"(ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB) lives on..."

[bcedaifu]

"(ye olde BC&H forum of IIDB) lives on..."
Yes it does live on. In fact, it seems to have been resurrected from the dead. A miracle. I read there, this morning, an interesting exchange between one of the prominent scholars of our group, "outhouse", (who seems to post in both places), and Sheshbazzar, one of the prominent members of the old BC&H forum.

I noticed this morning, that several of the forum members, or rather, former forum members, who had been banned from this forum, are engaged in that exchange with "outhouse". There are, in my opinion, few folks, anywhere, whose erudition matches that of Sheshbazzar, so the results of the "debate" at the IIDB site ("evidence for or against an historical figure, Jesus of Nazareth"), are not really unpredictable. Still it was interesting to me, to read that the topic has reappeared at IIDB. Reading Sheshbazzar's comments versus "outhouse" is something of a bare knuckle fist fight---bloody, short, and little doubt about the outcome.

Mountainman was one name, in that debate, I recalled this morning, from Kirby's shameful blacklist. Why anyone, in this field of Biblical fraud, dishonesty, and overt forgery, would expel members, simply because of their controversial viewpoints, and then prevent their ability to view this forum, by blocking their ISP, refutes this title: Ye Olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on. It most certainly does not "live on", HERE. This site is Kirby's private fiefdom. None of the folks on Kirby's blacklist had been expelled from BC&H, in fact, they are still there, today, and still writing (the same nonsense, as always!)

Mountainman, Duvduv, and others expelled by Kirby, never faced expulsion, at BC&H, did they? Their views don't correspond to Kirby's, therefore he kicked them out. How is that conduct different, from the history of the destruction of documents by the ancient Christian authorities?

[Peter Kirby]

Scathing. It's the wrong subforum, but whatever. I'm a tyrant.

[hjalti]

Correcton: a benevolent dictator

[perseusomega9]

Egafs ban mountain man and his repetitive trolling and you're just like the mob the razed the library of Alexandria.

Bfdeacuiomnp of whatever your name is, protip: you can read everything mountain man is ever going to say at his horribly designed website, he will never deviate from that script.

[stephan happy huller]

They were a bunch of nitwits who had little interest engaging the evidence honestly. I always thought they should have their own forum - sort of like Sartre's hell for internet bloggers. Read No Exit and you will understand what it was like being stuck in a forum with those folks. Complete idiots.

[Roger Pearse]

Mountainman was one name, in that debate, I recalled this morning, from Kirby's shameful blacklist. Why anyone, in this field of Biblical fraud, dishonesty, and overt forgery, would expel members, simply because of their controversial viewpoints, and then prevent their ability to view this forum, by blocking their ISP, refutes this title: Ye Olde BC&H forum of IIDB lives on. It most certainly does not "live on", HERE. This site is Kirby's private fiefdom. None of the folks on Kirby's blacklist had been expelled from BC&H, in fact, they are still there, today, and still writing (the same nonsense, as always!)

Mountainman, Duvduv, and others expelled by Kirby, never faced expulsion, at BC&H, did they? Their views don't correspond to Kirby's, therefore he kicked them out. How is that conduct different, from the history of the destruction of documents by the ancient Christian authorities?

Running a forum is a thankless task, and I certainly wouldn't do it. Nobody thanks you. Your job is to be the bad guy. And the overpowering aura of self-entitlement given off by posters, whenever you venture to interfere with even the most egregrious example of online misbehaviour, must be very dispiriting.

The first question that I would ask, in response to your query, is whether you think forums should be moderated *at all*? There was a time online when people DID hold the view that there should be no moderation, but those days passed sometime in the last 5 years, with the avalanche of spam online. These days everyone believes that there must be moderation, if only to deal with the paid spammers. So we all agree that some people must not be allowed to post.

Given that we all hold this view, I don't quite see the point of the comment at the end (which is, I know, not yours, but a stock gibe deployed by the unscrupulous whenever people are banned, however deservedly). Any ban of any sort could be compared to Nazi book-burning, although it is hard to see quite why the two should be linked (I don't know what "ancient Christian authorities" you mean; Christianity was illegal until 313).

It is not my business to second-guess or discuss PK's decisions. I wouldn't appreciate it myself. My own policy, on my own blog, is to ban everyone who annoys me; IMHO they can pontificate from their own blogs, but the content on *my* blog, which I pay for, is what *I* want there. A major forum with thousands of users, which is essentially a public place, is one thing. A ban from facebook, or twitter, is a serious matter because the user has no real alternative. But that is not the case with the web, where one blog, or one forum, is as good as another.

Now I wasn't aware that MountainMan had been banned. But I can easily imagine why he was banned. It was because he would not refrain from attempting to hijack **every single interesting thread** with his "Constantine invented Christianity" nonsense. It drove you nuts, after a while. I would cheerfully have supported a ban in the old FRDB forum. Why? Because it prevented real discussion taking place. Once the forum was full of his rubbish, or responses to it, then no debate could take place. No doubt Peter Kirby took the same view. A moderator *must* ban posters whose participation wrecks the forum and prevents other posters discussing what the forum exists to discuss. Had he been less aggressive in his posting into unrelated threads, he might have remained indefinitely. I found some value in some of his later posts, as he started to get more into sources, I should say; the translation of the Acts of Linus only took place because of his encouragement, and if he never did anything in his life, he did that, for which posterity should be grateful to him.

You no doubt know that the people at FRDB went mad and shut down the old forum? I personally regretted this. It was better to be part of a larger forum, I thought. But PK has at least ensured that those who were the core of BC&H could still meet. Inevitably not everything is the same - how could it be? - but a great deal is. Thank you Peter.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

[outhouse]

"( Mountainman, Duvduv, and others expelled by Kirby, never faced expulsion, at BC&H, did they?

Which is exactly what caused the demise of that forum, with addition to poor moderation.

Still it was interesting to me, to read that the topic has reappeared at IIDB. Reading Sheshbazzar's comments versus "outhouse" is something of a bare knuckle fist fight---bloody, short, and little doubt about the outcome.

Comedy.


He is actually someone I would call friend, and while the topic and debate gets heated, the dude is alright in my book.


The only outcome you can talk about if your personal percieved wishes and wants.

You were asked to jump in to the frying pan, as the 10 conspiracy minded people VS a scolarly approach is no real match.

Your view/opinion will stay a conpiracy minded opinion that carries no credibility, as you only attack the messenger not the material.


I have stayed on the defensive, because IF I go on the offensive, it shuts the whole thread down.

Prove Marcion created Pausl epistles, if thats your case, dont blame others because they cant prove something that didnt happen. Thats how weak your position actually is, its only one side of a coin, attacking others. Because you have no defence at all, its your only methodology.

[bcedaifu]

Egafs ban mountain man and his repetitive trolling and you're just like the mob the razed the library of Alexandria.

Bfdeacuiomnp of whatever your name is, protip: you can read everything mountain man is ever going to say at his horribly designed website, he will never deviate from that script.

Couple of points here, perseusomega9, first, regarding my name, yes, it has meaning, but not in English, certainly.

Secondly, I have not read one word at mountainman's web site, and therefore couldn't begin to reply in response, whether or not it is “horribly designed”.

I would ask you though, perseusomega9, whether or not you have complained to kirby about mountainman's web site, since kirby includes mountainman's web site among those sites worth visiting....One would think, that if it were “horribly designed”, then Peter Kirby would be sufficiently bright enough to detect that shortcoming, and instead of advertizing it, alert his cohort of cothinkers of the dangers of visiting that site.

“Never deviate”, really? Someone comes up with a novel idea, and you consign him to hell, forever, because he has the courage to speak out, about the king wearing his birthday suit to the parade? I don't agree with mountainman's theory that the whole fabric of christianity was created, lock stock and barrel, by Constantine and Eusebius, but, I think the refutation of that theory has yet to be exposed. If I recall, spin asserted at BC&H that the discovery at Dura Europos had nailed it. Haha. Makes me laugh. What a farce. Dura Europos never disturbed, and never excavated after the conquest by the Persian army, until the Yale team arrived on the scene???? what nonsense. No wonder the biblical “scholars” are held in such low esteem by the rest of the academic community.

Your job is to be the bad guy.

What? What does prohibition of a blacklisted member, i.e. preventing them from listing, have to do with denying access to the forum, by blocking the ISP?

That, Roger, is the functional equivalent of preventing access to a library, because the person has written a pamphlet denouncing Caesar.

Telling bcedaifu that he is incompetent, and therefore ought to be excluded from this august forum of very learned folk, is ONE thing. That may or may not be, regarded as the legitimate function of a forum moderator. Telling bcedaifu, that because she writes something critical of another forum member's analysis, he/she is no longer able to READ the content of the forum, is something quite different, in my opinion. I do not regard denial of access to the forum, by blocking the ISP, to represent a legitimate forum moderator function. It may well be kirby's legal right to do so, I don't know. I do know that he is wrong, to claim “ye olde BC&H forum lives on”, while concurrently prohibiting ACCESS to this forum by those whom he expels. The BC&H forum may have had many faults, but one fault it did NOT possess, was to prevent ACCESS to the contents by members. Kirby is not a benevolent dictator. He is a simple fascist, and will be exposed as such, by me, until death do us part.

whether you think forums should be moderated *at all*?

But, Roger, that isn't the problem, at all.
The problem isn't that kirbyfascist prevented aa5874 from writing ad infinatum, ad nauseum about whatever nonsense; the problem is that kirbyfascist prevented aa5874 from reading Andrew Criddle and Philosopher Jay and Roger Pearse. Kirbyfascist prevented aa5874 from access to the “truth”, if that is what those three have penned, (and I believe that those three members do express themselves, honestly).

That's not moderation. That's fascism. Kirby is a fascist, not a “benevolent dictator”. Had kirbyfascist denied writing privilege to those on his blacklist, I would have opposed his decision, but, I would have accepted that it is his right to do so. I do not accept as his right, the denial of access to this forum, if he wishes to call it, the reincarnation of “ye olde BC&H forum”.

Nope. He should simply call it the kirby-gang blog. No connection to the BC&H forum. Just a private club, not unlike days of yore, when “no women allowed” hung over the entrance sign. Or, perhaps, an ethnic restriction, rather than only a gender discrimination.

Now I wasn't aware that MountainMan had been banned. But I can easily imagine why he was banned. It was because he would not refrain from attempting to hijack **every single interesting thread** with his "Constantine invented Christianity" nonsense. It drove you nuts, after a while.

I think you are a great guy, Roger, but, I don't agree with you here. You have provided kirbyfascist with precisely the ammunition he needed, to maintain this as an exclusive, not inclusive, club of cothinkers. Mountainman's ideas are not ideas with which I am in agreement, but I admire his attempt to introduce some novelty to the dusty field of biblical archaeology. His ideas certainly never “drove me nuts”. A forum, to be productive, can not simply reiterate the same mantras over and over again, day in and day out. Pete's ideas may conflict with the status quo, but they are both provocative and interesting, and that is precisely what makes a forum thrive.

A moderator *must* ban posters whose participation wrecks the forum and prevents other posters discussing what the forum exists to discuss.

But, then, Roger, in such a case, why shouldn't kirbyfascist ban me? Am I not “preventing other posters from discussing what the forum exists to discuss”?

But PK has at least ensured that those who were the core of BC&H could still meet.

WRONG

You err here, colleague. That is precisely the point of this thread. Kirbyfascist has ensured that some of the core of BC&H, are not able to read this exchange between us, friend. He denies access to the forum.

I would not be so angry at kirbyfascist, if he simply wrote, ok,., ms. daifu, you are no longer given the opportunity to post your opinions here on my blog. You are no longer welcome to post here, because your comments prevent others from writing about the subject matter of this forum, just as Roger Pearse has explained.

But that, Roger, is not what kirbyfascist does. He denies access to the forum. Not just denial of ability to post pithy messages of delight, but denial of ability to read your submissions to the forum, Roger.
Inability to read Andrew's comments. Inability to read Philosopher Jay's comments. No way to encounter MaryHelena's comments.

Roger, you recall our exchange on the thread regarding Mithra/Mithras. Was it productive? Maybe not. Maybe it was a waste of everyone's bandwidth. I don't know. I am not objective about my own submissions. Perhaps you view my submissions as an utter waste of your time.

But, Roger, think about those who are reading our exchange. Did they learn anything, useful? How could that exchange between us, have taken place, had I been denied access to the forum?

Yes, perhaps “outhouse” is correct, and perhaps kirbyfascist should have expelled me. I don't think so. But, that is a different question from the one posed here. What right does he have to deny a person access to READ the submissions to the forum, if it is to be considered the continuation of BC&H?

I think the world needs less aggression, less force, and fewer restrictions, with more consideration of other's opinions, more tolerance for those whose beliefs lie on the opposite side of the circle, and more willingness to negotiate. Whether or not I should have been forbidden to express my opinions, I deny that anyone should wield the power to prevent my reading the thoughts of those who imagine that this is genuinely the continuation of “ye olde BC&H forum”.

[perseusomega9]

So much butthurt

[outhouse]

That's not moderation. That's fascism. Kirby is a fascist, not a “benevolent dictator”. Had kirbyfascist denied writing privilege to those on his blacklist, I would have opposed his decision, but, I would have accepted that it is his right to do so. I do not accept as his right, the denial of access to this forum, if he wishes to call it, the reincarnation of “ye olde BC&H forum”.

I dont see it. This is not a place for conspiracy minded people to gather and crap on modern scholaships, knowledge and education.


This is designed to be a place where knowledge can be advanced without inane replies practicing substandard methodology.