Why won't they announce the reason for disfellowshipping or disassociation?

[Matthew9969]

Sounds like this man is not sinning, just wants to worship God.

[Space Merchant]

On 3/16/2018 at 2:34 PM, Matthew9969 said:

Sounds like this man is not sinning, just wants to worship God.

Was it that necessary to grave dig a 2016 thread when it is March 17, 2018, to be specific a thread posted March 25, 2016 (about 722 days), with a small comment? It would not have been much of an effort to simply contact the user via pm messaging: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/profile/5857-γιαννης-διαμαντιδης/

or wait until said user of this thread gives an update.

Don't let that happen again, for in doing so makes any comment without an update from the creator of the thread, obsolete and or irrelevant, especially if a person who didn't make this thread says something vague.

What is gravedigging?

Gravedigging is the term we use for reviving inactive threads the name is fitting, because you're basically just digging up things that are long gone.

Why is gravedigging so bad?

Why exactly shouldn't you gravedig? It's pretty simple: Reviving old threads clutters the forum. If everyone went ahead and posted on threads from a while ago, newer threads would struggle to appear from beneath the threads of old nonsense. If one person revives an old thread, other people end up posting on it too. Those members will continue to bump an old thread, advertising it to even more potential posters. Often, an inactive thread will contain outdated information on a particular topic. We want to make sure that you're getting all the updates you need, and so avoiding bringing up older threads is best.

How can I tell if I'm about to gravedig a thread?

Knowing when you might be about to gravedig a thread is important. There might even be times where you avoid posting on a thread because you're worried about gravedigging it when it's actually okay. The age cutoff, when a thread goes from being active to inactive, is currently two weeks If a thread is on the first page of a section, you may post on that thread without being at risk of gravedigging, regardless of the age cutoff. If a thread is not on the first page of a section but has not yet reached the age cutoff, you may post on that thread without being at risk of gravedigging. You may also post on guides/tutorials, regardless of activity, without being at risk of gravedigging as long as you're posting something constructive, and not something like "great guide" etc. Pinned threads and staff members are also immune from gravedigging. In a nutshell, you can post on any thread that was last active under two weeks ago, and you can also post on threads that were not active under two weeks ago as long as they're on the first page of a section.

This also goes for ignoring Search Bars, in some cases.

Source

https://www.rtsoft.com/forums/showthread.php?26209-Spamming-And-Gravedigging-Explained

Information on this can also be Goggle'd on the Internet regarding ALL forums known on the internet.

Remember this, please, for if this was elsewhere, the CSE Christian Community forums, you would have been in a world heavy criticism for pulling that off there.

[Matthew9969]

13 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Was it that necessary to grave dig a 2016 thread when it is March 17, 2018, to be specific a thread posted March 25, 2016 (about 722 days), with a small comment? It would not have been much of an effort to simply contact the user via pm messaging: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/profile/5857-γιαννης-διαμαντιδης/

or wait until said user of this thread gives an update.

Don't let that happen again, for in doing so makes any comment without an update from the creator of the thread, obsolete and or irrelevant, especially if a person who didn't make this thread says something vague.

What is gravedigging?

Gravedigging is the term we use for reviving inactive threads the name is fitting, because you're basically just digging up things that are long gone.

Why is gravedigging so bad?

Why exactly shouldn't you gravedig? It's pretty simple: Reviving old threads clutters the forum. If everyone went ahead and posted on threads from a while ago, newer threads would struggle to appear from beneath the threads of old nonsense. If one person revives an old thread, other people end up posting on it too. Those members will continue to bump an old thread, advertising it to even more potential posters. Often, an inactive thread will contain outdated information on a particular topic. We want to make sure that you're getting all the updates you need, and so avoiding bringing up older threads is best.

How can I tell if I'm about to gravedig a thread?

Knowing when you might be about to gravedig a thread is important. There might even be times where you avoid posting on a thread because you're worried about gravedigging it when it's actually okay. The age cutoff, when a thread goes from being active to inactive, is currently two weeks If a thread is on the first page of a section, you may post on that thread without being at risk of gravedigging, regardless of the age cutoff. If a thread is not on the first page of a section but has not yet reached the age cutoff, you may post on that thread without being at risk of gravedigging. You may also post on guides/tutorials, regardless of activity, without being at risk of gravedigging as long as you're posting something constructive, and not something like "great guide" etc. Pinned threads and staff members are also immune from gravedigging. In a nutshell, you can post on any thread that was last active under two weeks ago, and you can also post on threads that were not active under two weeks ago as long as they're on the first page of a section.

This also goes for ignoring Search Bars, in some cases.

Source

https://www.rtsoft.com/forums/showthread.php?26209-Spamming-And-Gravedigging-Explained

Information on this can also be Goggle'd on the Internet regarding ALL forums known on the internet.

Remember this, please, for if this was elsewhere, the CSE Christian Community forums, you would have been in a world heavy criticism for pulling that off there.

I don't believe you are in a position to tell me what I may post on or may not post on. Darn internet free speech police.

[Space Merchant]

16 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

I don't believe you are in a position to tell me what I may post on or may not post on. Darn internet free speech police.

On the contrary, it is nothing to do with position - fact, for anyone is capable of calling out such things on forums of any kind, for if you are probably fairly new to the internet, people will response and or react to grave-digging a post and or a thread (necroposting) and will call it out and or remind the user (often it is people who are unaware and or newcomers to a forums who do such things and are often reminded and or called out for it), for me I am just a mild type of person who calls out to this type of thing, which should be a lucky case for you, compared to the violent ones that will spark flame wars on forums for any person bringing up or bumping an old thread, regardless of what it is - that being said all I am telling you is that what you have done is grave-dig/necroposting, for if this was your thread, it is understandable, it is called a thread/post bump (update), but seeing as the user who made this thread was inactive for more than 600+ days and other comments with the nearly the same span of time, the last comment coming from "Gone Away" a mere comment that does not add to the thread falls in that category of grave-digging or necroposting - therefore being entirely irrelevant and the thread will not get any sort of attention, whatsoever for what is said is done by the final commentor and or user of said thread, after all that is where such terms come from in regards to internet forums, but let it be a reminder, you are not the first.

Also I agree, freedom of Speech, but it is common sense to be heard by others on an active discussion than a dead one and or one that has already come to a strong conclusion - such as this one.

Grave-Digging and or Necroposting, in addition to calling people out about it is not "Internet Free Speech Police" lol, vastly different from each other by a very large margin, perhaps two margins, for the term you brought up basically does not equal  to what I have mentioned - the facts and information, found on the internet of course, automatically solidifies this - of which can be proven should one look up thread grave-digging and or necroposting compared to what you have mentioned, which seems to be an non-existent term and or not relating to anything in regards to forums and or forum function and users.

Just next time look at the date and the date of the end comment.

 

If you like bringing up dead comment sections and or threads, the only place to best do this, other than a forum(s) is YouTube, for there anything goes and you are bound to get a response from even a 6 year old closed discussion, should anyone see what you posted, not being blanked out by Goggle Algorithms in today's YouTube.

That being said, both of us can sit back and watch the already high probability of this thread going down into the pages as more active and recent threads are always updated with recent comments and discussion and or made by active users who still log on here, and this 2016 thread will return from which it came prior to the grave-digging done on your part, and it going down is already predicted - as this is 100% common with those who necropost such threads, the public irrelevancy, and said thread just going page by page as new ones are made - and my message will just be a reminder to others anyways, and they aren't the first.

[Matthew9969]

You must make a living on doing this.

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@Space Merchant @Space Merchant @Space Merchant don't know why your name has appeared 3 times or if it will disappear. However what I'm finding at the moment is that i cannot comment on the main thread I was commenting on. Maybe it's good that i can't comment as @TrueTomHarley is sounding off again. Still adding my name to it I see. Poor man just cannot resist it.........

I can see the wood from the trees Tom and can see the need for JW Org to be investigated in every country of this Earth. I say Earth as they say they are no part of the 'world'. However they soon use the worldly legal systems to do their dirty work. 

[TrueTomHarley]

7 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Maybe it's good that i can't comment as @TrueTomHarley is sounding off again. Still adding my name to it I see. Poor man just cannot resist it..

I am tempted to start a post with flagging you 60 times. It is not considered rude to flag people usually, especially when they have been a central figure of the conversation.

The specific reason I flagged you last time was to exclude you from a category of people that would wish to stifle the Bible's message. Had I not flagged you, I would have left the impression that I thought you were the worst of the lot.

It is out of consideration for you that I did it.

The other thread doesn't work for me, either. I don't know why. To my knowledge no one is specifically shut out without a warning or two first from @The Librarian Not too long ago I got into a endless battle with a certain pestilential fellow who I will not flag because if I never see him again it will still be too soon  - a 'jugganaut', even his chum callled him - about another subject entirely and the Librarian asked me privately to knock it off. 

She is somewhat fond of the bottle (the old hen) and does not always notice at first when conversations are going down the toilet. She really doesn't like conversations, anyway - her pupils are here to study and do homework. She may have closed down the entire thread because there are getting to be many such threads and she is absolutely anal about imposing order on things that are not neccesarily that way, combing through her card catalog and sniffing out duplicates long after all her colleagues have gone digital and use their spare time to have a life.  I don't know. Usually threads run longer than three pages, and if you are not @AllenSmith, who can be outragious, even though more often than not he strikes a blow for what is right, and has been tossed a number of times, you or anyone can continue to your heart's content. 

You must understand, John, that except for me, no Witness here is typical. That is not to say that any of them are bad, necessary, but they are not typical. The typical one will be more reserved as to participate in a slugfest such as this, knowing that Bethel recommends what Jesus recommended about opposers: "Let them be" at Matt 15.

[TrueTomHarley]

On 3/17/2016 at 2:38 PM, Γιαννης Διαμαντιδης said:

where is the scriptural proof of hiding the reason of disfellowshipping or dissociation?

this is because @The Librarian is not running the organization. If she was, each disfellowshipping would be broken down and cataloged in a system that would make John Dewey envious, and like snowflakes, the same reason would not appear twice.

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley Tom if you flagged me for that reason then thank you. 

I think you said something like the people are only causing this upheaval to stop or slow down the ministry. I presume you mean those that are not genuine victims of abuse and those that are not interested in seeing prevention of future victims. 

Well i can see your point, there are always trouble makers in all walks of life. SM seems to think it will not hinder people from studying with JW's, and as far as i can see it has not, here in the UK, caused any ministry to stop. For my part I cannot understand how few people even know about the situation. Whether true or false or whatever, people here just don't seem to know or are not interested. Though I've seen video of other countries where meetings are being disrupted. To be honest I've had my say, and yes did get a bit heated up, for which I apologize. 

As you know there are lots of things i would like to see happen, and things I would like to see change. So I will probably just stay away from the meetings and keep watching to see what happens.   Each time you flag me I get an email so I look to see what you've written and sometimes reply. I will try to respond less  .

Quote "You must understand, John, that except for me, no Witness here is typical. That is not to say that any of them are bad, necessary, but they are not typical. The typical one will be more reserved as to participate in a slugfest such as this, knowing that Bethel recommends what Jesus recommended about opposers: "Let them be" at Matt 15"

Um, I don't really understand your meaning of typical here. In my ex-congregation all people were totally different. Some i found I could get along with well and others i would rather just sit the other side of the hall thank you.... There were people that i would have considered to be my friends, but sadly no more. i can fully understand some people being upset at being totally shunned, especially if they left the Org of their own choice because of some bad thing happening to them... I see no scriptural evidence for such shunning in these cases, and I have been shunned since January.  However I think this would cause a difference of opinion between you and I so I'll leave it there. 

Now i will admit here that i was offered the choice of just becoming inactive, and that would have been far easier in the long run. But I saw it as just taking the convenient route and not feeling right to my conscience, hence i felt the need to leave. But i don't want  Jehovah's purpose to be slowed down or stopped. Not that it would anyway. And I'm now feeling it will be good when all this problem is over and finished. I think it will take until the end of this year, and i think it will get worse before it gets sorted. But next year, well hopefully it will be a much happier time for God's people. The scriptures say something like, it's good to suffer if it's for serving God properly. There is a scripture which starts of something like 'Hold your head high when.. ' and it's about being 'happy' when suffering for the sake of serving God well. Hence i see persecution as a relatively good thing when it's for the right purpose. 

Enough again, I get to burbling a bit. Have a good day, John 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

For my part I cannot understand how few people even know about the situation. Whether true or false or whatever, people here just don't seem to know or are not interested.

I think it is because one calamity comes along and people become incensed, but then another one or two arises the very next day to distract them. They get overwhelmed and in many cases they turn everything off. This is part of what I meant by 'not seeing the forest for the trees.' I did not mean it in a patronizing way, but only that there are so many scandals people tend to not focus on any given one. Even if we narrow it down to child sexual abuse itself, there is so much of it everywhere that people's eyes start to glaze over. A top cop in one British town said he wished he didn't have to prosecute cases of child porn found on computers. It pained him to say it, he acknowledged, but there was so much of it his people could not possibly keep up and were thereby distracted from the more immediate cases of abuse. At the meeting last night we spoke of the 'pangs of distress' Jesus spoke about. Pangs of distress before childbirth are bad and they get worse and they get more frequent. I think that is what is happening today.

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

To be honest I've had my say, and yes did get a bit heated up, for which I apologize. 

Who doesn't? I do. Everybody does. It is the nature of the internet to never let the other fellow have the last word, as we all should do more often. I am guilty of it myself. I am guilty of it now.

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Now i will admit here that i was offered the choice of just becoming inactive, and that would have been far easier in the long run. But I saw it as just taking the convenient route and not feeling right to my conscience,

Okay. I respect this. Your family pays a high cost for this, however, so take that into consideration, as I'm sure you have.

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Some i found I could get along with well and others i would rather just sit the other side of the hall thank you.

This is how "God works in mysterious ways," to hijack a phrase from religious leaders when their doctrines have painted them into corners they cannot escape from. Over time agape love (the Greek agape,, not the English word) which focuses on a object and does not let go until its purpose is realized, serves to bind you to these ones too, even if they are yo-yos. There is a report somewhere that one GB member upbraided another for behaving "like an idiot." I have no idea whether it is true or not, but, as I close my eyes, I can see it, for their personalities are quite different. They smoothe it over with love so as to function effectively.

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

 Each time you flag me I get an email so I look to see what you've written and sometimes reply. I will try to respond less  .

If it helps - one participant jokingly complained a few times that I never 'like' anybody. The final time she said it, I went back into her comments and 'liked' everytime she so much as breathed. She asked me to knock it off before I crashed her system.

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Enough again, I get to burbling a bit. Have a good day, John 

You and me both, pal. @The Librarian is not wrong when she makes me sit in the corner with a dunce cap every now and then.

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley Thanks Tom. 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

2 hours ago, tromboneck said:

Whoever the bozo is that wants to quit...go ahead and do it loser. You are "already gone"

You have much stature, Trom, and I appreciate that, but I have learned not to say such things. Even when they are gone, there is no saying they might not come back. I don't like to make it personal.

Someone may say "you don't?" because I have pushed back hard at times, even 'slapping' some. But I try to never go personal, and I think proof that that can work is the conciliatory note from John. Now, he is gone for now, but it is not necessarily permanent, and we might have made it so by going after him personally.