#1 ·
Why am I being blocked from the Alternative?
@dustyharbor18 You're mistaken if you think they got rid of me that easily...☕
@dustyharbor18 You're mistaken if you think they got rid of me that easily...☕
Started by Melissa Watson4 · · 👁 5 views · 150 replies
dustyharbor18 said:A) @
Melissa Watson4, Chris Lopez59, Paul Chavez, Joseph White5
The ban on accessing Alternative regarding you four applies specifically to analyses of current military and political events that rely on alleged connections to the Book of Revelation. I guess the core thesis of the main ideological defender behind these military analyses is that World War III and the subsequent apocalypse are somehow desirable for humanity, serving as a firm and eagerly awaited guarantee of the return of Jesus.
It goes without saying that this kind of tone regarding military-political conspiracies has attracted a certain number of Christians whose views seem pretty bizarre and extreme—if not outright extremist—to most people.
Of course, such controversial stances have also drawn opposition, along with a fair amount of rude, uneducated, and naive forum users.
Since the participants described here show an increasingly low level of tolerance for differing views, the Alternative moderators are using this action to sharply distance themselves from such positions, which they consider utterly unacceptable from a civilized and humanistic perspective.
B)@
George Turner2, driftinggull13
As for you and others who take a stand based on skepticism, rationality, and logic against irrational, inaccurate, and uninformed views—the answer is completely different. Alternative has never distanced itself from you. In fact, any constructive opposition is always welcome.
Just to be clear, driftinggull13, since you’re the one with the most toxic, cynical language on this forum—something you actually pride yourself on while enjoying your own toxic posts—you should probably take responsibility for your sweet insults toward chlorine and silver solutions or bowel cleansers, especially given how much you enjoy pushing your opinions on them.
So, just to avoid confusion—it’s the manner in which you do it that is being criticized. I don't see any reason why your views couldn't be presented in a benevolent and educational way.
Melissa Watson4, Chris Lopez59, Paul Chavez, Joseph White5 [/B]
The ban on accessing Alternative regarding you four and three other forum members concerns analyses of current military and political events based on their alleged connection to the Book of Revelation. The core thesis of the main ideological defender of these military analyses is that World War III and the subsequent apocalypse is a desirable event for humanity, because it represents a solid and eagerly awaited guarantee of the return of Jesus.
dustyharbor18 said:A) @
Melissa Watson4, Chris Lopez59, Paul Chavez, Joseph White5
The ban on accessing Alternative regarding you four applies specifically to analyses of current military and political events that rely on alleged connections to the Book of Revelation. I guess the core thesis of the main ideological defender behind these military analyses is that World War III and the subsequent apocalypse are somehow desirable for humanity, serving as a firm and eagerly awaited guarantee of the return of Jesus.
It goes without saying that this kind of tone regarding military-political conspiracies has attracted a certain number of Christians whose views seem pretty bizarre and extreme—if not outright extremist—to most people.
Of course, such controversial stances have also drawn opposition, along with a fair amount of rude, uneducated, and naive forum users.
Since the participants described here show an increasingly low level of tolerance for differing views, the Alternative moderators are using this action to sharply distance themselves from such positions, which they consider utterly unacceptable from a civilized and humanistic perspective.
B)@
George Turner2, driftinggull13
As for you and others who take a stand based on skepticism, rationality, and logic against irrational, inaccurate, and uninformed views—the answer is completely different. Alternative has never distanced itself from you. In fact, any constructive opposition is always welcome.
Just to be clear, driftinggull13, since you’re the one with the most toxic, cynical language on this forum—something you actually pride yourself on while enjoying your own toxic posts—you should probably take responsibility for your sweet insults toward chlorine and silver solutions or bowel cleansers, especially given how much you enjoy pushing your opinions on them.
So, just to avoid confusion—it’s the manner in which you do it that is being criticized. I don't see any reason why your views couldn't be presented in a benevolent and educational way.
Chris Lopez59 said:I suppose their views were just too "alternative" for the Alternative. Or maybe they only want views on the Alternative that show a healthy dose of skepticism toward the Alternative itself.
This is nothing more than a speech ban wrapped up in a pile of seemingly benign words, and as for who actually pulled the trigger on this group ban and at what level of authority, we can only speculate.
Personally, I know how I argued, and honestly, I don't even fit into the description provided, but then again, I don't consider myself central to the topic since I wasn't one of those "true analysts"—I was just participating incidentally. So, it's crystal clear to me that I've been banned simply because of the side I took and the support I offered. It’s transparently obvious that one school of thought is being silenced, while the group that was creating unarguable confusion remains untouched.
They can write whatever they want here as an explanation, but the truth is as plain as day.
dustyharbor18 said:A) @
Melissa Watson4, Chris Lopez59, Paul Chavez, Joseph White5
The ban on accessing Alternative regarding you four applies specifically to analyses of current military and political events that rely on alleged connections to the Book of Revelation. I guess the core thesis of the main ideological defender behind these military analyses is that World War III and the subsequent apocalypse are somehow desirable for humanity, serving as a firm and eagerly awaited guarantee of the return of Jesus.
It goes without saying that this kind of tone regarding military-political conspiracies has attracted a certain number of Christians whose views seem pretty bizarre and extreme—if not outright extremist—to most people.
Of course, such controversial stances have also drawn opposition, along with a fair amount of rude, uneducated, and naive forum users.
Since the participants described here show an increasingly low level of tolerance for differing views, the Alternative moderators are using this action to sharply distance themselves from such positions, which they consider utterly unacceptable from a civilized and humanistic perspective.
B)@
George Turner2, driftinggull13
As for you and others who take a stand based on skepticism, rationality, and logic against irrational, inaccurate, and uninformed views—the answer is completely different. Alternative has never distanced itself from you. In fact, any constructive opposition is always welcome.
Just to be clear, driftinggull13, since you’re the one with the most toxic, cynical language on this forum—something you actually pride yourself on while enjoying your own toxic posts—you should probably take responsibility for your sweet insults toward chlorine and silver solutions or bowel cleansers, especially given how much you enjoy pushing your opinions on them.
So, just to avoid confusion—it’s the manner in which you do it that is being criticized. I don't see any reason why your views couldn't be presented in a benevolent and educational way.
electricangler22 said:So, I’m jumping in here because I feel like I’ve become invisible to the Alternative too. Honestly, I have to ask—what’s the deal, dustyharbor18? I don't really see myself in those groups you listed. Unless, of course, you know me better than I know myself and you're stripping away my access just to save me from myself? Maybe I offended you with some of my posts, though I truly never meant to be disrespectful.
Melissa Watson4 said:There was no offense intended, no trolling, no spamming, nothing of the sort....
It’s actually quite simple.... dustyharbor18 decided to purge everyone who doesn't think exactly like her... so now, besides the chaos already here, we'll just have this echo chamber where everyone just nods along in unison...