QuakerInfo.com Forum

[oneputt]

I am curious about the reasons for Sparky's banning.One of the other posters to this forum emailed me that Sparky was not using the emoticons with his sarcasms to indicate them as such.Would he have been banned had he put some smiley faces by his words?And if he would not have because he used them(emoticons) properly,why not a warning first instead of the boot right away?Most of the forums I watch issue some form of warning such as a yellow card.Even the secular ones where the discussion sometimes gets a little rough have the courtesy to issue warnings,so it surprises me that a Christian site doesn't and doubly so that a site by a member of a religious group that champions free speech is so quick to suppress it without a warning.And before someone refers to the agreement policy,that is not clear cut about areas such as sarcasm and where the line is drawn,especially if sticking in an emoticon has some bearing on how it is perceived.I also note with interest that while sarcasm seems to be outside the bounds of the Quaker spirit of dialogue,what is within the bounds is for someone to accuse former and present conservative Presidents of murder.I guess it all depends on which side of the political spectrum you are posting from.

[servant]

I agree- I miss the interchange with Sparky, though he was being pretty mean-spirited.

But present and former Presidents have committed murder.
_________________
abdul muhib

Life *is* the parable.

[John]

There are all flavors of Quakers, but sarcasm and accusations are foreign to Friends no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. We are fond of plain speaking and truthfulness. Still, I and every other Quaker I know, am a human being, complete with faults, prejudices, and a prodigious capacity for error.

I don't know why or if Sparky was banned. It seemed to me that his arguments were deteriorating into name-calling, but I was willing to be patient with that.
_________________
John Price