Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by modcat5

  1. modcat5

    A few thoughts

    The post is in humor, oddly enough. Pretty much whenever the site goes down, GreasyTech is the one who brings it back up. The rest of us sit around and watch Stranger Things
  2. Everyone please give a hand to GreasyTech for fixing the formatting problem with GSC. Welcome back! Back to where we were...
  3. Just now realizing this is the humor forum. We'll leave it at this: No politics. Period. The opening post will stay up as an example of what NOT to post. Whether something is political will be discussed by the mods if there's any need for that. The decisions we make in that regard, as a whole, are guaranteed to be both flawed and final.
  4. modcat5

    A few thoughts

    Thank you, Paw, for the trust and the compliment! Might be a good time to remind people there's a donate button at the top of the page! :)
  5. The opening post reflects the challenge we face. Making fun of Pat Robertson would appear to be fair game until you realize his connection to the Republican party and its base. The tweet quoted in the opening post doesn't even try to mask the political nature of its contempt for Robertson, with its "Trump/Putin 2020" statement: CLEARLY political. I would be among the first to say there's a difference between politics in 2014 and politics in 2019. If you know me on a personal level, you know I have a LOT to say on the subject. I also know what would happen to GSC if the "no politics" rule were not rigorously enforced, with an abundance of caution as the guiding principle. I'm not trying to shot down the idea of this thread. Or maybe I am. I just do not see, at all, how it can work here without devolving rapidly into a political discussion. We didn't even make it through the opening post. I will await the input of my mod-ally before taking any action on this thread. I do hope this doesn't put Kathy off posting here. She seems to have been on the receiving of a lot of mod action lately (not a judgment or criticism: just an observation).
  6. Hid a few more posts. Deleted a few others. Some observations: WordWolf accurately pointed out why Oldiesman's post was hidden (whether that was his intent or not, I have no idea, but it doesn't matter). On its surface, I did not see any violations, but this is a thread for a GS newbie to share thoughts. It's not your typical thread, so we all ought to give her the space she needs to share what she wants to, when she wants to. IF she wants to. The subsequent conversation was out of line and disrespectful of the thread topic. I the very near future we will be deleting all references to this moderation action, out of respect for the thread. I would take this moment to apologize to Leah if we haven't already chased her as far away from GSC was we possibly could.
  7. Gary Busey DC Cab Mr T oops. forgot to Raf
  8. A statement I posted yesterday explaining action I took as a moderator inadvertently made it seem that only one person was the target. The target of the moderating action was an exchange, not a single poster. We once again urge ALL posters to stay on topic. Thank you.
  9. FYI http://www.fox9.com/news/investigators/wife-of-alleged-cult-leader-victor-barnard-files-for-divorce
  10. DWBH: I am taking you at your word that the person you identified as Victor Barnard's wife is, in fact, his wife. EDIT: This post originally appeared to be directed entirely at DWBH. That was my communication error, for which I take sole responsibility. The remainder of this post is directed at ALL USERS. Multiple user posts were deleted, INCLUDING MY OWN. DWBH did not deserve to have the entire post appear to be directed at him. I am deeply sorry. --modcat5, Raf. Personal "calling out" of posters for being "friends" or "followers" on Facebook will not be tolerated on this site. To be clear, there are people who "like" and "follow" pages and identify as "friends" with people for the purpose of being able to keep track of what those people do and say on social media. It does NOT necessarily mean those people are actually "friends" or that the "follower" is indeed a follower of that person. I "follow" and monitor multiple people and campaigns that I do not endorse, either on a personal or especially on a professional level. Multiple posts on this thread were deleted in their entirety. One was trimmed to eliminate what I consider to be a minor but significant infraction of our rules. This thread is about its topic. Any future posts that are not on topic will be deleted. Not edited. Not trimmed. Not examined. Deleted. Please do not transfer an argument from a previous thread, especially one where the offending comments have been deleted, onto other threads. On a personal note: Dear friends are putting us in a position of having to take sides. We don't want to. But when it comes to GSC, we have ONE side: GSC. We will do what we must in the best interest of the site. If we err, we err. But it will NOT be out of disrespect for the mission, purpose and interest of GSC. I hope and trust this is the last time moderators will need to intervene in this dispute.
  11. After careful consideration and in an overabundance of caution, we have decided to hide the spinoff thread that emerged from this discussion. We are aware that this action may be perceived as protecting people whose actions do not deserve protection. Please be assured that the only people we are interested in protecting with this decision are our posters, our moderators/administrators and our site owner. We suppose there is a place for healthy discussion about the second and third tiers of cult leaders, those who enable the leaders, the aiders and abettors of their abuses. But it's a fine line between identifying someone as VB's right hand man and accusing him of participating in criminal behavior. This decision is not final and the thread has not been deleted. It has been hidden so that we can delve into our previous policies on naming people to determine whether there is some middle ground we can reach where names are acceptable under conditions a, b and c but not x, y and z. We are amateurs at this. We are erring on the side of caution and protecting GSC against liability. Thank you for your patience as we seek to work this out.
  12. Raf posting: First, the post-resurrection gospel never changed. In the gospels, pre-resurrection, it was the kingdom. But at the end of the gospels, Jesus gives the explicit instruction to disciple all nations in his name. The only change, scripturally, is that he's resurrected now. There are 40 days of appearances, only a small handful of which are shared in the gospels and Acts. We don't know how many people witnessed each appearance. But if you think he's teaching them the same thing after the resurrection that he was teaching before... I don't even know what to say to that. He of all people knows things have changed, and how. It is beyond reason to think he would not have shared information that they needed to know in order to make disciples of all the nations in his name after having instructed them to do so! So why DON'T the 12 do what he said explicitly to do? The Bible's answer is implied: the 12 struggled to get past the primacy of Israel and the Jews as God's chosen people. It's the only thing that explains Jesus needing additional visions after being told in person by the risen Christ to disciple all nations in his name. [The skeptical answer is that this is a major plot hole in a made up story, but I don't need to resort to that]. Peter should never have needed to explain to the disciples that Paul was justified in preaching to the Gentiles because all of them would have remembered Jesus explicitly saying disciple all nations in his name. So why did Paul learn more than the 12? It's not because he had a different mission. He had the same mission. It's because he got serious about carrying it out. And once he demonstrated his commitment to the instruction, he got more. So the revelation of the One Body comes to Paul. Why? Because the 12 failed to follow the instruction while Paul dedicated himself to it. Easy. Biblical. Corresponds to all scripture on the subject without inventing a reason for Jesus to not mean precisely what he said when he said disciple all nations in his name. [The skeptical answer, of course, is that Paul made his doctrine up and Christianity retconned the words of Jesus to make Paul consistent with his post-resurrection instructions. There being no resurrection, Jesus never said any such thing. The plot hole is only created when you have him say something clear and unambiguous and his most faithful followers completely ignore it].
  13. I just deleted the thread while trying to get rid of a duplicate post. Feel free to carry on while we try to fix it...
  14. modcat5

    Countdown 2019

    11 days to go
  15. Your history in TWI is fair game, as is DWBH's. We implore you both to keep real names out of it. Your marriage history is not fair game. References have been deleted. By the way: It's no longer a secret in these parts, but Modcat5=Raf. I try not to moderate conversations when I am a participant, generally, but I felt safe intervening here.
  16. I'm not comfortable with disclosing the personal histories of posters unless THEY choose to disclose them. Same goes for real names. Please be discrete with people's personal information.
  17. I took Pawtucket at his word here when he said he was shutting down. But I should not be the one making public announcements about it. I will refrain from further comment until he announces what will be happening with this site. My apologies to all involved. See you soon.
  18. That is correct. read my last clue carefully. I dropped a major hint in it. Raf
  19. I just realized we did this show... not recently, but very few POSTS between them and now. It's how I met your mother.
  20. sorry. lost track. "Haaave you met Ted?"
  21. Maggie Smith won an Oscar for playing an actress who loses an Oscar. In the play, her character says she Hope's the award is presented by Michael Caine because he's so classy. In the movie, her husband is played by Michael Caine, so the reference is changed to David Niven.
  22. For what it's worth: As you all (probably) know, moderators have two accounts: one as a moderator, and one as our normal selves. For a long time, the moderators' identities were secret. Many were outed a few years ago, but not all. If you don't know by now that I am Raf, you probably don't care. Whatever, I am Raf. It is not my place to disclose the identities of other moderators, with the exception of pawtucket, who owns the site but rarely posts. Two mods have mostly been monitoring things here day to day. Modgellan is the other one. I will not disclose Modgellan's identity. And I will not disclose Modwildcat's ID either. If he/she chooses to, that's up to him/her. Personally, I think this moderator's faith journey would be fascinating if he/she would disclose his/her identity. Finding out that modwildcat returned to Catholicism is ... not terribly interesting to me. I mean, who is modwildcat? But finding out THIS PERSON returned to Catholicism is surprising, to say the least. So, I invite modwildcat to post under his/her original screen name and continue this fascinating conversation. Hit me up with a PM if you can't find your login credentials. And wow.
  23. Vince has been teaching that you could lose your salvation for at least 20 years. --Raf posting.
  • Create New...