Wow!

[Irish Melkite]

That's all I can say about this 

Many years,

Neil

[Asteriktos]

Very byzantine of them   

[deusveritasest]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

[Irish Melkite]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

Agreed. But, it wasn't always that way, as those here and at byzcath who once participated there, remember.

Many years,

Neil

[Stephen St. Pierre]

So are you guys on the side of the Orthodox poster that caused all of this then? Was that person's banning unfair to begin with making others come to their defense or something?

None of my business I know, just curious.

[FrChris]

Well, here is an interesting thread if y'all are interested in reading it...

[GabrieltheCelt]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?  Why the surprise anyway when the name is CATHOLIC Answers?  Pretty clear to me.  At any rate, I respect their tactics; they've created a forum where Roman Catholics can go to get answers about the Roman Catholic faith and they don't want any other faith to detract or jeopardize their mission.  In others words, they're doing exactly what they set out to do.  So they won't let us Orthodox say what we want on THEIR forum?  Big deal!  That's not Machiavellian nor Orwelian.  They take their faith seriously (as do we) and they're in no mood to let their flock become confused or proselytized.  Obviously as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I view their faith as heretical, but that's their forum so I don't understand why we Orthodox are constantly complaining about them not letting us say what we want.  If only we would concentrate on the log in our own eyes...  

[Peter J]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?

Actually, an awful lot of Orthodox seem to care an awful lot about what happens at the Catholic Answers Forum.

But it isn't just the Catholic Answers Forum. Neo-conservative Catholics in general are the 600-lb gorilla in ecumenical relations. If you don't play their game, there a good chance you won't get to play at all. (I'm not saying that's how it should be, just how it is.)

[vamrat]

Thank the Lord that in His great mercy Catholic moderators are banning us from their forums rather than Catholic Ustashi killing our people or Catholic Crusaders sacking our Capitals!

[Irish Melkite]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?  Why the surprise anyway when the name is CATHOLIC Answers?  Pretty clear to me.  At any rate, I respect their tactics; they've created a forum where Roman Catholics can go to get answers about the Roman Catholic faith and they don't want any other faith to detract or jeopardize their mission.  In others words, they're doing exactly what they set out to do.  So they won't let us Orthodox say what we want on THEIR forum?  Big deal!  That's not Machiavellian nor Orwelian.  They take their faith seriously (as do we) and they're in no mood to let their flock become confused or proselytized.  Obviously as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I view their faith as heretical, but that's their forum so I don't understand why we Orthodox are constantly complaining about them not letting us say what we want.  If only we would concentrate on the log in our own eyes...  

Gabriel,

The point is that one can post there on any topic regarding pretty much any faith that one chooses to adopt - except, apparently, Orthodoxy. This latest extreme viewpoint taken by CAF even surpasses its prior purging of its Eastern Catholic and Orthodox members a few years back - an event that brought quite a few folk to this site.

While I don't 'care', I (and I suspect others as well) cannot help but be amazed at the public adoption of such a hostile viewpoint toward a Church and Faith which the Church of Rome has declared as being so dear to itself.

Many years,

Neil 

[Shanghaiski]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?  Why the surprise anyway when the name is CATHOLIC Answers?  Pretty clear to me.  At any rate, I respect their tactics; they've created a forum where Roman Catholics can go to get answers about the Roman Catholic faith and they don't want any other faith to detract or jeopardize their mission.  In others words, they're doing exactly what they set out to do.  So they won't let us Orthodox say what we want on THEIR forum?  Big deal!  That's not Machiavellian nor Orwelian.  They take their faith seriously (as do we) and they're in no mood to let their flock become confused or proselytized.  Obviously as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I view their faith as heretical, but that's their forum so I don't understand why we Orthodox are constantly complaining about them not letting us say what we want.  If only we would concentrate on the log in our own eyes...  

Gabriel,

The point is that one can post there on any topic regarding pretty much any faith that one chooses to adopt - except, apparently, Orthodoxy. This latest extreme viewpoint taken by CAF even surpasses its prior purging of its Eastern Catholic and Orthodox members a few years back - an event that brought quite a few folk to this site.

While I don't 'care', I (and I suspect others as well) cannot help but be amazed at the public adoption of such a hostile viewpoint toward a Church and Faith which the Church of Rome has declared as being so dear to itself.

Many years,

Neil 

They apparently don't know how to answer Orthodoxy.

[sainthieu]

They apparently don't know how to answer Orthodoxy.

That's it in a nutshell. Censorship is the last refuge of a beaten argument.

I am continually astonished at the amount of hostility coming off the RC camp; it's one of the reasons I could never consider RC. It's often--how shall I say?--so un-Christian.

[orthonorm]

Neo-conservative Catholics

What do you mean by this? Is it someone who would politically be described as a Neo-Con and also RC or an RC of a stripe which is neo-conservative? If the latter, what does it mean in a nutshell. It sounds a little pejorative in the context, but that could just be me.

Thanks.

[Wyatt]

And they say I'M the one with a martyrdom complex 

[Peter J]

They apparently don't know how to answer Orthodoxy.

That's it in a nutshell. Censorship is the last refuge of a beaten argument.

I am continually astonished at the amount of hostility coming off the RC camp; it's one of the reasons I could never consider RC. It's often--how shall I say?--so un-Christian.

I can't say that I'm astonished by the hostility that neo-conservative Catholics have toward EOs. Quite frankly, we traditional Catholics can also be pretty hostile toward the Orthodox. But the difference, I think, is that we have a kind of consistency in our approach; whereas the neo-conservative Catholics will cease their hostility just long enough to say Aren't Catholics and Orthodox really the same? or Why do the Orthodox make such a big deal about our differences?

[Peter J]

Neo-conservative Catholics

What do you mean by this?

Peter W. Miller calls them "'conservative' Catholics". Here's his definition:

As the heretics of yesterday have become the liberals of today, the liberals of yesterday now lay claim to the title "conservative". Consequentially the conservatives came to be known as "traditionalists". Unfortunately, these terms are no longer completely accurate descriptions. So for the purposes of this essay, I will use the following general definitions to delineate the differences between traditionalists and "conservatives":

TRADITIONALIST: One who challenges the novel practices and teachings of Catholics (including bishops and priests) which appear to contradict the prior teaching of the Church. A traditionalist questions the prudence of new pastoral approaches and holds the belief that those things generally deemed objectively good or evil several decades ago remain so today.

"CONSERVATIVE": One who upholds and defends the current policies and positions of the Church hierarchy regardless of their novelty. A "conservative" extends the definitions of "infallibility" and "Magisterium" to include most every action and speech of the Pope and those Cardinals around him, but may exclude those Cardinals and bishops outside of Rome. A "conservative's" opinion is also subject to change depending on the current actions of the Holy Father. "Conservative" will be used it in quotation marks to avoid the misleading connotation of being diametrically opposed to liberalism or on the far right of the spectrum. Also since there only exists a desire to "conserve" only those traditions and practices of the past deemed appropriate at any given time by the present Pope. The quotation marks will also ensure a proper dissociation between the actual conservatives active prior to and during Vatican II (Ottaviani, Lefebvre, Fenton, etc.).

Both traditionalists and "conservatives" acknowledge the existence of problems in the Church but disagree as to their nature, extent, causes and remedies.

"Conservatives" see it as an "illness" — an incidental problem like a gangrene limb. In the English-speaking world, this problem may be limited to the actions of certain American bishops. "Conservatives" see the novelties of Vatican II and the New Mass as natural and acceptable developments in the course of the Church, but take issue with those seeking to expand upon those novelties, or take them to their next logical progression. They see the crisis in the Church as a societal issue that would have happened regardless of what actions the Church leadership had taken. Their solution is to return to Vatican II and embark on another attempt to "renew" the Church.

Traditionalists see the illness as a widespread cancer affecting the whole body put most particularly and critically the heart. They question the prudence of making significant changes in the Mass and the Church's pastoral orientation. They attribute the destruction to liberal and Modernist ideals given a certain degree of acceptability once the Church decided to stop fighting them with extreme vigilance. They see the Church leadership as sharing in the responsibility for the crisis due to its governance (or lack thereof). Their solution is not another attempt at a reform that may be "more in line with the 'spirit' of Vatican II" (shudder), but a return to the practices and beliefs of the Church that sustained it for hundreds of years prior.

- A Brief Defense of Traditionalism
Peter W. Miller

[sainthieu]

I wouldn't call them 'neo-conservative' Catholics. I wouldn't necessarily even call them 'conservatives'; I suspect they're just Catholics trying to rehabilitate their beloved church after all the agonies of the last decade. (Correct me if I'm wrong; I don't read that forum.) I can understand that.

I just tend to look askance at any idea that can only thrive in the absence of countervailing views. It's an admission of weakness.

[orthonorm]

Thanks Peter.

[Peter J]

I wouldn't call them 'neo-conservative' Catholics. I wouldn't necessarily even call them 'conservatives'; I suspect they're just Catholics trying to rehabilitate their beloved church after all the agonies of the last decade. (Correct me if I'm wrong; I don't read that forum.) I can understand that.

I just tend to look askance at any idea that can only thrive in the absence of countervailing views. It's an admission of weakness.

To be fair, CAF does in fact have a Traditional Catholicism section. (I know some traditional Catholics have a very negative opinion of it, but personally I haven't really spent enough time there to have much of an opinion one way or another.)

[Peter J]

Thanks Peter.

You're welcome.

[Kasatkin fan]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?  Why the surprise anyway when the name is CATHOLIC Answers?  Pretty clear to me.  At any rate, I respect their tactics; they've created a forum where Roman Catholics can go to get answers about the Roman Catholic faith and they don't want any other faith to detract or jeopardize their mission.  In others words, they're doing exactly what they set out to do.  So they won't let us Orthodox say what we want on THEIR forum?  Big deal!  That's not Machiavellian nor Orwelian.  They take their faith seriously (as do we) and they're in no mood to let their flock become confused or proselytized.  Obviously as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I view their faith as heretical, but that's their forum so I don't understand why we Orthodox are constantly complaining about them not letting us say what we want.  If only we would concentrate on the log in our own eyes...  

Gabriel,

The point is that one can post there on any topic regarding pretty much any faith that one chooses to adopt - except, apparently, Orthodoxy. This latest extreme viewpoint taken by CAF even surpasses its prior purging of its Eastern Catholic and Orthodox members a few years back - an event that brought quite a few folk to this site.

While I don't 'care', I (and I suspect others as well) cannot help but be amazed at the public adoption of such a hostile viewpoint toward a Church and Faith which the Church of Rome has declared as being so dear to itself.

Many years,

Neil 

They apparently don't know how to answer Orthodoxy.

One of the first lessons I learned upon becoming Orthodox (actually a few weeks before) is that Catholics, for the most part, have no idea how to handle the idea of Orthodoxy and are prone to react in quite unpredictable ways.

I want to emphasize the "most part" bit, some Catholics handle it quite well.

[orthonorm]

Outside of the internets, where do you people find all these arguments with Catholics or Orthodox?

I see boards like this or CAF like some of the bars I would go to. Pretty much everyone was there to get into a little trouble, so really when you ended up hurting someone and getting hurt, it was pretty much a social contract.

I cannot for the life of me, outside discussions with fellow parishioners, remember the last time I had a discussion much less a debate about RC vs. OC or really anything religious. I just avoid the topics in the rare event they occur.

The one exception is a Palestinian guy who runs a local convenient store. He raps to me when others ain't around about how he can't stand Israel, cause he knows I am sympathetic. He asked, if I was Christian. I said I don't know yet, but I am trying to become part of the Orthodox Church, which he thought was great for a number of reasons I won't list here.

I am just saying.
 

[Jharek Carnelian]

That's all I can say about this 

Many years,

Neil

Neil,

This relates in part to a poster there who is a friend of mine who went by the name of GurneyHalleck1. He was banned recently for God alone knows what. Before he was banned he was considered moving from Catholicism to Orthodoxy (he was originally Anglican) and he discussed the subject with myself and a number of other posters, both Catholic and Orthodox and some like myself who had family from both Churches. He was a very popular poster and people were very annoyed when he was banned and the mods got hit with a lot of posts complaining about it. As a result Mr. Hilbert who wrote that thinks there is some organised conspiracy of some kind to push an Orthodox agenda or that our banned fellow member Scott is organising some secret super-villian scheme to destabilise the regime. First Eric made a ruling that no-one could discuss leaving the Church under any circumstances, now we've moved to this position.

I've had my own posts pruned there over the last couple of days at times. Once when partaking in a conversation about the real presence when I was told 'this is not an Orthodox thread' for talking about how Catholicism views various Church's Eucharists. Also when attempting to point out the differing understanding of the sacrament of marriage in the east and west.

It is a Catholic forum but it is ludicrous that now one of the largest Christian groups in the world cannot be mentioned in a particular sub-forum. What's even more odd is outside that sub-forum you can happily mention the Orthodox Churches still.

[sainthieu]

outside that sub-forum you can happily mention the Orthodox Churches

Maybe it's just the one paranoid moderator.

RC shoots itself in the foot by being overly dogmatic: if you're not with them, you're agin' em. It's sad.

[Asteriktos]

if you're not with them, you're agin' em.

That sounds familiar... 

[Aindriú]

if you're not with them, you're agin' em.

That sounds familiar... 

lol

[Irish Melkite]

It is a Catholic forum but it is ludicrous that now one of the largest Christian groups in the world cannot be mentioned in a particular sub-forum. What's even more odd is outside that sub-forum you can happily mention the Orthodox Churches still.

Jharek,

Thanks for the explanation - however, although one cannot post about the Orthodox in the Non-Catholic forum (to which Orthodox topics were relegated when they retitled the old Eastern Christianity forum as Eastern Catholic), one also can't post about Orthodox in the Eastern Catholic forum there, unless there has been a very recent change.

Many years,

Neil

[orthonorm]

if you're not with them, you're agin' em.

That sounds familiar... 

lol

Yeah, I always wondered what would we do if we actually applied Christ's variation on that saying.

[JamesRottnek]

I just want to thank CAF.  I am forever in their debt.  You see, I first heard about the Orthodox Church through their forum 

[Peter J]

That's all I can say about this 

Many years,

Neil

Neil,

This relates in part to a poster there who is a friend of mine who went by the name of GurneyHalleck1. He was banned recently for God alone knows what. Before he was banned he was considered moving from Catholicism to Orthodoxy (he was originally Anglican) and he discussed the subject with myself and a number of other posters, both Catholic and Orthodox and some like myself who had family from both Churches. He was a very popular poster and people were very annoyed when he was banned and the mods got hit with a lot of posts complaining about it. As a result Mr. Hilbert who wrote that thinks there is some organised conspiracy of some kind to push an Orthodox agenda or that our banned fellow member Scott is organising some secret super-villian scheme to destabilise the regime. First Eric made a ruling that no-one could discuss leaving the Church under any circumstances, now we've moved to this position.

Not to split hairs, but the actual statement was:

No more "I'm thinking of leaving the CC to become a _________" threads.

Effective immediately

(Unless you're referring to a different statement that I haven't seen.)

P.S. Now you've got me wondering: does that taboo include people joining the SSPX?

[Jharek Carnelian]

No that's the statement. I can't see the value of it as it actually works against keeping a member of the Church there I would have thought. More mature people won't be swayed to either leave or join by the ructions on an internet forum but for those wavering or more naive in their faith it may be the proverbial staw that breaks their back. I could understand a ruling against people saying they find it hard to remain members of the Church and who then go on to insult it. But to just put a blanket ban on any discussion of the subject was I felt not the right approach.

As to the ban in that part of the forum I think the Orthodox posters here who have commented that 'hey so what we're not Catholic?' are really taking the best approach.

[Aindriú]

No that's the statement. I can't see the value of it as it actually works against keeping a member of the Church there I would have thought. More mature people won't be swayed to either leave or join by the ructions on an internet forum but for those wavering or more naive in their faith it may be the proverbial staw that breaks their back. I could understand a ruling against people saying they find it hard to remain members of the Church and who then go on to insult it. But to just put a blanket ban on any discussion of the subject was I felt not the right approach.

As to the ban in that part of the forum I think the Orthodox posters here who have commented that 'hey so what we're not Catholic?' are really taking the best approach.

If you're familiar with Catholic Answers, then you should be familiar with to general naivety of the posters. Many of them have little education in Christian thought, much less Catholic theology. Considering it is specifically geared towards this type of poster (Catholic Answers),from an objective stance, I can't much blame them.

[ialmisry]

No disrespect intended towards the OP, but who cares what's being said on a Roman Catholic forum?  Why the surprise anyway when the name is CATHOLIC Answers?  Pretty clear to me.  At any rate, I respect their tactics; they've created a forum where Roman Catholics can go to get answers about the Roman Catholic faith and they don't want any other faith to detract or jeopardize their mission.  In others words, they're doing exactly what they set out to do.  So they won't let us Orthodox say what we want on THEIR forum?  Big deal!  That's not Machiavellian nor Orwelian.  They take their faith seriously (as do we) and they're in no mood to let their flock become confused or proselytized.  Obviously as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I view their faith as heretical, but that's their forum so I don't understand why we Orthodox are constantly complaining about them not letting us say what we want.  If only we would concentrate on the log in our own eyes...  

I was going to complain about the non descript title, but then when I saw the link, I said "WoW!"

My big problem with CAF is some of the most bizarre statements are made about the Orthodox, which cannot be challenged.  They're not as bad as Fisheaters, but that's not saying much.

Btw, what was the post/er that brought this on?

[ialmisry]

That's all I can say about this 

Many years,

Neil

Neil,

This relates in part to a poster there who is a friend of mine who went by the name of GurneyHalleck1. He was banned recently for God alone knows what. Before he was banned he was considered moving from Catholicism to Orthodoxy (he was originally Anglican) and he discussed the subject with myself and a number of other posters, both Catholic and Orthodox and some like myself who had family from both Churches. He was a very popular poster and people were very annoyed when he was banned and the mods got hit with a lot of posts complaining about it. As a result Mr. Hilbert who wrote that thinks there is some organised conspiracy of some kind to push an Orthodox agenda or that our banned fellow member Scott is organising some secret super-villian scheme to destabilise the regime. First Eric made a ruling that no-one could discuss leaving the Church under any circumstances, now we've moved to this position.

I've had my own posts pruned there over the last couple of days at times. Once when partaking in a conversation about the real presence when I was told 'this is not an Orthodox thread' for talking about how Catholicism views various Church's Eucharists. Also when attempting to point out the differing understanding of the sacrament of marriage in the east and west.

It is a Catholic forum but it is ludicrous that now one of the largest Christian groups in the world cannot be mentioned in a particular sub-forum. What's even more odd is outside that sub-forum you can happily mention the Orthodox Churches still.

Is this the Scott that Papist is always confusing me with?

[deusveritasest]

And they say I'M the one with a martyrdom complex 

Precisely, because you complain far more in amount and in quality and yet you aren't even treated as poorly here as we are at CAF.

[FrChris]

And they say I'M the one with a martyrdom complex 

Precisely, because you complain far more in amount and in quality and yet you aren't even treated as poorly here as we are at CAF.

Hear, hear!

[Peter J]

No that's the statement. I can't see the value of it as it actually works against keeping a member of the Church there I would have thought.

I don't want to over-generalize, but I've found that there are some Catholics who are more offended by someone thinking about leaving the Catholic Church, than by someone actually leaving the Catholic Church. Have you never heard one Catholic say to another something to the effect of "If you're thinking about leaving, than we wouldn't want you anyways"?

[Kasatkin fan]

Outside of the internets, where do you people find all these arguments with Catholics or Orthodox?

Arguments and debates are two very different things, but I personally often have discussions with Catholics I meet about Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

[orthonorm]

Outside of the internets, where do you people find all these arguments with Catholics or Orthodox?

Arguments and debates are two very different things, but I personally often have discussions with Catholics I meet about Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

I get that. I argue and rant all the time. I guess I just am around non-religious folk most of the time and just opt out of the conversations when they go religious lest I offend them.

When I am around Catholics, and they talk about their charity drives or whatnot, and ask what I am up to, I never ever get any questions or disparaging remarks or questions for debate, just a smile and encouragement.

Maybe it is because I spend too much time with women.

The only time, I've gotten anything flack, was twice and both mega-churchers. The comments were the same and was the tone, snide: you must like a lot of ritual.

I left it at that.

[Kasatkin fan]

Outside of the internets, where do you people find all these arguments with Catholics or Orthodox?

Arguments and debates are two very different things, but I personally often have discussions with Catholics I meet about Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

I get that. I argue and rant all the time. I guess I just am around non-religious folk most of the time and just opt out of the conversations when they go religious lest I offend them.

When I am around Catholics, and they talk about their charity drives or whatnot, and ask what I am up to, I never ever get any questions or disparaging remarks or questions for debate, just a smile and encouragement.

Maybe it is because I spend too much time with women.

The only time, I've gotten anything flack, was twice and both mega-churchers. The comments were the same and was the tone, snide: you must like a lot of ritual.

I left it at that.

Actually all but one of my real conversations with Catholics has happened in the context of work. I happen to work for a Christian company that is staffed mostly by Catholics and Orthodox, so the discussion on the distinctions comes up frequently.

[orthonorm]

Interesting work environment.

Do you find working in such an environment more supportive of your faith or more trying?

[Peter J]

Agreed. But, it wasn't always that way, as those here and at byzcath who once participated there, remember.

Many years,

Neil

On a side note, I was rather puzzled when I first noticed that all this hasn't been mentioned at all on the byzcath forum. I wonder if that's due to the fact that CAF only banned EO discussion and not EC discussion, or if it's more that byzcath posters don't pay a lot of attention to what happens at CAF.

[Kasatkin fan]

Interesting work environment.

Do you find working in such an environment more supportive of your faith or more trying?

It can be both at times. For the most part it has confirmed my decision to become Orthodox, but at the same time it has helped me learn more about Catholicism, and given me a healthy respect for that religion. I'm not sure I'd say it has helped me grow in my personal faith though, which was a bit unexpected, but it hasn't hindered me either.

[Irish Hermit]

Wow!   This part of the Directive was particularly draconian:

"Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension."

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=581934

[Aindriú]

Wow!   This part of the Directive was particularly draconian:

"Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension."

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=581934

[ialmisry]

Wow!   This part of the Directive was particularly draconian:

"Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension."

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=581934

yeah, that's about right.

[TristanCross]

What does the link to Catholic Answers say? I am banned from their forums because I told a group of Catholics that they should stop hating on David Letterman for the sex scandal (you should have seen how harsh they were) and to pray for him because he is a fellow sinner. Apparently, they don't like the fact that we are all guilty of sin, equally 

[Cavaradossi]

That's all I can say about this 

Many years,

Neil

Neil,

This relates in part to a poster there who is a friend of mine who went by the name of GurneyHalleck1. He was banned recently for God alone knows what. Before he was banned he was considered moving from Catholicism to Orthodoxy (he was originally Anglican) and he discussed the subject with myself and a number of other posters, both Catholic and Orthodox and some like myself who had family from both Churches. He was a very popular poster and people were very annoyed when he was banned and the mods got hit with a lot of posts complaining about it. As a result Mr. Hilbert who wrote that thinks there is some organised conspiracy of some kind to push an Orthodox agenda or that our banned fellow member Scott is organising some secret super-villian scheme to destabilise the regime. First Eric made a ruling that no-one could discuss leaving the Church under any circumstances, now we've moved to this position.

I've had my own posts pruned there over the last couple of days at times. Once when partaking in a conversation about the real presence when I was told 'this is not an Orthodox thread' for talking about how Catholicism views various Church's Eucharists. Also when attempting to point out the differing understanding of the sacrament of marriage in the east and west.

It is a Catholic forum but it is ludicrous that now one of the largest Christian groups in the world cannot be mentioned in a particular sub-forum. What's even more odd is outside that sub-forum you can happily mention the Orthodox Churches still.

Thank you for your explanation Jharek. Some Orthodox posters at CAF who were not aware of what had happened (myself included) were wondering what could have taken place to make the moderator start shooting from the hip like that. I wonder if they're going to resort to another mass-banning. The Orthodox posters, as one person put it, were starting perhaps to become too successful in defending their faith again. 

[Asteriktos]

What does the link to Catholic Answers say?

Here is the text from the linked-to post:

Because of a banned member's continued efforts to cause trouble on the NCR forum through emails and his friends derailing threads....

All topics surrounding Orthodox issues are banned until further notice.

This includes old as well as new threads.
Failure to observe this will result in discipline up to and including closing an account.

To our Orthodox friends not involved, I'm sorry you have been caught up in this, but it is necessary because of the passive/aggressive behavior of less mature members.

I will let you know when the ban has been lifted.

PS, there is also sticky regarding emails from banned members.
Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension.

[Irish Hermit]

How is this being seen by the members of CAF?   

Is it the excessive reaction of a Moderator, reacting to just one issue with one person?  Is the Moderator new to the job at CAF and uneducated about the position which the Vatican holds with regard to Orthodoxy? Does he not realise that his action is belittling to Orthodoxy in general and very destructive of the attitude towards the Orthodox which the Pope and the Vatican wish Catholics to cultivate?

Is this another reaction as in 2007 because too many Catholics are converting to Orthodoxy?

[Irish Hermit]

The Gurney Halleck at the epicentre of the CAF storm.... I've read some of his posts and he has style and knowledge, humour and pizazz.....

Someone should invite him to OC.net....

[Cavaradossi]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

[Irish Hermit]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

And they have nuked the Moderator's post (given here in message 48.)

Vatican intervention?   

[Cavaradossi]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

And they have nuked the Moderator's post (given here in message 48.)

Vatican intervention?   

Papal supremacy does have a use after all. 

[ialmisry]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

[Cavaradossi]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

I see. I guess it's possible for them to ban somebody without showing it. What a shame then, if they're going to keep Gurneyhalleck banned.

[Irish Hermit]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

I see. I guess it's possible for them to ban somebody without showing it. What a shame then, if they're going to keep Gurneyhalleck banned.

For CAF's deceitful policy of not showing banned members as banned please see message 1198
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13287.msg217288.html#msg217288

[Cavaradossi]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

I see. I guess it's possible for them to ban somebody without showing it. What a shame then, if they're going to keep Gurneyhalleck banned.

For CAF's deceitful policy of not showing banned members as banned please see message 1198
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13287.msg217288.html#msg217288

A shame that they choose to be so sneaky at CAF. Guess the moderators have a Thomist outlook over at CAF: if you can't beat their deviant heresy, ban them in order to protect the flock.

[Peter J]

A shame that they choose to be so sneaky at CAF. Guess the moderators have a Thomist outlook over at CAF: if you can't beat their deviant heresy, ban them in order to protect the flock.

Well, at least there's no physical violence.

[Cavaradossi]

A shame that they choose to be so sneaky at CAF. Guess the moderators have a Thomist outlook over at CAF: if you can't beat their deviant heresy, ban them in order to protect the flock.

Well, at least there's no physical violence.

It would certainly provide for an interesting story, though, if CAF started an inquisition in real life.

[Personna]

P.S. Now you've got me wondering: does that taboo include people joining the SSPX?

People who attend the SSPX, think of joining the SSPX, and other RC Traditionalists run into problems at CAF.  Below is a link to a thread at fisheaters.com.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3441721.0.html

A guilty pleasure of mine is to lurk around their forum.  I find it entertaining.

[Aindriú]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

You show banned when I see your posts. 

[FrChris]

A shame that they choose to be so sneaky at CAF. Guess the moderators have a Thomist outlook over at CAF: if you can't beat their deviant heresy, ban them in order to protect the flock.

Well, at least there's no physical violence.

You're right. Evil is fine as long as it's not TOO evil. 

[Shlomlokh]

A shame that they choose to be so sneaky at CAF. Guess the moderators have a Thomist outlook over at CAF: if you can't beat their deviant heresy, ban them in order to protect the flock.

Well, at least there's no physical violence.

You're right. Evil is fine as long as it's not TOO evil. 

E.V.I.L.

Every
Villain
Is
Lemons

I rest my case.

In Christ,
Andrew

[ialmisry]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

You show banned when I see your posts. 

LOL.  That's now. Not always so.  A number of us more numerous posters were banned (at least the notification said so), but our names didn't.

[ialmisry]

P.S. Now you've got me wondering: does that taboo include people joining the SSPX?

People who attend the SSPX, think of joining the SSPX, and other RC Traditionalists run into problems at CAF.  Below is a link to a thread at fisheaters.com.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3441721.0.html

A guilty pleasure of mine is to lurk around their forum.  I find it entertaining.

In a grisly fascination with a train wreck sort of way.

[Personna]

P.S. Now you've got me wondering: does that taboo include people joining the SSPX?

People who attend the SSPX, think of joining the SSPX, and other RC Traditionalists run into problems at CAF.  Below is a link to a thread at fisheaters.com.

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3441721.0.html

A guilty pleasure of mine is to lurk around their forum.  I find it entertaining.

In a grisly fascination with a train wreck sort of way.

Everyone needs a hobby.  What I find most interesting is the fact that the thread on fisheaters started about the same time as this one.  CAF seems to be doing an almost Soviet style purge.  They are going after both Trad Catholics and Orthodox.  They are getting rid of people who don't tow the Moderators' party line. 

[Punch]

Wow!   This part of the Directive was particularly draconian:

"Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension."

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=581934

Thought begets heresy.  Heresy begets retribution.

[Aindriú]

Wow!   This part of the Directive was particularly draconian:

"Any further PMs to me regarding amnesty for a particular banned member will result in an instant suspension."

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=581934

Thought begets heresy.  Heresy begets retribution.

No more thinking?

[TristanCross]

All I can say is that the spirit of Catholicism is well within Catholic Answers. The mods think they are little popes! All they care about is authority.

[Jharek Carnelian]

How is this being seen by the members of CAF?   

Is it the excessive reaction of a Moderator, reacting to just one issue with one person?  Is the Moderator new to the job at CAF and uneducated about the position which the Vatican holds with regard to Orthodoxy? Does he not realise that his action is belittling to Orthodoxy in general and very destructive of the attitude towards the Orthodox which the Pope and the Vatican wish Catholics to cultivate?

Is this another reaction as in 2007 because too many Catholics are converting to Orthodoxy?

I certainly find it excessive. The moderator is not that new but he did replace a rather more lax one some time back. I mind you am an oddity over there as half my family is Orthodox so I do find it somewhat disrespectful myself. I think he's over-reacted and is seeing agendas and conspiracies where there are none.

[Kasatkin fan]

How is this being seen by the members of CAF?   

Is it the excessive reaction of a Moderator, reacting to just one issue with one person?  Is the Moderator new to the job at CAF and uneducated about the position which the Vatican holds with regard to Orthodoxy? Does he not realise that his action is belittling to Orthodoxy in general and very destructive of the attitude towards the Orthodox which the Pope and the Vatican wish Catholics to cultivate?

Is this another reaction as in 2007 because too many Catholics are converting to Orthodoxy?

I certainly find it excessive. The moderator is not that new but he did replace a rather more lax one some time back. I mind you am an oddity over there as half my family is Orthodox so I do find it somewhat disrespectful myself. I think he's over-reacted and is seeing agendas and conspiracies where there are none.

Isn't this the same mod who banned discussion of Atheism and Islam, or am I thinking of someone else?

[Peter J]

All I can say is that the spirit of Catholicism is well within Catholic Answers. The mods think they are little popes! All they care about is authority.

Hold on a sec ... you think the "spirit of Catholicism" is that each person should be a little pope?

[Irish Melkite]

Agreed. But, it wasn't always that way, as those here and at byzcath who once participated there, remember.

On a side note, I was rather puzzled when I first noticed that all this hasn't been mentioned at all on the byzcath forum. I wonder if that's due to the fact that CAF only banned EO discussion and not EC discussion, or if it's more that byzcath posters don't pay a lot of attention to what happens at CAF.

Peter,

CAF's shenanigans have generally been of little interest at Byzcath because relatively few among the long-time core members at Byzcath, both Catholic and Orthodox, ever spent much time at CAF (the most notable exception being myself, during my incarnation as the old CAF Eastern Christianity forum mod). After the EO/EC purge at CAF of a few years back, most of the EO refugees from CAF and a few of the EC refugees came here (some of us, myself included, were already members here).

That reflects, in part, the difference between here and ByzCath. The atmosphere here is more debate-oriented than at ByzCath and the old EC forum at CAF included a lot of debate, though it was also highly focused toward education and discussion (hard to find evidence of that, given the many, many 1000s of posts by Fr Ambrose, myself, isa, hesychios, and many others, that were 'archived' on its closure). While debate transpires at ByzCath, it is generally more subdued and short-lived. (I'll hazard the opinion that such relates to the majority of the Catholic posters here who engage in debate being neither EC nor OC, but canonical Latins.)

The core Eastern population at CAF in the 'old' days (both Catholic and Orthodox) was close-knit and quick to rally in support of one another against Latins who would descend and try to run roughshod over the East - an observation on which I'm pretty certain that Father Ambrose, isa, and even stashko would agree.

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

[TristanCross]

All I can say is that the spirit of Catholicism is well within Catholic Answers. The mods think they are little popes! All they care about is authority.

Hold on a sec ... you think the "spirit of Catholicism" is that each person should be a little pope?

The spirit of Catholicism is the quest for authority

Don't worry, I'm only half serious 

[Hesychios]

Hello Father,

The Gurney Halleck at the epicentre of the CAF storm.... I've read some of his posts and he has style and knowledge, humour and pizazz.....

Someone should invite him to OC.net....

Please bless!  

Yes, Gurney has a lot of passion, but he needs time to think. I don't know where he posts any more, if he posts at all.

I give him high marks for sincerity of conscience (he is equally as challenging to every faith tradition), but he is probably still in 'search mode'. It's a rough road he has been traveling on.

[Hesychios]

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Hello my good brother Neil!
 

[ialmisry]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

I can see why I was banned.  But the banning of Irish Melkite was just obscene, along with the sacking of Joe Monahan.

[ialmisry]

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Hello my good brother Neil!
 

Hello to you too! Visit more often here!

[Jharek Carnelian]

How is this being seen by the members of CAF?   

Is it the excessive reaction of a Moderator, reacting to just one issue with one person?  Is the Moderator new to the job at CAF and uneducated about the position which the Vatican holds with regard to Orthodoxy? Does he not realise that his action is belittling to Orthodoxy in general and very destructive of the attitude towards the Orthodox which the Pope and the Vatican wish Catholics to cultivate?

Is this another reaction as in 2007 because too many Catholics are converting to Orthodoxy?

I certainly find it excessive. The moderator is not that new but he did replace a rather more lax one some time back. I mind you am an oddity over there as half my family is Orthodox so I do find it somewhat disrespectful myself. I think he's over-reacted and is seeing agendas and conspiracies where there are none.

Isn't this the same mod who banned discussion of Atheism and Islam, or am I thinking of someone else?

As far as I remember he banned Islam for a time. I'm not sure it was him who banned discussion on atheism though or whether that was another mod in another sub-forum. Certainly Gurney is still banned. When they banned him the word banned was not inserted under his user name. I see others here have previous experience of simialr happenings there. Highly dishonest I feel for such a practise to occur.

[Hesychios]

Hello to you too! Visit more often here!

Hi Isa!

Maybe I will 

I really need to escape the pit of perennial darkness and confusion. I feel I have suffered enough.

Michael

[mabsoota]

an internet topic about internet topics??
 
i pray u all find someone to talk to outside of the computer!
 
ok, that includes myself as well coz i actually read this thread!
gonna go now and interact with the outside world...

[Peter J]

(I'll hazard the opinion that such relates to the majority of the Catholic posters here who engage in debate being neither EC nor OC, but canonical Latins.)

Don't forget elijahmaria.

[Peter J]

an internet topic about internet topics??
 
i pray u all find someone to talk to outside of the computer!
 
ok, that includes myself as well coz i actually read this thread!
gonna go now and interact with the outside world...

I would say you are interacting with the world outside -- the world outside of Orthodoxy, that is.

[stanley123]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

[biro]

an internet topic about internet topics??
 
i pray u all find someone to talk to outside of the computer!
 
ok, that includes myself as well coz i actually read this thread!
gonna go now and interact with the outside world...

Same here, mabsoota.     If it weren't raining right now, I'd go swimming. Dang!   

[Peter J]

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

I hope you remembered to duck after posting that on an Orthodox forum.   

But seriously, my impression is that people were less upset about 'Joe Monahan' being banned than they were about the secret bannings.

[ialmisry]

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

I hope you remembered to duck after posting that on an Orthodox forum.   

But seriously, my impression is that people were less upset about 'Joe Monahan' being banned than they were about the secret bannings.

Not I.

[Peter J]

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

I hope you remembered to duck after posting that on an Orthodox forum.   

But seriously, my impression is that people were less upset about 'Joe Monahan' being banned than they were about the secret bannings.

Not I.

That probably shouldn't surprise me, yet it does.

[Irish Hermit]

(I'll hazard the opinion that such relates to the majority of the Catholic posters here who engage in debate being neither EC nor OC, but canonical Latins.)

Don't forget elijahmaria.

What comes through with elijahmaria is a decidedly Latin background and outlook.

[Irish Hermit]

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

I hope you remembered to duck after posting that on an Orthodox forum.   

But seriously, my impression is that people were less upset about 'Joe Monahan' being banned than they were about the secret bannings.

People were upset about both of course.  There was general shock and disbelief about the shabby way the CAF staff ousted Joe Monahan.

[Irish Melkite]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF

Stanley, my brother,

'Joe Monahan' was a pseudonym that I adopted to use as a nick when I accepted the post as moderator of the old Eastern Christianity forum at CAF (their policy required that a member use a diff nick as Mod than that by which he was known as a poster - in my case, Irish Melkite).

How did it feel? It felt wrong - I felt wronged. It was not the same medicine as what I administered. Yes, I banned - but there were very, very few EC or EO posters banned and it never happened without a strong effort to avoid it and deal with the matter by other means.

Many years,

Neil  

[Peter J]

(I'll hazard the opinion that such relates to the majority of the Catholic posters here who engage in debate being neither EC nor OC, but canonical Latins.)

Don't forget elijahmaria.

What comes through with elijahmaria is a decidedly Latin background and outlook.

If so, then we definitely are short of EC opinions around here (excepting this thread of course).

[Irish Melkite]

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Hello my good brother Neil!
 

Michael, my beloved friend and brother,

It is always good to see and hear from you. You're missed both here and at ByzCath.

Many years,

Neil

[Peter J]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF

Stanley, my brother,

'Joe Monahan' was a pseudonym that I adopted to use as a nick when I accepted the post as moderator of the old Eastern Christianity forum at CAF (their policy required that a member use a diff nick as Mod than that by which he was known as a poster - in my case, Irish Melkite).

How did it feel? It felt wrong - I felt wronged. It was not the same medicine as what I administered. Yes, I banned - but there were very, very few EC or EO posters banned and it never happened without a strong effort to avoid it and deal with the matter by other means.

Many years,

Neil  

I wasn't involved with CAF back in those days, but just going by ^^ it sounds like Eastern posters may have been given preferential treatment.

[Irish Hermit]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF

Stanley, my brother,

'Joe Monahan' was a pseudonym that I adopted to use as a nick when I accepted the post as moderator of the old Eastern Christianity forum at CAF (their policy required that a member use a diff nick as Mod than that by which he was known as a poster - in my case, Irish Melkite).

How did it feel? It felt wrong - I felt wronged. It was not the same medicine as what I administered. Yes, I banned - but there were very, very few EC or EO posters banned and it never happened without a strong effort to avoid it and deal with the matter by other means.

Many years,

Neil  

I wasn't involved with CAF back in those days, but just going by ^^ it sounds like Eastern posters may have been given preferential treatment.

I had over three years on CAF and was there for the entire reign of Joe Monahan over the Eastern Christian subforum and I can assure you that it was not like that.  The man was treasured as fair and even-handed, especially in contrast to some previous arbitrary and often mean-spirited moderators of that section.

[Irish Melkite]

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF)?

I hope you remembered to duck after posting that on an Orthodox forum.   

But seriously, my impression is that people were less upset about 'Joe Monahan' being banned than they were about the secret bannings.

Not I.

That probably shouldn't surprise me, yet it does.

Isa, my brother,

Thank you, my friend. I appreciate very much how you and others here reacted.

Peter,

I'm proud to say that 'Joe Monahan' had a strong and positive relationship with the members of the Eastern Christianity forum, both Catholic and Orthodox. I was touched and humbled by the kind words that were posted to the CAF thread here in support of me after I was 'resigned' from the mod staff at CAF.

Many years,

Neil  

[elijahmaria]

(I'll hazard the opinion that such relates to the majority of the Catholic posters here who engage in debate being neither EC nor OC, but canonical Latins.)

Don't forget elijahmaria.

What comes through with elijahmaria is a decidedly Latin background and outlook.

I spent many more years as a Roman rite Catholic and taught adult catechesis for many years.

But my liturgical practice is eastern and the calendar I keep is eastern and has been for nearly 15 years, which means I can double dip on the saints and historical practices of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church....

It's a nice place to be here breathing with both lungs...and I don't need to be nasty to anyone in order to live my faith authentically.   

[Irish Melkite]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

^ Like my brother said

Anyone who doubts that such a thing would be done is well-advised to read the old CAF refugee thread here at OC.net and count the 'banned, but unlabeled'. Let's see .. there would be Father Ambrose, myself, isa, 'Joe Monahan' (my alter ego as a CAF mod - labeled as 'resigned', but 'banned' for all intents and purposes), the list goes on ...

Many years,

Neil

Mr. Monahan, if that is you, how did it feel to get a taste of your own medicine (of banning people at CAF

Stanley, my brother,

'Joe Monahan' was a pseudonym that I adopted to use as a nick when I accepted the post as moderator of the old Eastern Christianity forum at CAF (their policy required that a member use a diff nick as Mod than that by which he was known as a poster - in my case, Irish Melkite).

How did it feel? It felt wrong - I felt wronged. It was not the same medicine as what I administered. Yes, I banned - but there were very, very few EC or EO posters banned and it never happened without a strong effort to avoid it and deal with the matter by other means.

Many years,

Neil  

I wasn't involved with CAF back in those days, but just going by ^^ it sounds like Eastern posters may have been given preferential treatment.

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

Latins, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, anyone who wanted to come to the Eastern forum and learn about us, debate with us, etc, - in a civil and charitable manner - was more than welcome to do so. Those who weren't welcome were those who came with an attitude of triumphalism and disdain. Their careers were short-lived. We had a decent number of non-Eastern posters who were 'regulars' to us. Quite honestly, when someone would come along who was clearly out to 'bait' us, it wasn't uncommon for a group PM to pass among two or three dozen of the 'regs' pointing the individual out and warning each other to avoid getting suckered into a troll-feeding fest.

We were a Community - and that Community spanned both Churches and geography.

Many years,

Neil

[Peter J]

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

[Irish Hermit]

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

Yes.

Quite a few people were against the formation of the Eastern Christianity subforum.  They thought that it would relegate the Eastern Catholics into an even deeper ghetto than when they were mixed into the regular Roman Catholic forums.   But in the end the wisdom of creating a specific subforum proved to be the right decision.

[Peter J]

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

Yes.

Quite a few people were against the formation of the Eastern Christianity subforum.  They thought that it would relegate the Eastern Catholics into an even deeper ghetto than when they were mixed into the regular Roman Catholic forums.   But in the end the wisdom of creating a specific subforum proved to be the right decision.

So CAF's mistreatment of ECs and EOs let to ECs and EOs flocking to CAF?

Am I missing something here?

[Irish Hermit]

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

Yes.

Quite a few people were against the formation of the Eastern Christianity subforum.  They thought that it would relegate the Eastern Catholics into an even deeper ghetto than when they were mixed into the regular Roman Catholic forums.   But in the end the wisdom of creating a specific subforum proved to be the right decision.

So CAF's mistreatment of ECs and EOs let to ECs and EOs flocking to CAF?

Am I missing something here?

Yes. 

Only the hardy survived.  Many Eastern Catholics faded away;  many, knowing of the conditions prevailing on the Forum, simply never joined. Irish Melkite can confirm this and he can confirm that with the advent of Joe Monahan's reign of toleration (himself Eastern Catholic) more Eastern Catholics were joining and staying.  The Orthodox, being of hardy stock,  often stayed.   And part of their decision to stay was sometimes to support the Eastern Catholics against the attititudes of the Roman Catholics.

[Hesychios]

Hi Peter,

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

Yes, I can remember it pretty well.

It was difficult to participate in a deep conversation about liturgy or theology, because of course the Byzantine Catholic perspective was different. People made a lot of assumptions and then an eastern Catholic would say something like " but our viewpoint is such and such ..." and it was really annoying to everyone else.

I think there was a lot of pressure to remove us and prevent us from worming our way into a lot of conversations.

I can remember trying to make the case that eastern Catholic topics should be in the Traditionalist section. I was really big on the universality of the church and by 'Traditionalist' of course they really meant 'Latin Traditionalist', not "all Catholic Traditionalist". Recently there was an excellent thread in that section on the Mozarabic church, spearheaded by a bright young man who did great research and happily shared it. I think you might remember it. The Mozarabic church is definitely one of the root traditions of Roman Catholicism.

There were a few who objected "what is this doing here?" as if it were something foreign. I thought it should be a sticky. That bias was so endemic and so natural to most people that it was like a fish in water doesn't know about the water.

So Liturgy is basically "Latin Rite Liturgy", and Apologetics is basically "Latin Rite Apologetics" and Traditionalist is basically "Latin Rite Traditionalist" and if you start a thread about Syro-Malabar Traditional Catholicism it gets moved to the ghetto.

Anyway, I was a bit resentful of the sequestering but the idea of making it a meeting place for Orthodox and Eastern Catholics  made it seem worth the try. It could have been a little Orientale Lumen forum with ongoing high minded discussion. I had high hopes for it.

Instead it turned into a hothouse for debate.

[Peter J]

Peter,

You hsve to understand that before there was the Eastern Christianity forum, EC were treated elsewhere on the site as the red-haired stepchildren with head lice. EO were treated as illegitimate cousins  with even worse conditions. If someone asked a question about liturgical praxis, spiritual life, fasting, saints, prayers, and either of us had the temerity to explain 'well, in the East, the praxis is ..., we were quickly let know, in no uncertain terms, that we could return to the cellar and do whatever the unwashed and unwanted do when they aren't annoying the regular folk.

  And that's what led to the Eastern Christianity forum?

Yes.

Quite a few people were against the formation of the Eastern Christianity subforum.  They thought that it would relegate the Eastern Catholics into an even deeper ghetto than when they were mixed into the regular Roman Catholic forums.   But in the end the wisdom of creating a specific subforum proved to be the right decision.

So CAF's mistreatment of ECs and EOs let to ECs and EOs flocking to CAF?

Am I missing something here?

Yes. 

I guess it's like my grandmother used to say: You catch more flies with arsenic than with vinegar.

[Peter J]

Ah yes, I noticed (although I don't think I've commented on it before) that there's a sticky in the Traditional Catholicism section that reads

Notice:

This forum is intended for discussion of Traditional Roman Catholic liturgy, practices, and spirituality. It is not intended for discussion of Eastern Catholic liturgy, practices, and spirituality (or for arguing for the presumed superiority of Eastern Catholicism to Traditional Roman Catholicism). Those wishing to discuss Eastern Catholicism must do so in the Eastern Catholicism forum, and not in this forum.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=429527

So apparently traditional Catholicism is Western by definition!

[Jetavan]

Ah, those were the days.

[Fr. George]

FYI: A few people noted that their accounts had, at one point, not been labeled as "banned" publicly at CAF.  In the spirit of full discretion: the banning system at OC.net often does not display a "banned" note by someone's name.  The banning feature that is part of the forum warning software (the same warning system that administers "Warned," "Moderated," and "Muted") automatically reduces people from "Banned" to "Muted" after 99 days (which is the maximum warning duration supported), so we had to begin using a 3rd party add-on to enact permanent/indefinite bans, which does not display their Banned status in their User Log or posts.  However, they are no longer searchable in the Membership list.

[Kasatkin fan]

...and I don't need to be nasty to anyone in order to live my faith authentically.   

So you just do it for fun then?

[Asteriktos]

However, they are no longer searchable in the Membership list.

All the fine posts made by TomS, SmoT, Matthew777, Acolyte, etc... gone. So sad. *shakes head*

[Irish Melkite]

FYI: A few people noted that their accounts had, at one point, not been labeled as "banned" publicly at CAF.  In the spirit of full discretion: the banning system at OC.net often does not display a "banned" note by someone's name. 

Bless, Father,

I can personally vouch for the fact that the software at CAF had no such limitation.

At this point in time, I think that there are very few of the 'secretly banned' whose nicks remain unlabeled by a scarlet letter. I suspect that many labels were incrementally added, after the fact, so as to diminish the effect of having them all appear at once.

I do know that neither Father Ambrose nor me are labeled (unless it's very, very recent). Because of our high profiles (and Father's 18 or 19 thousand post count), I think we were perceived as ringleaders and potential rallying points for the community and there was, consequently, a concern that we'd become 'martyrs to the cause' if labeled.

That our bannings - or that of anyone else among the EC and EO community there - would go unnoticed for very long was, of course, a rather naive hope on CAF's part, as virtually every banning - public or secret - was posted about here within an hour or so of the time the bannee became aware of it. (Sometimes before he or she was themselves aware.)

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

However, they are no longer searchable in the Membership list.

All the fine posts made by TomS, SmoT, Matthew777, Acolyte, etc... gone. So sad. *shakes head*

They can, however, be found by using Advanced Search, entering a term that you know was used by the individual in a post or thread, entering his or her nick, and hitting search.

For example, Benedictine as the search term and Matthew777 as the poster, will produce the infamous thread in which Matthew mused about joining the Benedictines because the order would pay for his college and grad school education and, thereafter, assign him to a teaching position in a higher education setting (a thread that put me right over the edge).

At CAF, one can likewise find threads/posts by bannees, using the same process. However, a monumental number of threads from the Eastern Christianity forum were 'archived' in the deepest reaches of CAF's cyber-dungeons and cannot be searched. Initially, they remained retrievable through Google caches, but CAF was quick to get that loophole closed. As a consequence, the available threads and posts from the pre-purge period represent only a tiny fraction of what had been originally posted.

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

Ah yes, I noticed (although I don't think I've commented on it before) that there's a sticky in the Traditional Catholicism section that reads

Notice:

This forum is intended for discussion of Traditional Roman Catholic liturgy, practices, and spirituality. It is not intended for discussion of Eastern Catholic liturgy, practices, and spirituality (or for arguing for the presumed superiority of Eastern Catholicism to Traditional Roman Catholicism). Those wishing to discuss Eastern Catholicism must do so in the Eastern Catholicism forum, and not in this forum.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=429527

So apparently traditional Catholicism is Western by definition!

Can I offer another 'Wow!'  The Traditional Forum wasn't created until after our expulsion, so I've never had much occasion to look at it. But, I am intrigued to learn that someone was arguing "the presumed superiority of Eastern Catholicism to Traditional Roman Catholicism" (maybe they'd want to try 'Latin" in place of 'Roman'? - seems more traditional   ).

I've never seen that argument raised anywhere that I can recollect - although I sure have seen the obverse raised any number of times!

The things one learns about at CAF* - Wow!

Many years,

Neil

*As examples, Father Ambrose and I 'learned'

(1) that the Holy Fire is produced by a zippo lighter (we first became well-acquainted over e-mail during our matching 30 day suspensions over that fiasco), and,

(2) that the EP concelebrated a Divine Liturgy with the Pope

[Irish Hermit]

*As examples, Father Ambrose and I 'learned'

(1) that the Holy Fire is produced by a zippo lighter (we first became well-acquainted over e-mail during our matching 30 day suspensions over that fiasco), and,

     That incident was my hilarious introduction to Catholic Answers.  I had just signed up and I noticed a post saying the Holy Fire was produced by the Patriarch using a piece of jiggery-pokery and a cigarette lighter !!   So I thought I'd make a response to that. 

Little did I know at the time that the person who was asserting it was in fact Karl Keating himself the founder and head of Catholic Answers and reverenced as only slightly less infallible than the Pope.   

His response, when his infallibility was questioned on this matter, was to delete the entire thread. No apology for maligning the Patriarchs of Jerusalem.  No upfront message saying that perhaps he was mistaken!   I think that at that stage if I had any discernment at all I should have realised that the level of integrity among some of the staff at CAF was not of a high standard (with notable exceptions.)

[ialmisry]

*As examples, Father Ambrose and I 'learned'

(1) that the Holy Fire is produced by a zippo lighter (we first became well-acquainted over e-mail during our matching 30 day suspensions over that fiasco), and,

     That incident was my hilarious introduction to Catholic Answers.  I had just signed up and I noticed a post saying the Holy Fire was produced by the Patriarch using a piece of jiggery-pokery and a cigarette lighter !!   So I thought I'd make a response to that. 

Little did I know at the time that the person who was asserting it was in fact Karl Keating himself the founder and head of Catholic Answers and reverenced as only slightly less infallible than the Pope.   

His response, when his infallibility was questioned on this matter, was to delete the entire thread. No apology for maligning the Patriarchs of Jerusalem.  No upfront message saying that perhaps he was mistaken!   I think that at that stage if I had any discernment at all I should have realised that the level of integrity among some of the staff at CAF was not of a high standard (with notable exceptions.)

LOL. Even teh Muslims admit the miracle of the Holy Fire, and have for centuries (I recall reading a Muslim account from around 1100).

[PeterTheAleut]

Locked pending moderatorial discussion of whether we want to permit any more CAF-bashing threads.

[Fr. George]

However, they are no longer searchable in the Membership list.

All the fine posts made by TomS, SmoT, Matthew777, Acolyte, etc... gone. So sad. *shakes head*

We don't delete accounts, and we don't delete posts unless necessary.

So.... They're not gone - you just can't look up their member profile easily to then find the posts.

[PeterTheAleut]

Unlocked after further review

[Irish Melkite]

Locked pending moderatorial discussion of whether we want to permit any more CAF-bashing threads

Unlocked after further review

In truth, it's probably time to let the subject go. At this point, the thread is likely to become little more than a rehash of the original CAF refugee thread - old guys reminiscing, retelling war stories to the assembled young'uns.

CAF has apparently lifted the latest interdiction. I'd like to think that the public discussion here played into that decision - making it clear how ridiculous it was, but we'll never know.

Many years,

Neil

 

[Papist]

And they say I'M the one with a martyrdom complex 

Precisely, because you complain far more in amount and in quality and yet you aren't even treated as poorly here as we are at CAF.

Hear, hear!

Fr. I exected better from you.

[Xenia1918]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

[Xenia1918]

No that's the statement. I can't see the value of it as it actually works against keeping a member of the Church there I would have thought. More mature people won't be swayed to either leave or join by the ructions on an internet forum but for those wavering or more naive in their faith it may be the proverbial staw that breaks their back. I could understand a ruling against people saying they find it hard to remain members of the Church and who then go on to insult it. But to just put a blanket ban on any discussion of the subject was I felt not the right approach.

As to the ban in that part of the forum I think the Orthodox posters here who have commented that 'hey so what we're not Catholic?' are really taking the best approach.

If you're familiar with Catholic Answers, then you should be familiar with to general naivety of the posters. Many of them have little education in Christian thought, much less Catholic theology. Considering it is specifically geared towards this type of poster (Catholic Answers),from an objective stance, I can't much blame them.

I've noticed this too. Not only are they incredibly uneducated about non-Catholic faiths, but they are very uneducated about THEIR OWN Faith as it was in the "glory days" before V2. They seem to desperately cling to the "obedience uber alles" mentality which, frankly, is what turned me off to post-V2 Catholicism in the first place anyway, in addition to "the changes".

[Xenia1918]

It seems that they have re-opened discussions about Orthodoxy. See here

Update: it also seems that Gurneyhalleck1 has been unbanned. See here

Can't go by that: often CAF suspends someone etc. but it is not shown (I speak from personal experience).

I see. I guess it's possible for them to ban somebody without showing it. What a shame then, if they're going to keep Gurneyhalleck banned.

For CAF's deceitful policy of not showing banned members as banned please see message 1198
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13287.msg217288.html#msg217288

I've known others who were banned from there; the reason why they don't show banned members as banned is to artifically inflate their actual numbers, I suppose.

[Peter J]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

[Xenia1918]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!   One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

[Irish Hermit]

If you log out you'll be able to read the forum.

[ialmisry]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Yeah, the pick up on your IP.

They will still be sending you appeals for money though.

[Xenia1918]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Yeah, the pick up on your IP.

They will still be sending you appeals for money though.

Yeah....ha. I've a good mind to email them back with "If I'm not good enough for your boards then neither is my money". Truth is, I was leaving their forums anyway, there's just nothing there.

[Peter J]

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Wow. They banned you for saying that in a private message? That's a little ... well, I don't know what that is.

BTW, I can recommend another trad forum, if you'd like. (Of course, you may already know the one I have in mind.)

[Xenia1918]

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Wow. They banned you for saying that in a private message? That's a little ... well, I don't know what that is.

Inquisitorial?  

Its weird, you know? As novus ordo-y as they are, and as much into post-V2 Pope worship they seem to be, when it comes to silencing dissent, they are very medieval. haha

BTW, I can recommend another trad forum, if you'd like. (Of course, you may already know the one I have in mind.)

Probably. I think I'd get along better on a sede forum, but I don't know of any.

[Kasatkin fan]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!   One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Funny, I PM'ed a mod when they suspended my account to tell them to go ahead and ban me and they ignored me.

But I can say from experience on other forums ( ) that "banning" on most forums means you can't read anything either. I've seen very few that continue to allow you to read.

[Xenia1918]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!   One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Funny, I PM'ed a mod when they suspended my account to tell them to go ahead and ban me and they ignored me.

But I can say from experience on other forums ( ) that "banning" on most forums means you can't read anything either. I've seen very few that continue to allow you to read.

I tried logging out as another poster here suggested...no way to do it from what I could see.

But I found today that if you go to Google and Google your handle there, you can read the forum that way.  

[Irish Hermit]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Funny, I PM'ed a mod when they suspended my account to tell them to go ahead and ban me and they ignored me.

But I can say from experience on other forums ( ) that "banning" on most forums means you can't read anything either. I've seen very few that continue to allow you to read.

I tried logging out as another poster here suggested...no way to do it from what I could see.

But I found today that if you go to Google and Google your handle there, you can read the forum that way. 

All of us who were thrown off CAF can still read posts.  I am surprised that you can't.

[Peter J]

BTW, I can recommend another trad forum, if you'd like. (Of course, you may already know the one I have in mind.)

Probably.

Done.

[Xenia1918]

CAF is such a joke when it comes to dialoguing with the Orthodox.

They are a joke when dialoguing with anyone they disagree with. I was over there posting, and made the mistake of innocently saying the post-V2 church is "modernist", which to me, means very different from the historical Roman Catholic Church (the only form of it I am familiar with for complicated reasons).

I got an "infraction", and then when I tried to let people know I had decided to just leave the board since the modern church is too different for me to try to understand, I got another "infraction" for saying THAT!

Finally, I wrote back to the mod who sent me the second "infraction" to basically say "don't worry, I've leaving anyway", and then I got this:

Your account has been locked for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

This change will be lifted: Never
 

I wonder if I set a record? I got two infractions AND a banning, all in ONE DAY!  One was probably for speaking kindly about the Orthodox, and the other was probably for speaking favorably about Catholicism before V2.

Hi Xenia,

Sorry to hear you've been banned.

I had been participating in their Traditional Catholicism sub-forum this summer, as I'm sure you noticed -- although I haven't been there in the last couple weeks. (I've been going to a different traditional Catholic forum, but I won't get into that.)

I actually had intended that today would be my last day posting there, and when I logged on to private message a few friends to let them know, I saw the infraction messages. I then wrote back to the one mod and said basically "Its OK, I was logging on to say to folks I was leaving today", when he banned me right then.I guess it was a case of, "You can't quit! You're banned instead!"lol

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Funny, I PM'ed a mod when they suspended my account to tell them to go ahead and ban me and they ignored me.

But I can say from experience on other forums ( ) that "banning" on most forums means you can't read anything either. I've seen very few that continue to allow you to read.

I tried logging out as another poster here suggested...no way to do it from what I could see.

But I found today that if you go to Google and Google your handle there, you can read the forum that way. 

All of us who were thrown off CAF can still read posts.  I am surprised that you can't.

I can if I go through Google. Maybe its my computer.

[Irish Melkite]

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Xenia,

As Father Ambrose notes, all of us bannees are able to read there. It is, indeed, possible to block an IP but historically (based on my several years as a Mod there) it was very rarely done - in my experience only in the case of spammers, hackers, and bannees who continually tried to reinvent themselves under alternative identities (and even the latter were uncommon, because their IPs were often ones that legit posters also used).

From your story, I'd guess that some Mod was on a power trip - altho, unless things have changed, a Mod couldn't initiate an IP ban; he or she would have to request that the Forum Admin (a gentleman with his own power issues, if it's still the same individual) do so.

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

hmm - database error - told me to try again and then dbl-posted. Obviously CAF gremlins at play here

[Xenia1918]

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Xenia,

As Father Ambrose notes, all of us bannees are able to read there. It is, indeed, possible to block an IP but historically (based on my several years as a Mod there) it was very rarely done - in my experience only in the case of spammers, hackers, and bannees who continually tried to reinvent themselves under alternative identities (and even the latter were uncommon, because their IPs were often ones that legit posters also used).

From your story, I'd guess that some Mod was on a power trip - altho, unless things have changed, a Mod couldn't initiate an IP ban; he or she would have to request that the Forum Admin (a gentleman with his own power issues, if it's still the same individual) do so.

Many years,

Neil

Maybe they did ban by IP..which is weird because I have a very common IP for my area. It would mean they are banning a lot of others too. They may have me confused with someone else though, because the mod who sent me the final infraction said something about, "You've been here long enough to know this rule", yet I'd only been there for a couple of weeks at most. I did think that was an odd statement.

Its also possible its my computer....I find the only way I can access the forums here too, is to go through Google or another search engine, and do a search on the forum name plus my handle. When I try coming to OC.net directly, there is no way to access the forum or anything else, all I see is the main page with no tabs at the top. And then once I'm in and posting, after I submit the post it says "data system error" that my post did not get posted, but when I look for it via my profile, it shows up.

[Peter J]

The weird thing is,I can't even SEE the forums;so the banning must make it so you can't even READ anything?

Xenia,

As Father Ambrose notes, all of us bannees are able to read there. It is, indeed, possible to block an IP but historically (based on my several years as a Mod there) it was very rarely done - in my experience only in the case of spammers, hackers, and bannees who continually tried to reinvent themselves under alternative identities (and even the latter were uncommon, because their IPs were often ones that legit posters also used).

From your story, I'd guess that some Mod was on a power trip - altho, unless things have changed, a Mod couldn't initiate an IP ban; he or she would have to request that the Forum Admin (a gentleman with his own power issues, if it's still the same individual) do so.

Many years,

Neil

Maybe they did ban by IP..which is weird because I have a very common IP for my area. It would mean they are banning a lot of others too. They may have me confused with someone else though, because the mod who sent me the final infraction said something about, "You've been here long enough to know this rule", yet I'd only been there for a couple of weeks at most. I did think that was an odd statement.

Its also possible its my computer....I find the only way I can access the forums here too, is to go through Google or another search engine, and do a search on the forum name plus my handle. When I try coming to OC.net directly, there is no way to access the forum or anything else, all I see is the main page with no tabs at the top. And then once I'm in and posting, after I submit the post it says "data system error" that my post did not get posted, but when I look for it via my profile, it shows up.

That's been happening to me too, but only in the last couple days. I had never seen the "data system error" message before.

[Xenia1918]

Switching computers and ISPs enables a multitude of problems to be solved.

[JustPostingOnce]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

[Αριστοκλής]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

Don't flatter yourself. There is nothing worthy reading over there.

[elijahmaria]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

As a postscript:  Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have.  The inability to persevere in the face of extreme pressure has never been, is not and never will be a mark of my Church.  It is not Catholic to run from a challenge to the faith, but it is the first line defense of far too many Catholics.

There are some accusations and questions that cannot be defended head on because the deliverer of the blow has designed the accusation or question to be unanswerable as it is delivered.   In those cases a re-iteration of the truth is sufficient.  Jesus said to shake the dust from our own sandals...NOT to gouge the mud out of our brother's eye or extract the plank by driving it into their brain.

What is repulsive to me as a Catholic, about the CAF response to challenge, is the fact that it is full of fear.

[Irish Melkite]

Mary,

We don't often agree, but I can't let your last post go by without a round of applause!

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

Yeah.  
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple.    

Believing that the job of being a good moderator is simple, is itself a pretty simple approach (and not very accurate).

On the other hand, most any simpleton can simply function as a thought cop, a rather simple job.

Many years,

Neil

 

[orthonorm]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

Well, guess the fast is going to be more strict today, as I threw up my breakfast just now. //:=)

[Asteriktos]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

[elijahmaria]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

Well, guess the fast is going to be more strict today, as I threw up my breakfast just now. //:=)

Well after the last several threads on masturbation, I am surprised to know that ANY of the active Orthodox male members of this Forum are squeamish about ANYTHING!!!

[elijahmaria]

Mary,

We don't often agree, but I can't let your last post go by without a round of applause!

Many years,

Neil

 ...We need not agree on everything or anything tangential as long as we stand, brother and sister, in the essential Christ.

I don't think badly of you ever.  I am sorry we've had rough patches over the years.

M.

[orthonorm]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

Well, guess the fast is going to be more strict today, as I threw up my breakfast just now. //:=)

Well after the last several threads on masturbation, I am surprised to know that ANY of the active Orthodox male members of this Forum are squeamish about ANYTHING!!!

It was out of laughter and shock. That is some serious PWNage. Putting your name in there: stroke of brilliance.

Biggest go    yourself, I've seen in a while.

[elijahmaria]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

Well, guess the fast is going to be more strict today, as I threw up my breakfast just now. //:=)

Well after the last several threads on masturbation, I am surprised to know that ANY of the active Orthodox male members of this Forum are squeamish about ANYTHING!!!

It was out of laughter and shock. That is some serious PWNage. Putting your name in there: stroke of brilliance.

Biggest go    yourself, I've seen in a while.

Oh...well...then...

[Cavaradossi]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

As a postscript:  Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have.  The inability to persevere in the face of extreme pressure has never been, is not and never will be a mark of my Church.  It is not Catholic to run from a challenge to the faith, but it is the first line defense of far too many Catholics.

There are some accusations and questions that cannot be defended head on because the deliverer of the blow has designed the accusation or question to be unanswerable as it is delivered.   In those cases a re-iteration of the truth is sufficient.  Jesus said to shake the dust from our own sandals...NOT to gouge the mud out of our brother's eye or extract the plank by driving it into their brain.

What is repulsive to me as a Catholic, about the CAF response to challenge, is the fact that it is full of fear.

Wow, talk about turning the blade and rubbing salt into the wound.  I applaud you.

[Xenia1918]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

Do you think we really care? Honestly? The Inquisitorial moderation tactics there have turned more people away from the Catholic Church than anything else I can think other than, well, the Inquisition. 

[Xenia1918]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

THIS makes all Catholics look exceptionally neurotic.  If Orthodoxy is the enemy then maybe the owners and moderators of CAF should take the "C" out of CAF because this Catholic doesn't think it belongs there with this kind of shit-faced attitude.

Mary Lanser

As a postscript:  Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have.  The inability to persevere in the face of extreme pressure has never been, is not and never will be a mark of my Church.  It is not Catholic to run from a challenge to the faith, but it is the first line defense of far too many Catholics.

There are some accusations and questions that cannot be defended head on because the deliverer of the blow has designed the accusation or question to be unanswerable as it is delivered.   In those cases a re-iteration of the truth is sufficient.  Jesus said to shake the dust from our own sandals...NOT to gouge the mud out of our brother's eye or extract the plank by driving it into their brain.

What is repulsive to me as a Catholic, about the CAF response to challenge, is the fact that it is full of fear.

It has been my experience that most novus ordo-ites are woefully ignorant of anything their church taught prior to Vatican II (and they don't know much that came after it, either). The ignorance is absolutely astounding, and their church doesn't care as long as they (drum roll): OBEY! BLINDLY AT THAT! The Byzantine Catholics I have known were far more knowledgeable, as are the Orthodox. Not to mention far more humble, too.

[Peter J]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

[Xenia1918]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

That's also a possibility, I did think of it. Regardless, I got to say what I thought.

[Aindriú]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Whatever. If someone really wanted to feel important, they would have impersonate me. After all, I'm pretty much awesome.

[ialmisry]

Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have. 

Evidently it does.

[Achronos]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Whatever. If someone really wanted to feel important, they would have impersonate me. After all, I'm pretty much awesome.

When I tried registering for this board, Azurestone was taken.

[the slave]

Well - here is one Banned member who can't read there - I was banned by IP and Irish Melkite and I have discovered this evening that my ID is still there but all my posts have gone  , vanished , removed and / or deleted

Err I managed to do that search without a problem but if , and it must be a BIG IF there is a Mod looking at this thread then I'm saying no more .

[orthonorm]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Of course.

I have no way to know what anyone is on the internet for the most part.

I assumed it was someone playing around. Who cares? If so, all the better.

And whether the post was "real" or not, EM reaction was hilarious. Wasn't expecting it.

If anyone on the internet or in RL think they know what 99% of most of the time is true, they need to have their heads examined.

Life is a stage and all that.

[Xenia1918]

Well - here is one Banned member who can't read there - I was banned by IP and Irish Melkite and I have discovered this evening that my ID is still there but all my posts have gone  , vanished , removed and / or deleted

Err I managed to do that search without a problem but if , and it must be a BIG IF there is a Mod looking at this thread then I'm saying no more .

I don't think we were banned by IP; I think we were banned by ISP (earthlink, etc). How else is it that I can still go there and even join if I choose to again (I don't), simply by switching ISP? (we have several in our home due to one child going to school from home via the school ISP, a home business with another ISP and a personal ISP).

[orthonorm]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

That's also a possibility, I did think of it. Regardless, I got to say what I thought.

Amateur hour.

[Aindriú]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Whatever. If someone really wanted to feel important, they would have impersonate me. After all, I'm pretty much awesome.

When I tried registering for this board, Azurestone was taken.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Irish Melkite]

I don't think we were banned by IP; I think we were banned by ISP (earthlink, etc). How else is it that I can still go there and even join if I choose to again (I don't), simply by switching ISP? (we have several in our home due to one child going to school from home via the school ISP, a home business with another ISP and a personal ISP).

If you were blocked (not banned, banning is done internally - blocking stops you from getting there at any of several dfferent levels of blockage), you were blocked by IP. IP blocks are problematic enough insofar as the possibility that they will affect innocent members, a ban by ISP would shut out thousands.

Many years,

Neil

[orthonorm]

I don't think we were banned by IP; I think we were banned by ISP (earthlink, etc). How else is it that I can still go there and even join if I choose to again (I don't), simply by switching ISP? (we have several in our home due to one child going to school from home via the school ISP, a home business with another ISP and a personal ISP).

If you were blocked (not banned, banning is done internally - blocking stops you from getting there at any of several dfferent levels of blockage), you were blocked by IP. IP blocks are problematic enough insofar as the possibility that they will affect innocent members, a ban by ISP would shut out thousands.

Many years,

Neil

This fact can be used to your advantage if you are able to gain the IP address of another member you wish to be banned and it is done easily enough.

This is a legitimate part of internets debate and fully allowed in a no holds barred environment; however, usually not very effective, because most people on such boards, especially the mods, know such rhetorical techniques and are usually smarter than your average modded board user.

It usually goes unnoticed in more heavily modded boards.

[Irish Melkite]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Peter,

Thought about it right at the outset but a simultaneous, 'coincidental', happening convinces me that the poster was very likely a CA mod. And, if my suspicion is correct, it may be possible to confirm it.

I do, however, suspect that the story which accompanied that post (as to how the individual found his/her way here - Google search by name, ...  - is a fabrication. CAF staff who have been there for any length of time are more than aware that Eastern Christians who post both there and elsewhere are most commonly found either here or at ByzCath.

Many years,

Neil

[Irish Melkite]

This fact can be used to your advantage if you are able to gain the IP address of another member you wish to be banned and it is done easily enough.

This is a legitimate part of internets debate and fully allowed in a no holds barred environment; however, usually not very effective, because most people on such boards, especially the mods, know such rhetorical techniques and are usually smarter than your average modded board user.

It usually goes unnoticed in more heavily modded boards.

IP blocks are rarely used at sites like CAF. It's one thing to block IPs coming out of China and cut off the shoe spammers or IPs that are historically used to circumvent by rerouting, etc, or which principally exist to reroute and hide the origin. Lists of those IPs are routinely available and widely consulted not just by those who would use them, but those who would block them. 

As one of two mods at CAF who usually worked overnight (the other, a friend, was terminated at the same time I was, apparently our friendship was considered a risk to my being able to remain in touch with the inner workings of CAF), I spent a lot of my time away from the Eastern Christianity forum, tracking IPs related to significant issues. That was a major part of my work there, keeping the peace. IP bans were extremely uncommon for your average bannee/circumventor - those were saved for use with the hardcore and the hackers, spammers, etc

Many years,

Neil   

[the slave]

My banning had to be by IP - I'm still with the same ISP in the same house admittedly on a different Mac  but until relatively recently I could not access CAF , I just got the banning notice up each time.

[Peter J]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Whatever. If someone really wanted to feel important, they would have impersonate me. After all, I'm pretty much awesome.

 

[orthonorm]

My banning had to be by IP - I'm still with the same ISP in the same house admittedly on a different Mac  but until relatively recently I could not access CAF , I just got the banning notice up each time.

People misunderstand both IP allocation and banning. Do you know your IP at any given time?

Check via a tool on the internet.

Thing is that most boards are going to ban your username before the IP they see associated with it most of the time.

So you have to have a sock puppet for the part to see if your username is banned or IP. Check with your sock puppet from the same IP. You will then know.

IP proxies aren't very effective anymore against IP bans as the software detection most well run servers use will recognize the suspicious amount of redirects.

Now there are still ways around IP banning. But those you have to find out for yourself.

EDIT: The above is the "easiest" manner for checking for most people, I know there are more elegant methods.

[Irish Melkite]

CAF staff who have been there for any length of time are more than aware that Eastern Christians who post both there and elsewhere are most commonly found either here or at ByzCath.

In fact, as I think about it, there are 2 CAF mods w/ posting accts here (maybe now 3    )
One has only been used once that I'm aware; the other posted briefly as a member both here and at ByzCath but hasn't posted at either since around the time of the Great Purge.

Many years,

Neil

[Asteriktos]

Xenia1918, Cavaradossi, elijahmaria, orthonorm, Asteriktos, Irish Melkite, and Αριστοκλής,

I trust you all realize that we have no way to tell whether JustPostingOnce is a real CA moderator or just some random person trying to feel important?

Well, I'm not banned there yet... so...

[Xenia1918]

This fact can be used to your advantage if you are able to gain the IP address of another member you wish to be banned and it is done easily enough.

This is a legitimate part of internets debate and fully allowed in a no holds barred environment; however, usually not very effective, because most people on such boards, especially the mods, know such rhetorical techniques and are usually smarter than your average modded board user.

It usually goes unnoticed in more heavily modded boards.

IP blocks are rarely used at sites like CAF. It's one thing to block IPs coming out of China and cut off the shoe spammers or IPs that are historically used to circumvent by rerouting, etc, or which principally exist to reroute and hide the origin. Lists of those IPs are routinely available and widely consulted not just by those who would use them, but those who would block them.  

As one of two mods at CAF who usually worked overnight (the other, a friend, was terminated at the same time I was, apparently our friendship was considered a risk to my being able to remain in touch with the inner workings of CAF), I spent a lot of my time away from the Eastern Christianity forum, tracking IPs related to significant issues. That was a major part of my work there, keeping the peace. IP bans were extremely uncommon for your average bannee/circumventor - those were saved for use with the hardcore and the hackers, spammers, etc

Many years,

Neil  

Well, they evidently blocked ME by IP (or ISP), and I'm not a spammer or hacker. In fact I was only there about 2 weeks and didn't even do anything really wrong except make a comment a) that they took as an insult against the novus ordo church, and b) told  a mod I'm leaving anyway. I suspect they have me confused with someone else, or think I am someone else, based on what one mod said to me ("You've been here long enough to know bla bla bla"...two weeks is "long enough"?!

[elijahmaria]

Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have. 

Evidently it does.

 

Just because I think CAF was wrong doesn't mean I support your silliness.

[orthonorm]

This fact can be used to your advantage if you are able to gain the IP address of another member you wish to be banned and it is done easily enough.

This is a legitimate part of internets debate and fully allowed in a no holds barred environment; however, usually not very effective, because most people on such boards, especially the mods, know such rhetorical techniques and are usually smarter than your average modded board user.

It usually goes unnoticed in more heavily modded boards.

IP blocks are rarely used at sites like CAF. It's one thing to block IPs coming out of China and cut off the shoe spammers or IPs that are historically used to circumvent by rerouting, etc, or which principally exist to reroute and hide the origin. Lists of those IPs are routinely available and widely consulted not just by those who would use them, but those who would block them.  

As one of two mods at CAF who usually worked overnight (the other, a friend, was terminated at the same time I was, apparently our friendship was considered a risk to my being able to remain in touch with the inner workings of CAF), I spent a lot of my time away from the Eastern Christianity forum, tracking IPs related to significant issues. That was a major part of my work there, keeping the peace. IP bans were extremely uncommon for your average bannee/circumventor - those were saved for use with the hardcore and the hackers, spammers, etc

Many years,

Neil  

Well, they evidently blocked ME by IP (or ISP), and I'm not a spammer or hacker. In fact I was only there about 2 weeks and didn't even do anything really wrong except make a comment a) that they took as an insult against the novus ordo church, and b) told  a mod I'm leaving anyway. I suspect they have me confused with someone else, or think I am someone else, based on what one mod said to me ("You've been here long enough to know bla bla bla"...two weeks is "long enough"?!

Did you mention your Orthodox Jewish background?

[Xenia1918]

This fact can be used to your advantage if you are able to gain the IP address of another member you wish to be banned and it is done easily enough.

This is a legitimate part of internets debate and fully allowed in a no holds barred environment; however, usually not very effective, because most people on such boards, especially the mods, know such rhetorical techniques and are usually smarter than your average modded board user.

It usually goes unnoticed in more heavily modded boards.

IP blocks are rarely used at sites like CAF. It's one thing to block IPs coming out of China and cut off the shoe spammers or IPs that are historically used to circumvent by rerouting, etc, or which principally exist to reroute and hide the origin. Lists of those IPs are routinely available and widely consulted not just by those who would use them, but those who would block them.  

As one of two mods at CAF who usually worked overnight (the other, a friend, was terminated at the same time I was, apparently our friendship was considered a risk to my being able to remain in touch with the inner workings of CAF), I spent a lot of my time away from the Eastern Christianity forum, tracking IPs related to significant issues. That was a major part of my work there, keeping the peace. IP bans were extremely uncommon for your average bannee/circumventor - those were saved for use with the hardcore and the hackers, spammers, etc

Many years,

Neil  

Well, they evidently blocked ME by IP (or ISP), and I'm not a spammer or hacker. In fact I was only there about 2 weeks and didn't even do anything really wrong except make a comment a) that they took as an insult against the novus ordo church, and b) told  a mod I'm leaving anyway. I suspect they have me confused with someone else, or think I am someone else, based on what one mod said to me ("You've been here long enough to know bla bla bla"...two weeks is "long enough"?!

Did you mention your Orthodox Jewish background?

Only if it was pertinent to the subject at hand.

[ialmisry]

Sadly the behavior of CAF owners and operators projects a weakness that my Church will never have. 

Evidently it does.

 

Just because I think CAF was wrong doesn't mean I support your silliness.

CAF isn't my silliness.

[Jharek Carnelian]

Yeah. 
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple. 

Eric is that you?

If this really is a CAF moderator then it has to rank as one of the poorest examples of conduct regarding beens such I have seen in several years.

[Xenia1918]

Yeah.  
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple.  

Eric is that you?

If this really is a CAF moderator then it has to rank as one of the poorest examples of conduct regarding beens such I have seen in several years.

I never thought I'd say this, but I think we should cut novus ordo church members some slack. Think about it: Their  (new) church changes every time you turn around, and out of their sense of misplaced obedience, they are often left having to defend the indefensible.  Can you imagine having to defend a "pope" who kisses the Quran, not to mention does a host of other bizarre things, and then is put on the path toward CANONIZATION? Its enough to make anybody neurotic and maybe even paranoid. I'm just glad its not my problem or dilemma anymore, but my heart breaks for those who remain and have to become schizophrenic just to survive int hat church.

[Hesychios]

This has been a very entertaining thread to read 

[elijahmaria]

Yeah.  
Because forum moderators NEVER use a simple Google search, come to your forum, and hear you brag about circumventing a ban.
Thanks for making our job simple.  

Eric is that you?

If this really is a CAF moderator then it has to rank as one of the poorest examples of conduct regarding beens such I have seen in several years.

I never thought I'd say this, but I think we should cut novus ordo church members some slack. Think about it: Their  (new) church changes every time you turn around, and out of their sense of misplaced obedience, they are often left having to defend the indefensible.  Can you imagine having to defend a "pope" who kisses the Quran, not to mention does a host of other bizarre things, and then is put on the path toward CANONIZATION? Its enough to make anybody neurotic and maybe even paranoid. I'm just glad its not my problem or dilemma anymore, but my heart breaks for those who remain and have to become schizophrenic just to survive int hat church.

Why thank you!! Allow me to return the psycho-analysis...

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics > Topic: Wow!