Why Jorge and JM are preferable to Kendemeyer

[Snarf]

Jorge and JM, fanatic as they are, are at least honest to themselves and the rest of us. At least their personal integrity is a credit to the risen Lord.

Ken, by your constant invention of sock puppets and rule-breaking, are an embarassment to all of us who look to Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Don't you ever feel shame in breaking rules by pretending to be someone else to sneak in? Not only is this lack of honesty an embarassment, you're not even good at it-the stupidity alone is a shame on the rest of the Body.

[Meh_Gerbil]

Jorge and JM, fanatic as they are, are at least honest to themselves and the rest of us. At least their personal integrity is a credit to the risen Lord.

Ken, by your constant invention of sock puppets and rule-breaking, are an embarassment to all of us who look to Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Don't you ever feel shame in breaking rules by pretending to be someone else to sneak in? Not only is this lack of honesty an embarassment, you're not even good at it-the stupidity alone is a shame on the rest of the Body.

Am I the only person that thinks Kendemeyer = Snarf?

:pot:

[Dee Dee Warren]

As a site owner and Christian I am thoroughly embarassed by Ken's behaviour. Rules apparently are for everyone else and not him. I have been unfairly banned from sites. I don't go back and re-register and re-post. In fact this site was started because of just such an event. He may think his initial booting was unfair, well he has never tried to work it out, just blatantly breaks rules he gives his word to uphold when he registers.

[Barry Desborough]

As a site owner and Christian I am thoroughly embarassed by Ken's behaviour. Rules apparently are for everyone else and not him. I have been unfairly banned from sites. I don't go back and re-register and re-post. In fact this site was started because of just such an event. He may think his initial booting was unfair, well he has never tried to work it out, just blatantly breaks rules he gives his word to uphold when he registers.

Most of us recognise that there are [self-moderated hyphenated expression]s of all shades of opinion and belief.

[wattsr1]

As a site owner and Christian I am thoroughly embarassed by Ken's behaviour. Rules apparently are for everyone else and not him. I have been unfairly banned from sites. I don't go back and re-register and re-post. In fact this site was started because of just such an event. He may think his initial booting was unfair, well he has never tried to work it out, just blatantly breaks rules he gives his word to uphold when he registers.

Gidday TMX,


One reason for embarassment would be if we (atheisits, agnostics, Hindus, Whatevers) - looked at Ken and thought "typical". I look at it as Ken being typically Ken. I often wonder if he can really help himself. I certainly do not look at Ken and think "typical Christian".

Mind you, Ken simply illustrates the warts we all have. So there is no need to feel embarrased because of his behavior. He is simply a stupid man from your side. We have plenty on our side. As a result it would be very hard to use him to point a finger at theists.


Regards, Roland

[Dee Dee Warren]

Roland, when the site first started, we didn't have this kind of issue from Christians, but just a few very nasty atheists. But since then our by far worst offenders of the sockpuppet variety have been Christians, and really there is no excuse to be on our permaban list, we allow so much, that it is pathetic to be permanently shown the boot here. And nearly anyone can be let back under certain conditions, even Ken, but he never even tried to communicate with us, not once.

[wattsr1]

Roland, when the site first started, we didn't have this kind of issue from Christians, but just a few very nasty atheists. But since then our by far worst offenders of the sockpuppet variety have been Christians, and really there is no excuse to be on our permaban list, we allow so much, that it is pathetic to be permanently shown the boot here. And nearly anyone can be let back under certain conditions, even Ken, but he never even tried to communicate with us, not once.

Gidday TMX,

I understand. But look, even with the Christian concept of sin, people like Ken will still exist. Neither of us can escape the ratbags. And wrt Ken, I suspect that he cannot be shamed. Maybe it is something in him.

Have you ever thought that some people like Ken may be atheists trying to make you folk look terrible? It would be a good ruse, particularly if one really "had it in" for he opposition. While I doubt that this is the case with Ken (given my first contact with him - and he was very dishonest back then, to me personally), you never know with some others.


Regards, Roland

PS Take heart. I cannot speak for other atheists, but your site really is great.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Thanks Roland, you are a sweetie.

[Jorge]

Am I the only person that thinks Kendemeyer = Snarf?

:pot:


Hmmm ... vely intelesteen ... please, tell me more ... what do you mean? ... what "evidence" is there?

My take : Ken has PM'ed me a few times. I'd find it very hard to believe that K=S. If it were true -- and that's a BIG if -- then I'd be inclined to believe that we have a living case of multiple personalities.

But again, I don't believe this is the case.

I will take this opportunity to ask Ken to abide by the rules. I believe that if you at least try to work things out, you may be allowed to return (maybe - not my call). Continuing down this road, it's game over and it's wrong.

Jorge

[Dee Dee Warren]

Ken should contact admin@theologyweb.com if he wishes to participate here to try to work something out with the administrators of this site.

[Minnesota]

Roland, when the site first started, we didn't have this kind of issue from Christians, but just a few very nasty atheists. But since then our by far worst offenders of the sockpuppet variety have been Christians, and really there is no excuse to be on our permaban list, we allow so much, that it is pathetic to be permanently shown the boot here. And nearly anyone can be let back under certain conditions, even Ken, but he never even tried to communicate with us, not once.

Gotta say that having once been banned from another site for posting an innocuous comment--it went against their beliefs-- I certainly appreciate the latitude allowed on Tweb. Although it sometimes attracts sockpuppets, it has also attracted some very knowledgeable people, those with actual degrees in the subjects they address, which is not all that common on other sites. Kudos to the administration here.

[Piebald]

Have you ever stopped to consider the fact that he may be simply reincarnating a lot lately; you atheists are always so quick to judge

[wattsr1]

Have you ever stopped to consider the fact that he may be simply reincarnating a lot lately; you atheists are always so quick to judge

No, no, no, Piebald, we atheists fully understand that, in this one specific instance, we do have a case of reincarnation.

It's just that he always comes back with the same habit. He's like a blowfly at a BBQ - a terrible nusiance and simply cannot be waved away.

I wonder if he could be squashed by a swat of the hand?

Now that I have stepped into the supernatural realm, I must take grasp of reality and step back to my atheist faith. :teeth:


Regards, Roland

[Meh_Gerbil]

... atheist faith. :teeth:


Regards, Roland

I knew it....I just KNEW IT!

*Meh Gerbil does a happy dance*

[wattsr1]

I knew it....I just KNEW IT!

*Meh Gerbil does a happy dance*

:teeth: :teeth: :teeth:

Did you feel the earth rumble when you read it TMM? (Mind you, it could have been your tummy.)

[efbarton]

To Dee Dee and admins:


Dee Dee wrote:


And nearly anyone can be let back under certain conditions, even Ken, but he never even tried to communicate with us, not once."

quote taken from: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85617&highlight=contact+admin




Dee Dee also wrote:




Ken should contact admin@theologyweb.com if he wishes to participate here to try to work something out with the administrators of this site."

quote taken from: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85617&highlight=contact+admin




I did try to communicate with you via a polite letter to the admin@theologyweb.com address. I received no response. I took the no response as an indication that you didn't want to work things out. I was also told by a TWEBBER that matrixing only lasted a short while and my matrixing didn't end a short while.

If you want to work things out please write to me via the email address greenjello321@hotmail.com I am willing to see if we can work things out.

Lastly, I thought my relegation to the matrix was unfair because I wrote a admin regarding a warning I received and received a internal email to my TWEB account from and admin not to worry about my warning level because it was quite low. Almost immediately afterwords, I was put in the matrix. In short, I viewed my putting in the matrix as unfair and the subsequent non reply to the letter I wrote to admin@theologyweb.com as being further unfair.

By the way, perhaps, the non-reply to my admin@theologyweb.com letter was an administrative error and I should have written a second letter. I guess it is possible my letter fell between the cracks.

(A copy of this letter was sent to admin@theologyweb.com )



Sincerely,

Ken

[grmorton]

As a site owner and Christian I am thoroughly embarassed by Ken's behaviour. Rules apparently are for everyone else and not him. I have been unfairly banned from sites. I don't go back and re-register and re-post. In fact this site was started because of just such an event. He may think his initial booting was unfair, well he has never tried to work it out, just blatantly breaks rules he gives his word to uphold when he registers.


I for one and delighted to see Christians trying to publically correct the behavior, and even occasionally the facts of other christians. One of the things that really bothered me when I was a YEC was that the big named YECs I knew (and I knew nearly all of them) would not so much as lift a public finger to correct the most egregious statement (so long as it was from their side) nor the most dishonest behavior (sham degrees). We Christians should stand for something, like honesty, even if it is our side of the philosophical spectrum which is misbehaving.

Thus, My hat is off to y'all for your embarassment at this inexcusable behavior. It is a good sign.

[Trout]

Gotta say that having once been banned from another site for posting an innocuous comment--it went against their beliefs-- I certainly appreciate the latitude allowed on Tweb. Although it sometimes attracts sockpuppets, it has also attracted some very knowledgeable people, those with actual degrees in the subjects they address, which is not all that common on other sites. Kudos to the administration here.

Xena has asked to sift you like wheat, many times we've found her with cursor hovering over the Ban Minn button. But our prayers have been answered in the form of your continued participation here, I'm glad you've never said that prayer wasn't effective.

Post on, Minn . . . post on.

[Seasanctuary]

At least Ken has the distinction of introducing me to Tweb. :D

[Roy]

At least Ken has the distinction of introducing me to Tweb. :D

Suddenly his repeated banning makes sense...

:smile:

Roy