more attention than you deserve.
You just made them.
It’s that thing you’re not doing.
You are truly pathetic, trying to argue “Oh, I’m just a caretaker, not a moderator, so I can’t challenge Neil.”
Do you have any idea how ridiculous you look?
And of course Neil did exactly the same thing when you closed comments on the Moderation Issues 4 thread, to hide your disgraceful handling of the ALurker affair and your subsequent humiliating apology. He should have challenged you or reversed your action. Instead he circled the wagons with you.
The two of you are a real piece of work. You cover each others’ asses instead of doing what’s best for TSZ.
Well, what’s best for TSZ is for Lizzie to return. In the meantime, I support her idea of a venue that encourages discussion across a wide range of view, without rancour. What’s your objective?
PS
Citations?
Keiths
I’ve thought about it and it’s not very Christian of me to consign you to being ignored forever with no possibility of redemption. So I will modify my position.
When you sincerely apologize for lying for months here to gain a debating advantage and promise not to engage in that sort of behavior in the future I will take you off ignore.
The choice is yours.
peace
How will you know if he’s done that (he won’t, incidentally) if you’re ignoring his posts?
Just like I knew when he finally decided to admit he was only pretending to believe what he claimed to believe.
He can do so here and I’ll check from time to time.
Ignore does not work in this thread.
I suspect he will apologize only when he thinks it will be in his interest to do so. If nothing else keiths is demonstratively machiavellian in that way.
peace
Did not know that.
fifth:
To those who haven’t been following this, fifth is referring to my “embrace” of Rumraketism, a fake religion with an uncanny resemblance to presuppositional Christianity, and one which I “defended” using presuppositional techniques. An obvious parody, in other words.
Fifth, parody is not lying. Even you, bless your heart, were bright enough to understand that I was mocking your presuppositional Christianity, not embracing a new religion.
I’ve addressed this already:
As for your Ignore button, you keep bringing it up as if I should care whether you keep me on Ignore, but why? It doesn’t matter to me. Either way, you lose.
If you hide and make excuses, you look pitiful:
On the other hand, if you actually try to defend your views, you’ll lose:
I’m certainly not going to apologize for parodying your religion, so it looks like you’ve already made your choice: you’re going to cower behind your Ignore button, to the great glory of Jesus.
Good luck with the excuse-making.
FWIW, I think you do care that he has you on ignore, since you’ve brought it up about 50 times. You’ve practically begged him to reinstate you. It obviously galls you.
NO YOU DID NOT!!!!!!!
When asked what the tenets of your newly professed faith were you lied and said that they were a secret. That is not a presuppositional technique. That is a bold faced despicable lie designed to gain debating advantage.
If you don’t share what you believe I can’t evaluate your worldview for consistency. We can’t explore your worldview to see if it is able to do what you claim it does.
In short you put yourself in a position that was unfairly and dishonestly privileged.
Everyone knows what I believe and if they don’t all they have to ask and I will be happy to tell them. Any one can see if my worldview is consistent and sufficient to justify things like knowledge and morality.
You lied and used the rules of this site to keep from exposing yourself to the same scrutiny. That is despicable.
Presuppositionalism is all about making our perspective worldviews transparent. What you did was exactly the opposite of that.
You also took advantage of the rules here that prohibit me from questioning you when you claim to believe something.
In short you lied for months for no other reason than to obtain an unfair debating advantage and apparently you are still unwilling to admit that transgression.
until you do I will continue to ignore you.
good day sir
peace
walto,
You’re not thinking this through, walto.
It doesn’t gall me, and I don’t care whether he reinstates me. I bring it up because it’s to my advantage to bring it up.
Think about it. The more people who know that he’s hiding behind his Ignore button, the better it is for me. They can see that he’s just making excuses, and they know why.
There you have it. That’s keiths in a nutshell.
Lie about what you believe then lie about the response to your lie.
Why? because it’s to your advantage
It’s not a lie, fifth. You are hiding behind your Ignore button, and it’s to my advantage to bring that up.
fifth,
Parody is not lying, and I don’t need an unfair advantage. You make mistakes right and left. All I have to do is observe them and point them out. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
Think about how well this has worked out for me:
1. I still get to refute your arguments. The fact that you have me on Ignore hampers you from responding to me, but not vice-versa.
2. Readers see you failing to respond, and they know why. You’re not impressing anyone by hiding behind your Ignore button and making excuses.
3. Readers can see how little faith you actually have in Jesus. If you trusted him to help you, you’d be confronting my arguments instead of hiding from them. If you trusted him to reveal things at the crucial moments, you’d be bringing the fight to me instead of running away. Ironically, it’s one of the few things we seem to agree on: You’re on your own in these debates. Jesus doesn’t give you the help you need.
(I have an obvious explanation for that: He’s been dead for 2000 years, and dead people aren’t very good at responding to requests for help. What’s your explanation?)
You say that but you purposely lied for months in order to get one. That tells me a lot about your confidence in your “arguments”
If you had good arguments would not need to lie.
I’m not hiding from your arguments. Other folks are free to re-post any they find to be worthy.
That does not happen very often which tells me that no one here is very impressed with most of your “arguments”.
peace
Well, yeah, instead the presuppositional “technique” is to just claim that their worldview solves every absurd problem they’ve already bought into. When questioned the evasion technique consists on asking “by what standard blah, blah, blah, blah …” So, sure the evasions are different in presuppositional apologetics. Shame on you keiths! Being so dishonest that way instead of the other.
Yeah keiths! What the hell? Just because the pressupositionalist bullshitter won’t let you evaluate their claims doesn’t mean that you should follow suit!
What the hell keaiths? You’re not supposed to do as presuppositional bullshitters do! Dishonest privileged positions? Not on a presuppositionalist’s watch! you’re giving away their tricks! It’s totally unfair and dishonest to show that their bullshit is totally unfair and dishonest!!!! Shame on you.
Oh crap. I can’t keep this up. Now you bullshit yourself FMM?
What fucking scrutiny FMM? You won’t even try and understand the absurdity upon absurdity that you immerse yourself into in order to get your bullshit started. Who do you think your bullshitting if not just yourself?
Bullshit. Presuppositionalism is all about making absurd requests, then pretend to solve them by mere claim, hold to double standards where anything is acceptable if it’s your position, but not if it’s not, evasion techniques as necessary, never reading for comprehension when answered, deforming whatever answers you get. Pure bullshit FMM. So, please, stop the fucking pretence. Presuppositionalism is just bullshit. Far from transparent. Come on.
Nah, keiths played your own game (not too well though, he could have claimed “revelation” instead of “secret,” for example, and that you already knew but that you denied the truth in unrighteousness to follow the christian idolatry and rejoice in your sin), and you didn’t like it because you’re unable to look at yourself in the fucking mirror.
At least keiths doesn’t really believe any of the shit he played you with. You, on the other hand, are a dishonest bullshitter in the very name of the very “God” that you supposedly believe in, and that supposedly condemns that kind of crap under a fucking absolute morality! Talk about fucking internal inconsistency!
Entropy, to fifth:
O ye of little faith. That’s exactly what I did.
I wrote:
And:
keiths:
fifth:
Hardly. It was a parody, and I kept up the parody. You were helpless against it.
It was beautiful. Not only were you unable to defend presuppositional Christianity against the fake religion of Rumraketism, but the tactics I was using — including the appeal to revelation — came straight out of the fifthmonarchyman playbook. You were hoist by your own petard, to my great amusement.
fifth:
You’re hiding. Other people aren’t responsible for spoon feeding my arguments to you.
Look how phony your excuse is. If you weren’t hiding, then you wouldn’t need to put me on Ignore. After all, nothing obligates you to respond to what I write.
But you need the excuse. You want people to think that you haven’t even seen my arguments, so that they don’t fault you for not responding. That requires you to put me on Ignore. It’s a phony excuse, and readers are smart enough to see through it.
They’re also smart enough to see that despite all the false piety, you trust your Ignore button more than you trust Jesus. Jesus won’t protect you from the atheists, or reveal what you need to know to out-argue them. You know that, and so do we.
You can’t rely on Jesus, so you hide behind your Ignore button instead. Not very impressive.
I put you on ignore simply so that I will not be tempted to respond to you. I’m not hiding at all anyone can re-post your arguments as happened in the intention thread. I will be happy to answer them.
I just wont discuss stuff with unrepentant liars
All you have to do is say you are sorry for lying to me for months and promise not to lie in the future.
Heck I might even settle for a properly worded “I’m sorry for the misunderstanding” dodge as long as you promise not to lie anymore.
peace
what are you talking about? My beliefs are public anyone can evaluate them.
Keiths lied and said he held to beliefs that he does not and then would not expose those “phony” beliefs to the same scrutiny that I do my own. Every day on this website.
Are you daft????
My beliefs are public everyone knows them. You can cuss and discuss them all day long if you choose to. In fact a good portion of what happens on this website is the scrutinization of my beliefs. For some reason you all seem to get your jollies from that sort of thing.
On the contrary Keiths’ lie made scrutinization impossible for his claimed beliefs thus using deception and the rules of this website to put himself in an unfair privileged position.
It’s beyond despicable. That sort of behavior should not be rewarded.
peace
keiths,
My bad. I just took FMM’s word for it. Of course, I shouldn’t. When will I learn?
Sorry, fmm, but I don’t see keiths behavior as “lying”. Yes, he wrote something that was intentionally false, but there was no intent to deceive. The parody was obvious to all.
I must admit that I myself was considering explaining to you the tenets of MY belief in the Great Green Arkleseizure, hanky and all, but keiths was doing a bang-up job with Rumraketism, so I skipped. Is it your claim that you genuinely believed keiths was a follower of the Holy Gasket?
Likewise, you do appear to be “hiding” when you put keiths on ignore. Your “simply so that I will not be tempted to respond” excuse is just sad.
What’s the down-side of responding to him?
Proverbs 17:28
Ok, then.
It was not his intent to deceive that was the issue.
The problem is that I am prohibited from calling him on his ruse by the rules of this website. I must assume he is posting in good faith when he claims to have abandoned atheism.
So he is free to say he knows that he is not a brain in a vat because Rumracket tells him so and I can’t point out that he really does not believe that Rumracket can justify his belief that he is not a brain in a vat.
When I asked him in effect why Rumracket justifies his belief that he is not a brain in a vat he refused to say why but instead claimed his reasons were secret.
What he was doing was using his lie and the rules of this site to put himself in a privileged position and declaring any scrutiny of his worldview to be off limits while he was free to continue to critique mine.
That is profoundly unfair
I really wish you would have I would love the exercise of examining another world view for consistency. Keiths would not allow that for his pretended beliefs.
I’m sure you know It’s my position that Christianity is unique in it’s consistency and sufficiency to serve as a foundation.
I’m more than willing to take on all comers real or imagined.
The problem is that keiths would not allow his views “actual or pretend” to be examined. He wanted to spend all his time examining mine and he used a ruse coupled with the rules here to facilitate that.
That is just despicable and it should not be rewarded
peace
He will get the idea that there are no consequences at all for acting in a profoundly weaselly manner
peace
If, hypothetically, your position were defensible, then you have this exactly backwards. By NOT responding to him, you show that there are no consequences to his duplicity. If you were to respond to him, and use the power of your awesome logic to humiliate him, then you would have stuffed him up, but good.
Alternatively, you don’t have any adequate response whatsoever, so staying silent is your best course of action.
Like I noted, Proverbs 17:28
That your beliefs are public doesn’t mean that you allow them to be evaluated. You feel free to call somebody’s parody of your phony beliefs phony, but you’d not accept that yours are just as phony. When shown so you’ll just add more claims and more claims and more claims. The point is that you only pretend to allow evaluation, but, in the end you’re unable to even try and understand the profound failures of your phony beliefs to do anything of what you claim them to do, and they fail precisely because they’re just empty claims based on nothing but a system for you to avoid the criticism and keep living in a little untouchable bubble of self-deception and dishonesty towards whatever others present to you. So stop the whining already. You’ve got a spoonful of your own soup.
Your beliefs are just as phony. Otherwise you’d be able to try and evaluate criticism. yet what do you do? You hide behind more absurd claims and deception. Again, in the very name of the imaginary being that you claim to believe and whose “absolute” morality is supposed to be against the very way you behave in “His” name. Consistency my ass.
Are you?
You continue missing the fucking point. keiths “beliefs” were as public as yours in the very same sense. They were revelations from an imaginary being, just like yours. That can easily be evaluated the very same way as your bullshit: it’s all fucking imaginary and no amount of claims will make them any less so. No amount of absurdities you might feel able to answer will solve the problem because you’re not answering anything, you’re just imagining that you’re answering. You will avoid confronting your problems the very same way keiths did: claim revelation. It’s the very same shit. So, if you didn’t like it, maybe you need to re-evaluate the way you approach your own beliefs.
Just like you!
Of course it’s beyond despicable. Not nice looking at yourself in the mirror now, is it? As soon as you realize that’s what’s happening, you’ll have a way to improve yourself. Stop deceiving. Believe in as many gods as you want, but at least do it honestly. Then you won’t feel as offended by keiths. You’ll be rather grateful.
No, he explained that Rumraket had revealed to him that he was not a brain in a vat, and you, clearly, are not worthy of such revelation.
Site rules be damned, I really cannot believe that you are unable to see the symmetry here. You are indulging in precisely the conceit that you accuse keiths of. His whole point, with Rumraketism, is to point out to you the hermetically sealed triviality of your position. Do you really want me to explain to you how The Great Green Arkleseizure is precisely equivalent to Christianity in its presuppositional support. There’s absolutely nothing unique about Christianity in this regard.
Your whining about keiths`s duplicity is the most hilarious own goal yet. can you really not see this?
Here goes:
The GGA has revealed to me that the GGA is the one true font of all knowledge. Nobody knows anything except through the revelations of the GGA.
On a related note, I was once at a booze-up with my buddy Simon, and some twit came up to him and said “Boy I’m pissed off, I was just about to do this ‘Three Man Lift’ thing, when some asshole came up and poured a pint of beer down my trousers.” Quick on the uptake, even when drunk, Simon replied “That’s terrible. Wanna try again?”
I got to help out the second time around, although a google search reveals that the twit got off lightly.
You fmm, are like the twit.
It’s the truth that keiths was illuminating that pisses off Fifth.
The bullshit is hardly here or there. Who blathers more bullshit than Fifth? Should I care if he believes it? He can’t give the first reason why he or anyone should.
Glen Davidson
I don’t think the rules prohibit you from pointing out that a post appears to be parody.
Neil, to fifth:
Of course they don’t. Parody is not lying, so accusing someone of a parody doesn’t violate the good faith rule.
And as I’ve said:
It was an effective parody, and you were too incompetent to muster a comeback.
…says brave fifthmonarchyman, from the safe space behind his Ignore button.
You’re a fraud, fifth.
You did not present an alternative worldview to be evaluated. In fact for months you refused to do so despite my repeated requests.
You did this just so that you would not have to face scrutinization for your newly professed beliefs.
You wanted to continue to attack Christianity while hiding behind your deceptive claims to secrecy and the rules of this site.
That is despicable cowardly behavior and it should not be rewarded.
All you have to do to be taken off ignore is admit what you did and promise not to repeat that sort of behavior in the future.
the choice is yours
peace
I don’t think that keiths post was a parody. His phony religion had little in common with Christianity as witnessed by his contention that it’s tenets were secret.
Would it be against the rules to I say something like?
“You don’t really believe what you claim to believe”.
or
“Nobody really believes what you claim to believe”
or
“Despite what you say here it’s obvious you know that Rumracket (does/or does not) exist.”
or
“You are being deliberately deceitful in order to gain an unfair privileged debating position”
peace
How about “I don’t think you really believe that” or “I doubt that you really believe that”.
Telling somebody what they believe seems rude. Better to put it in terms of your own doubt.
Telling everybody what they believe is a presuppositionalist specialty.
Neil Rickert,
Maybe it should be called prejudicionalism instead. 🤣
What I did for months was every time I sensed he wanted to interact with me I would ask him to post a summary of his professed beliefs and in exchange I would take him off ignore.
That way if he was not serious about abandoning atheism all he had to do was say so and we could have a good laugh together or better yet he could prove he was actually doing a parody by producing a set of silly beliefs that were charactertures of what I believe.
Instead he chose to keep the deception up for months for no good reason except to maintain an unfair privileged debate position thereby proving that he will do anything whatsoever to gain an advantage.
That sort of behavior is despicable and should not be rewarded.
peace
There is no symmetry everyone knows what I believe and I will be happy to explain why the Christian God justifies things like knowledge and morality all you have to do is ask.
If you think my position is trivial or “hermetically sealed” you clearly don’t understand it.
All you have to do is ask and I will be happy to explain exactly why the Christian God can justify the things I appeal to him to justify.
If Great Green Arkleseizure is precisely equivalent to Christianity then it is Christianity!!!!!!!!!!!!
In fact I predict that the better Great Green Arkleseizure is at justifying things like knowledge the closer it’s beliefs will be to Christianity.
OK
How exactly does the GGA know that he is the one true font of all knowledge?
In case you are wondering the Christian God knows for certain that he is the one true font of all knowledge because as a tripersonal being each person in the Godhead can vouch for the omniscience and aseity of the other persons.
I hope you get the idea of how this conversation will go .
peace
Again I was not able to respond to him because he claimed his beliefs were secret and the rules prohibited me from calling him on his deception. He knew this that is why he lied.
Instead he was able to attack my position with impunity without ever once defending his own.
That sort of behavior is weasley and greasy and Machiavellian.
Even now he will not commit to being honest in the future.
There is simply no reason to try and discuss stuff civilly with a person who will lie for months because he thinks it’s to his advantage to do so.
peace
fifth,
The reason you couldn’t respond to me had nothing to do with the rules, as Neil and I have both pointed out to you. You couldn’t respond because you didn’t have a response. I beat you at your own game, using your own tactics. You were helpless. You couldn’t muster a comeback.
That obviously stings. Hence your retreat, followed by all of your frantic excuse-making.
So now you’re hiding. You know Jesus isn’t going to help you, so you hide behind your Ignore button, where it’s safe. Yet you pretend to trust Jesus.
That makes you a hypocrite.
Have you forgotten what God said to Joshua?
Hypocrisy is dishonest. Parody isn’t. So drop the holier-than-thou act.
fifth, to Neil:
Oh, please. You are claiming to be so clueless — so monumentally stupid — that you thought I might actually have abandoned my atheism to become a Rumraketeer?
Not even you are that stupid, fifth. You’re lying. You knew perfectly well that I was still an atheist and that I was mocking your presuppositional Christianity.
How do you think it looks to readers when you accuse someone who’s telling the truth of being a liar, while you yourself are lying through your teeth?
You’re a hypocrite. Might as well brand a scarlet H onto your forehead.
Where did Neil point that out?? He said I could suggest you were parodying.
You weren’t parodying you were lying to gain an advantage. He said I could not call you out on your lie because it would be rude.
I gave you ample opportunity to demonstrate you weren’t lying you did not do so. You kept it up for months
Even now you will not promise not to do that sort of thing in the future.
Lets face it you don’t want to discuss stuff.
quote:
Let the lying lips be mute, which speak insolently against the righteous in pride and contempt.
(Psa 31:18)
end quote:
nuff said
peace
I’m saying that I could not call you out on your lie and you knew it. It’s still a lie even if it is unconvincing.
Rumraketism is not a parody of Christianity it’s a made up religion that you used to keep your beliefs from being scrutinized
We all knew that you were lying but you still kept it up because you felt it gave you an advantage.
That is why you kept it up so long despite many many opportunities to fess up and move on.
Even now you won’t promise not to do that sort of thing in the future.
Despicable
peace
fifth,
Again, I don’t care if you keep me on Ignore. It just confirms what I’ve been saying. You’re hiding from my arguments and making up excuses for doing so. You’re also demonstrating that you don’t trust Jesus to help you out in a direct confrontation with me. Better to run away than to put your faith in Jesus, right, fifth?
Good, so we are clear you are on ignore solely because you won’t promise to not lie to gain an advantage.
I’ll just be sure to remind folks of that from time to time.
You can have this space to complain about everyone else and I’ll move on to more interesting stuff.
peace
keiths:
fifth:
Um, no, we’re not “clear” on that. Why lie about it, when my own words are right there?