On Pastor Chris' Forum, under the topic: FEAR, Marie has posted that this forum has deteriorated. See...if you talk about a forum long enough, saying --it has deteriorated, or sunk to a new level, or all the good people are gone--then others start saying it too. I'm a recent poster on this forum, and it is by far the best I've found. I'm not a computer geek, although I've worked with them off and on since they first came into financial institutions. But... this forum is the most tolerant, intelligent, informed site I've been on, that hasn't been taken over by the religious right or jack books crowd, yet. I forgot to add, that the people on here have another wonderful trait, humor.

We are also accused of being fearful, godless nambie pambies. I don't want to start anything, but I resent this forum being attacked unfairly, IMHO. Thats a greenspun forum.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), January 05, 1999

Answers

P.S. That "jackboots," not books, and "sense of humor," that which I'm glad all of you have.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), January 05, 1999.

amen, gilda!

-- jocelyne slough (jonslough@tln.net), January 05, 1999.

>>I resent this forum being attacked unfairly...

Would your feelings be anything like what I feel when you contrast "tolerant, intelligent, informed" people with those in the "religious right"?

-- Bryan (bhuie@aristotle.net), January 05, 1999.

Quality always declines as more people get involved. Examples abound.

-- fly . (.@...), January 05, 1999.

Bryan, I know all kinds of religious people, spiritual people and people from all denominatioins, who would never identify with the religious right, whose agenda is far more political than spiritual.

This was not meant to lead to a discussion of religion, and I will not take any more offered bait. Read the post I mentioned. I'm simply saying, I think the Yourdon Forum, and the posters, were unfairly criticized.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), January 05, 1999.

You want bait? Here ya go - take this guys position and defend it.

http://www.christiangallery.com/strategy.html

Sickest site on the web IMHO.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), January 05, 1999.

The solution is simple. Don't go over to Pastor Chris's forum! Many things have been said on this forum that I'm sure others resent. This is a free country and anyone "should" be able to post here regardless of faith or creed or non faith, non creed. Just don't answer/read posts of people you don't agree with.

-- Moore Dinty moore (not@thistime.com), January 05, 1999.

And it's another way to meet in The Times in Which We Live.

-- Critt Jarvis (Wilmington, NC) (critt@critt.com), January 05, 1999.

Gilda, This too shall pass. Soon I hope!

95% of the posters here are Gr-r-r-r-r-eat!!!

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 05, 1999.

"The full beauty of the mountain is not seen until you too consent to the impossible paradox: it is and is not. When nothing more needs to be said, the smoke of ideas clears, the mountain is SEEN.

- Thomas Merton

from The Seven Mountains of Thomas Merton by Michael Mott

-- Critt Jarvis (Wilmington, NC) (critt@critt.com), January 05, 1999.

Pastor Chris set up his own forum because he and his followers were intolerant of others. Isn't that the way some religious people are? If that were not so, why is there a church on practically every corner in a town, all echoing "love one another," but not in my church! If you go back into the archives and read some of the religious zealots posts, it wasn't love for one another at all. So they have to pack up their bags and take their sectarian spirits with them, and then turn around and criticize others for not being like them. Well, I am glad they are gone and they have a right to say whatever they want, but that doesn't mean that it is so. The more they criticize this forum, the more their ungodly spirits show.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 05, 1999.

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." G. K. Chesterton

As noted earlier, examples abound.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 05, 1999.

Folks, just accept that there are multiple forums for various reasons, stop attacking each other, and concentrate on the Y2k problem.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), January 05, 1999.

Gilda,

The point I'm making is that you are doing the same thing you accuse Marie of doing. You are labeling and denigrating those who post on Pastor Chris' Y2K forum because of your perception of their beliefs and because you disagreed with Marie's post.

Obviously you believe that all those "religious people, spiritual people and people from all denominations" you referred to are superior in their spirituality than the perceived "religious right" posters on Pastor Chris' forum. Your words reveal that you are just as bigoted and prejudiced as you believe them to be.

We would ALL be better off if we would quit judging one another and accept that we can all, regardless of our personal beliefs, make worthwhile contributions on this forum (well, maybe all of us except Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts:-)...

-- Bryan (bhuie@aristotle.net), January 05, 1999.

Hi Gilda,

if you read the entire fear thread you'll have noticed that several of us who post here regularly post on Pastor Chris' forum also. You will also have noticed that not all of us were calling you names. If you found our analysis of the motivations of some of the folks on this forum to be offensive, well as a Christian Libertarian all I can say is 'welcome to the First Ammendment'.

That forum is specificly set up for conservative Christian commentary, if that isn't the sort of stuff you want to read, then DON'T GO THERE. It's not that difficult - really! Same-same as I don't get into the new age stuff Diane S. does so I don't bother to go over to the new age forums and read their posts...and I don't worry about what might be said *over there* about what I write *over here*.

I think most of us agree that experience has shown it is best to keep *this* board as free of religious oriented discussions as possible, simply due to the diverse nature of TB2K contributors, and the overwhelming need to exchange information. Let's keep it that way, and in the meantime, let's also not go out of our way to look for trouble, okay?

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), January 05, 1999.

I am truly saddened by this "exchange." Please read the entire thread titled "Fear."

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=Y2K%20Forum

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), January 05, 1999.

Gilda, I am sorry if you felt attacked (or patronized) by anything I wrote. Please note that the concerns about deterioration I was addressing (expressed on earlier posts on both sites, and not by me) largely stemmed from the period around Christmas when we had our share of trolls, Ed ended up deleting some posts and Jerry was posting his strings of incoherent, aggressive, drug-induced expletives. Many people got annoyed, angry or offended, Christian and non-Christian alike. How we choose to deal with it: whether we attack, ignore, avoid, tolerate, try to understand, ridicule, or pray for the offender is based on our value system. I was trying to point out that there are more constructive and loving ways of dealing with attitudes and language some of us may not be able to identify with than to abandon this forum (which has a lot to offer) or to criticize its posters. I didn't post to bash this site, but to focus fellow Christians' attention away from their personal comfort zone and on the real, understandable and legitimate fear and hurt and anger behind behavior they feel uncomfortable with. Y2K is the common ground on this forum, and posts reflect that. If we were discussing the subject with more in common- if we were all, say, programmers, politicians, bankers, survivalists- our posts on y2k would reflect that common ground. As it is, we go here because for many of us it is the only group with which we can even discuss y2k openly, without triggering all sorts of strange reactions, based more on people's psyche and history than on y2k itself. Pastor Chris' site fulfills a similar function- we can post on the specific concerns we have AS CHRISTIANS and know we have enough common ground to be understood and taken seriously, if not necessarily agreed with. It is not competition to this site, but spares those who aren't interested in religious discussions and debates having to wade through them. Just like I avoid techie sites because it's Chinese to me.

-- Maria (encelia@mailexcite.com), January 05, 1999.

I promised myself when I began researching Y2K on the internet that I would get information from places like de Jager's Press Clippings and Gary North's newest links. I wanted to avoid chat rooms and discussion forums where I would be listening to rumor.

I changed my mind.

Ed's book is balanced, non-partisan and does not make cheap shots at existing social institutions. I figured that the people calling this forum weren't wackos if they thought enough of Ed's book to call the forum.

I'd like the trolls to go away, but I suppose it's important to them to trash this forum, since it's one of the few that does not have an obvious, pre-existing politcal, religious or social agenda that would scare off first-time callers.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 05, 1999.

Every Y2K forums I've seen serve a purpose to different types of poeple. Yourdon's forum is the only one I've found where all the different types of people on those other click forums meet. I like that very much, this way I don't have to be boxed in anyone religious/political/philosophical forum where the tone is always the same, but I still get to read these different people's views on Y2K. A very good mix, this forum.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), January 05, 1999.

Gayla!

Welcome back.

-- margie mason (mar3mike@aol.com), January 05, 1999.

Well...I am going to "shut my mouf," before someone shuts it for me. I feel thoroughly chastised. Not since I was kicked out of Vacation Bible School, at age 6, for saying a "dirty" word, have I been this mortified. But I did want to thank Critt for the link to The Times in Which We Live. It's an excellent essay.

Paul, you're right. That website you posted, to check out is sick, and it's very scary. I was going to post the last paragraph from The Times In Which We Live, it's so appropriate for y2k, but now, I think not. It's there for anyone who chooses to read it.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), January 05, 1999.

Tom,

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." G. K. Chesterton

Just a variation on a theme. Different words, same topic, same intent, hopefully same result:

Remembering your spirit has often not been tried and found wanting; it has been found amazingly difficult and not tried very often.

Unfortunately, Y2K is a globally shared experience.

Diane *Sigh*

(P.S. Arlin, Im much more into metaphysics. Its somewhat different than new age. Ive also participated in Bible study classes, etc., prior to a life-changing experience. BTW Gayla, I will check out Y2K Connections (tm) -the scenario game at: http://www.preparefory2k.com/ ... a game plan for building community connections ..."What if you could connect with people you care about and explore Y2K scenarios together with a game that gets everyone participating not panicking? What if we could transform this millennium bug into a Millennium Butterfly?" Thanks).

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 05, 1999.

Nice catch, Mr. Jarvis,

"The Times in Which We Live" is a brief and eloquent statement about the search for a new worldview on which many of us have embarked. The dichotomy between the mechanistic and the organic paradigms is sharply delineated. In a core tenet of his philosophy Daniel Quinn resonates with Dr. Heuerman when he says something like: Change will occur NOT through old minds with new programs, but with new minds and no programs.

It distresses me to observe how many old minds--religious, political, philosophical, etc--are expecting, even planning, to bring their programs across rollover and on into the future.

Hallyx

"It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory." ---W. Edwards Deming

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), January 05, 1999.

Kevin & Chris: my observation also. Although I would be more at home technically on c.s.y2k, I prefer the wider cross section. I have learned a lot from being here and I value each and every one of you's companionship. Even the trolls...they're good case studies on brain damage :)

-- a (a@a.a), January 05, 1999.