For review of meta

curiousdannii

Dec 3, 2022 06:29

@ReadLessPrayMore As we said before, the issue is that your answer didn't identify which type of non-Trinitarianism it represents. Please edit it to specify and it can be undeleted.

Read Less Pray More

Dec 3, 2022 06:59

@curiousdannii I'm still waiting for you to share with us where you are pulling this rule from. Can you share it here please?.. Once you can do this.. I will then choose a name for my theology by the time my suspension is up so that I can actually edit something. I think I will call it the 1 True Theology. J/K....

But seriously... I didn't even know there are names of different non-trinitarian branches. I don't spend time on researching them. Should I? Why? I just read the words of God and let the Spirit reveal the 1 True meaning... Is there something wrong with that? Should I be punished for that here?

@Matthew Yes there are few who understand the the failures of science because of its inherent limits. I have friends who are working hard to develop concepts that fill in the gaps at the lowest of abstractions...(youtube channel Material world). They are trying but they are having problems of course. Its very difficult to work backwards.

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:14

@ReadLessPrayMore true, in the beginning it was not so.

But we were about to get shut down as too subjective of a site and some Stackexchange employees (probably from the Chaldees ) got us doing this christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/89/…

Which is the rule you're looking for

Read Less Pray More

None of those apply to this situation.

@PeterTurner The answer you deleted was scoped for non trinitarians

I answered it that way.

In the link christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/22/…

There is no conclusive answer

And by doing so you disclude a large minority of believers

Who don't rely on things outside the bible

We all know you think Catholicism (even with all it flaws in leadership) is the 1 church. So how is your push to disclude the rest of us objective?

Does this site not care about minority voices?

Peter Turner

@ReadLessPrayMore right, that post was from before we had any rules and it was a freeforall and I was in your shoes completely, pretty much the only Catholic here

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore Please review my message to you last time about rules lawyering like this: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/62220708#62220708

Peter Turner

But please stop thinking your post was deleted because of its content. I deleted your post because you rolled back it back twice.

Read Less Pray More

Peter and why did you edit it?

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:29

I did not edit it

curiousdannii

Yes, my advice is just about what you can do going forward to result in the post being undeleted.

Peter Turner

You're reading the history wrong if you think I did, Lee edited it

Read Less Pray More

I can't see it beccause I'm suspended but I believe you edited it

Which answer Peter?

I had mulitple deleted

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore This site is not interest in your personal thoughts on the scriptures. We are here for well researched questions and answers about established Christian groups and their documented teachings and practices.

Read Less Pray More

@dannii you are telling me there are these rules and then when I ask where they came from you link me a comment that says you can do what you want? really?

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:30

christianity.stackexchange.com/a/93372/4

Read Less Pray More

@curiousdannii All these answers are someones personal thoughts

Why are theirs more valid? You can judge the eh?

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore Read my answer again (christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/a/7368/6071) "For the question linked about, it asks what non-Trinitarians think about a topic. This means that it's effectively a kind of overview question, and answers should be representing the views of the non-Trinitarian branches of Christianity"

@ReadLessPrayMore No, they're explaining the teachings of established branches of Christianity.

Read Less Pray More

Where does it say an established branch makes it more valid?

Does Jesus say that?

Actually he says the opposite

He doesn't say a thing about branches. So why am I being judged by the standards of babylon?

This is a rule specific to this SE

So it put in place by Christians

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore This isn't a church. Jesus's teachings about the church do not determine how this secular academic site operates.

Read Less Pray More

Are you a christian?

Do christians live like Christ sometimes?

Or all the time where ever they are?

Or just in church?

curiousdannii

Dec 3, 2022 07:35

@ReadLessPrayMore We try to. Most people on this site would claim to be a Christian. And they don't see any conflict between their faith and the site Code of Conduct or site Q&A rules.

Read Less Pray More

I'm talking about this rule you are asserting specifically

It has no basis in scripture so why is it being used here?

Peter Turner

Isn't it necessary to have an encyclopedia to define heresies?

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner Was Jesus the greatest heretic by definition?

curiousdannii

:62489243 Because this site isn't an attempt to run a theocracy by Biblical rules.

Read Less Pray More

Yet it is governed by Christians...

Who say they are saints ready to govern the kingdom to come

yet they govern buy other standards

curiousdannii

Dec 3, 2022 07:37

Yes, indeed most Christians don't live in theocracies now either. Most Christians understand secular customs and rules.

Peter Turner

No, we can't do what we want, they'd pull the plug on the site. We truly have to operate in Babylon to keep the lights on here.

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner THis rule Dannii is pulling from isn't stated anywhere nor is it SE wide

curiousdannii

Very few Christians actually want to live in theocracies. Because that's not what Christianity is about! We're not meant to be setting up Christian nation states run strictly by Biblical Laws.

Read Less Pray More

This rule to silence the minority is put in place locally by Christians...

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore It's on Meta.

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:38

They were going to pull the plug, but we adopted rules to keep the peace by requiring identifiable POV's in questions and citations in answers

Read Less Pray More

@curiousdannii Please link it

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore I already did.

I have to go. Bye all

Read Less Pray More

This rule that I need to state what non trinitatian denomination I am...huh?

@curiousdannii bye. I don't see your link.. Please relink

before you go

Peter Turner

@ReadLessPrayMore nobody cares what non-trinitarian denomination you are, what we do care about is what non-trinitarian denomination you're answering the question from.

Read Less Pray More

@curiousdannii Do you not think this might be a problem? Is God pleased at this?

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:43

I can answer questions about LDS, JW, Baptist, etc... as easily (or with as much difficulty) as you can. But I can't misrepresent them. If I do answer questiosn I need to cite my sources.

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner I don't even know a non trinitarian denomination...Like what JW or LDS?

Unitarian isn't good enough?

Peter Turner

Unitarian is fine

Read Less Pray More

Why am I being compelled to identify as a word not found in scripture in order for me to answer a simple q within scope?

Peter Turner

Because this site creepily avoids the "Truth" and bottles it into nooks and crannies and stinks of relativism.

Read Less Pray More

I don't know about any of that.

I'm just trying to q and a in peace

You are experience my reaction to be attacked by a majority

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:46

Well that's the gist of it, you called it on Babylon, I kind of forgot how weird this cite is.

Read Less Pray More

I am not speaking of babylon as you think I am

Peter Turner

I'm not in the majority, I've got more posts and less points than anyone lese is

Read Less Pray More

You shouldn't assume my intent

Peter Turner

No, I totally get your point.

Read Less Pray More

Bro you are a mod.

You have all the power

I have none

YEt I am attackingn you?

Nah

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:48

Yeah, well with great power comes sitting on your thumbs to try and avoid getting into holy wars.

There's no "real power" on this site, if I said what I wanted to I'd be just as banned as you.

Read Less Pray More

Well I would personally avoid deleting sola sciptura answers without clarity. I still am uhclear. I think what dannii is saying now, is that if I simply identify as Unitarian in my premise than my answer is ok? I don't get it.

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore Because the question asks about non-Trinitatian teachings, and it's impossible to answer that without answering according to what non-Trinitatians teach.

Peter Turner

no, you need to cite your sources, not just identify as a unitarian.

Read Less Pray More

@curiousdannii And...you think my answer did this?

@PeterTurner Huh?

I cited james and Paul.

Peter Turner

Every SE site requires that and it needs to be more than just the Bible. because nobody knows for sure that what you're citing is what a unitarian thinks the Bible means

Read Less Pray More

Dec 3, 2022 07:51

So sola scriptura is not valid for non trinitarians now?

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore That's the barest minimum. If you don't show with sources that your answer matches Unitarian teachings then it could be deleted, just like all other unsourced answers

Read Less Pray More

That was never established in meta

Peter Turner

nobody cares

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner about what?

Peter Turner

about meta

curiousdannii

Dec 3, 2022 07:52

@ReadLessPrayMore Sola scriptura is about ranking spiritual authorities. It is not relevant to the issue of referencing in answers

Read Less Pray More

yes I know. No one uses meta unfortunately.

@curiousdannii Wait...I'm getting confused a bit. Why was my answer deleted. Peter says a n edit war. dannii says something else.

Peter Turner

you can have your answer deleted for multiple reasons

Read Less Pray More

WHich was it for you?

Peter Turner

Because you rolled back Lee's edits

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore Peter explained why it was deleted. I've been talking about what you can do in the future

Read Less Pray More

Dec 3, 2022 07:54

@PeterTurner Which answer are you referencing?

Peter Turner

The one on the question I put the bounty on

curiousdannii

I would've locked it for that cause, but deleted it for a different reason (that it doesn't clearly identify its perspective)

Read Less Pray More

IS that ANY limit to what other can edit of others words here? He had no reason to do it.

I use words for a reason.

Peter Turner

Yeah and I should have flagged it, I don't usually try to moderate posts that I've either answered, asked or placed bounties on.

Read Less Pray More

Flag for what?

For unediting my own perfectly good answer?

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 07:56

Flagged it for another moderator to decide what to do about it

Read Less Pray More

really? LOL

C'mon this is absurd.

Peter Turner

You should accept when other people edit your posts, Lee's edits were fine

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore Yes, edits have to keep the intent of the author.

Read Less Pray More

Anyone can just edit my words for no reason and I need to flag it for review before I put it back to how I INTENDED MY ANSWER TO BE?

LOL

Peter Turner

I read the edits and found that they kept the intent and improved your post

Read Less Pray More

Dec 3, 2022 07:58

If this is the case... I don't think anyone know this

curiousdannii

Your posts don't belong to you. All our posts belong to the community

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner Well I can't verify that because I'm suspended

@curiousdannii yes but that doesn't answer my question

Peter Turner

you could have verified it before you went on a tirade on meta

Read Less Pray More

My tirade came after you deleted the answer 3 times

along with my comments

No one can even vote honestly on that meta because you hid my answer after the meta was posted

Peter Turner

You reposted your original answer on a meta post that wasn't about your answer as a standalone post in a way that made absolutely no sense

Read Less Pray More

Dec 3, 2022 08:01

Lee had no reason to edit my freshly made answer. He could have suggested something in the comments

@PeterTurner I disagree 100percent

The meta was about my answer. My answer was hyperlinked in the first sentence of the meta.

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore That meta discussion was not about your post, so it was not appropriate for you to keep spamming it. You could've made a new post to discuss your deleted answer

Peter Turner

I think he did make a meta post which I closed as a dupe

Read Less Pray More

@curiousdannii The meta was about my answer. My answer was hyperlinked in the first sentence of the meta.

@PeterTurner Which was not a dup

I was asking about my specific case

Somehow a single person without any power has victimized those with all the power here.

So much so that I am suspended..... HOW does that EVER happen?

curiousdannii

@ReadLessPrayMore it was prompted by your post but was not about your post

Read Less Pray More

Nah.. Its about my answer

and how Peter deleted it

We all can read the question.

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 08:06

You've got the time wrong

Read Less Pray More

He actually quotes Peters comment under my answer in his premise

Peter Turner

Right, he linked to it before I deleted it

Read Less Pray More

Users were meant to be directed to my answer from the link in the first sentence of the meta.

This really seems like more gaslighting

Peter Turner

By who?

Read Less Pray More

By who ever is denying that the meta was about my answer

Also check this out..

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 08:09

I think Mike cared more about his answers than yours

Read Less Pray More

1

A: Citing Sources in 2020/2022

I did give an answer to that question, but someone simply deleted it, even while admitting it was a well though-through answer based on Scripture. I'd reckon some just don't want to know. As far as I can tell, people rather see tradition being posted here as an answer (things that "saints" said),...

Look at Mr. Donutz answer

@peterturner He reposts his and the meta is NOT even about his answer. You comment multiple times on his repost. Why the are you enforcing rules subjectively?

@PeterTurner This Meta suggestion of your discludes a large minority from answering.

Are we here to silence minority voices?

Peter Turner

yes, until we change the rules minority voices will continue to be silenced.

That's why I asked that question, and will continue to ask it until we as a community change our mind about it

Read Less Pray More

Ok... not much more to say here.

Peter Turner

I'm entirely open to changing the rules, but I'm not open to anarchy.

Read Less Pray More

It doesn't seem to be a rule that is even enforced.

Nor should a plus 8 vote question and a plus 5 vote answer in meta be sufficient to change anything as major as discluding all of us.

Peter Turner

Dec 3, 2022 08:18

you posted a second answer to the meta question when you could have just edited in your original post (or parts of it) to the original one. I'm sorry if I'm not completely consistent.

Read Less Pray More

@PeterTurner Why do I need to do that? The Site gave me an option to post again.

Peter Turner

It also warned you about posting another answer

Read Less Pray More

yes I heeded the warning and posted anyways

Within my allowances

Peter Turner

OK - gotta go, good night.

Read Less Pray More

So.... what have we concluded?

I'm still suspended for victimizing those in power and my answer is still deleted.

And no one has shown me a rule that justifies any action taken against my answers.

Only loose loop holes.

@PeterTurner I gotta go too. Good night. Thanks.

The Upper Room

Participants