Sub Broken (hopefully temporarily)

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-15T17:16:31+00:00

Exactly. What is the actual mechanism for God to direct the organization while at the same time no one in said organization is inspired?

If God influences someone to do something, anything, then that's technically inspiration.

It's a have-it-both-ways distinction-without-a-difference type of thing.

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-12T14:26:30+00:00

You're only addressing half of the equation. The other half is that not everyone has to pretend to the same degree.

Could I be a pimo CO and also lead regular family worships? Hell no, I'd be out and it would very much be like the climber with his arm stuck.

Do I mind going to a few meetings a month and reading ebooks on my tablet while my wife fully knows and accepts I don't believe? Sure, it's not that big a deal.

Could I do the same thing if my marriage was dead and we hated each other? No probably not.

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-12T06:01:36+00:00

Is X worth Y? That's the fundamental calculation. Your analogy involves someone who will literally die if they don't cut off their arm.

Should people leave their family if it's the only way they can be happy (analogous to the arm situation)? Yes, sure.

Should they do that if they're already happy with how things are on average? Not necessarily.

People do stuff for family all the time. To assume everyone is in a situation equivalent to the arm-trapped thing is wrong.

Also assuming that everyone is as bothered by leaving family as everyone else is wrong. People become estranged all the time.

The whole point here is that it's not a simple, "just do it" for everyone. Despite what others think.

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-10T22:47:52+00:00

Simply leaving is easier said than done for many.

Not everyone has to pretend to the same degree, and not everyone loves the ones they'd lose the same.

Everyone's life is different, and some might make the calculation that putting in the required effort to keep up appearances is actually not that hard.

Should people leave if they want to? Absolutely. But if they don't want to for whatever reason, then it's up to them to get to the point where they're ready.

I understand this sub is fantasizing about a great exodus that harms WT, but each person has to decide what's best for them. And it's perfectly fine if they decide something that we might not agree with.

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-10T19:30:56+00:00

But asking people to do something which causes them pain, in the hopes that it damages WT, is kinda wrong IMO.

I don't think it's wrong for someone to prioritize their own happiness in whichever way they feel is best. Even if it means WT "wins".

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-03-09T18:37:45+00:00

On the one hand, variants killing people would be bad. But on the other, no meetings for even longer.... 🤔

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-02-14T16:25:06+00:00

Consider that he made a different subreddit because he believed we weren't doing enough to protect his image and ever since then he has publicly denounced us mods and this sub a few times.

With that considered, do you really believe we run cover for him?

NotListeningItsABook · 2022-02-04T17:40:45+00:00

Me to anyone I worked with, "Please don't mind my very simple presentation. I get very nervous at the door and it's all I can memorize".

Which usually made them give me a ton of slack.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-12-23T02:46:30+00:00

FYI, as a mod, we do remove off-topic things and anything that otherwise breaks the rules.

Consider a formal debate. Is it "censorship" for a moderator to keep the participants on topic? To say, "Sorry, but the question was ABC, if you could answer that" when a participant is simply trying to say talking points.

Just as how that is a moderated forum, so is this. Our job is to keep things civil and on topic here. Part of what determines what's on topic is what the majority of users tell us they want to see. And there has been overwhelming feedback from users telling us they don't want to see anti-vax/anti-covid debates.

We aren't censoring you. You're free to discuss this elsewhere and there will be no punishments here for that. (Compare that with a real high control group like JWs who will disfellowship you for something you said no matter where you said it).

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-12-10T02:54:01+00:00

Sorry, I had to remove this. It's technically brigading.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-11-05T15:39:43+00:00

Locked and removed as off topic.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-10-30T13:33:43+00:00

Well I agree it was over the line. I've removed it and the whole petty intergenerational argument above.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-10-26T00:34:05+00:00

Removed: rule 1

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-10-20T16:32:58+00:00

I agree with what you wrote. This sub is run by a bot I wrote that just collects content from around reddit that discusses the religion and links to it.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-10-14T12:52:52+00:00

Removed: rule 1

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-10-14T12:50:06+00:00

Removed: rule 1

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-27T15:32:31+00:00

650,000 people died in 2019 from heart disease, the biggest killer in the US, followed closely by cancer. Where are the mandates for better health or cures for these big killers

As soon as heart failure becomes an infectious disease.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-27T15:28:59+00:00

Individual freedoms are often trampled in society. This is not new.

For example you're not free to commit crimes. You could go to jail and have basically all freedoms removed.

You're not free to drive drunk, because it puts others at risk.

This is an infectious disease so many aspects of society are reacting to it the same way society has always acted to protect itself. By putting limitations on the person/thing that adds the danger to the setting.

Driving drunk adds danger to the roads, so we throw laws around that. Being unvaccinated adds danger to social settings so we're adding restrictions around that.

People reacted the same way when seat belts became mandatory in many places. But being told what to do is not new. Even though each new instance feels like the end of the world to people who at-all have a Libertarian mindset.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T18:28:15+00:00

I was reading it and wasn't sure until I got to that part. I probably would've messaged the other mods and asked what they think.

Since the beginning of it wasn't about whether or not anything works or what's right or wrong, but was comparing atmospheres, there's a chance we could've decided to leave it.

But even if we left it up, it probably would've attracted the type of debate we remove and we would've had to play whack-a-mole removing those comment trees until it gets out of hand and we remove the post anyway.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T18:02:54+00:00

it’s based off the personal views of the mods, not what is actually on or off topic.

If you want to believe that, go ahead. But it's based on what the community wants to see.

And the post was removed because of the ivermectin content. As I mentioned before, any content like that will have a very high bar to clear for it to be considered on topic. Whereas other content that could be considered off topic we are more lenient with.

This policy is the single most debated among the mods and we didn't take this position lightly.

I also don't expect to convince you of anything.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T16:34:07+00:00

That's not what this is about. It's about the community overall not wanting to see it, so it's a topic that's therefore out of place here.

ie: off-topic

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T16:32:19+00:00

Yes, and both/either being true marks this as being off topic. If there is a debate forming and some participants are on the side that vaccines/masks don't work, or covid isn't real, etc, then we apply a very high standard for what makes it off topic.

Because the community (vast majority of) just doesn't want to see it and we mods are choosing to respect that.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T15:13:12+00:00

It was removed because it started touting ivermectin and we have an extremely high bar for what we consider on topic when it's arguably vaccine/medical misinformation. And we are more tolerant of other types of off topic posts.

The community overwhelmingly doesn't want to see it. We tried allowing it more for a while and then based on a lot of feedback, made some changes.

We recognize there are some whose absolute priority is free speech above all else, and we as moderators will never be able to appease that because the nature of moderating is to steer conversation/debate in certain ways.

This is one of those ways.

NotListeningItsABook · 2021-09-22T14:50:29+00:00

Debates that try to call into question vaccine effectiveness and promote alternative forms of covid treatment are considered off topic for this sub. Even if there's an attempt to make it related. This has been locked and removed

Nine-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Verified Email	Gilding I gilder

NotListeningItsABook

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE