QUOTE (EnlightenmentHK @ Apr 08 2005, 13.58)

Ummm...no actually I don't. At least not to the point of getting people psycotically pissed off at eachother. Slagging off on someone's nation in a rather exxagerated sense is the internet equivilent of a 'your mama' joke.

There was only one person who got psychotically pissed and I don't know how his actions keep getting swept under the carpet.

Sajse, considering the subject matter, the timing, and the utter callousness and insulting nature of half the comments in this thread, Bowspearers reaction is not the least bit unpredictable or really that unjustified.

He lost control, sure...but he was given fairly good reason to. Imagine a 4-5 people prodding someone with a stick continually while he sits at a funeral for a friend. When that person snaps and takes a swing at everyone, are you really surprised? And while I'm against violence in most situations, if he does connect with someone, I can't really say that its not deserved. You don't needle a person to madness unprovoked than complain that he's irrational or mean a day later.

What? Look EHK, I usually tend to either A) Agree with alot of what you say, or B) At least understand where you're coming from when I do not agree. But this is just beyond logic. Bowspearer's reaction was ENTIRELY unjustified. Read this thread with a fresh eye from beginning to end. There is no getting around the fact that he was hostile & threatening when other responses would have been more appropriate. Your analogy to him being at a funeral while people tease is not appropriate for this, and is in fact indicitive of just the kind of thing some people on here were arguing with him.

Bowspearer did not know Karol Wojtyla personally. He knew 'The Pope'. That is to say, he knew what the man represented in his eyes through what he read or watched. In all actuality, it's entirely probable that everything he knew about this man, he knew through a third party. Thats fine, but it's a far cry from knowing someone personally. Now this is not to say that you can't feel for someone you've never met, especially in a religious context, but it's not the same as attending a friends funeral. I actually find that insulting. The Pope was a public figure. Now for ill or good, that opens him up to scrutiny and controversy. The death of any controversial public figure is of course going to spark a discussion such as this. As I said elsewhere in this thread, This same discussion is happening all over the world. In the context of the internet, just do a google search and you'll find 20million message board threads in which people were talking about both the good and bad things people percieved about the Pope. I will not be made to feel guilty by someone for making my feelings known.

Bowspearer entered into this discussion with the intention of defending someone he thought of as a great man. I have no problem with that. But to resort to threats and baseless name calling when people do not share your point of view is not acceptable. If he was so emotionally charged about this that he couldn't discuss it, then he should have simply closed this thread...went over to the main board...and started talking about Optimus Prime. The fact is, he was more concerned about being 'right' and proving to us we were faithless assholes then he was about expressing remorse. Hell, he even went to another message board and linked to this thread just to say " look at these cold-hearted assholes!". It's a shame really, because aside from this particular discussion, I never had a problem with Bow. I mean, we're all here first and foremost because we share a common interest. I actually wish he'd come back after a fashion & continue to throw his two cents in on the TF page.

Well I decided not to post an overly long reply because Sinister said it much better than me, but I want to add one last thing.

You say the Pope is very important to people who follow and agree with him, and that we should respect that. Well he's very important to people who DISAGREE with him, and they should respect that too.

This is a message board, not a funeral parlour. If you seek solace then go to a church. Not some place which is reknowned for people sticking their oar in.

You can call me what you want but at the end of the day I respect your right to free speech. I won't viciously attack you and I won't threaten your physical wellbeing just because we disagree.

I suppose if everyone was like Bowspearer we'd all be better off eh? Let's take a look at the Middle East...

I'm not condoning the full extent of his reaction, I think he did push it too far, but I understand why it occured. And I wasn't surprised by it, given the provocation. And I think anyone who claims to be surprised is deluding themselves.

People came into this thread with a chip on their shoulders. If they weren't hoping and praying to offend the other side as much as possible, you still couldn't fault someone for concluding as much from the tone and content of the posts. When you're trolling that blatantly (or really that much an an insensitive asshole) during a time like this, don't be surprised and surely don't cry victim when something or someone blows up in your face.

QUOTE (mr_sinister_31 @ Apr 08 2005, 18.30)

In all actuality, it's entirely probable that everything he knew about this man, he knew through a third party. Thats fine, but it's a far cry from knowing someone personally.

The friend's funeral analogy is pushing it, but not by much. They did not personally know eachother, but truly great, influential public figures have a way of connecting with people thousands of miles away. They have a way of speaking to a crowd of millions, yet creating the image of a one on one conversation. Given the general age on this board, I doubt Bowspearer knew or watched JP during his more charismatic years, but that still does not mean there isn't an emotional attachment and a great sense of loss, approaching the level of a real funeral, when he did pass. We don't know that nor can we really speculate with any accuracy. But we do know that a hell of alot of Catholics and non-catholics alike were in for some pretty serious mourning their lives. Whether his percieved level of personal loss was reasonable or not is irrelevant, the fact is alot of people would be feeling this sort of loss and we all knew it. Yet some people still came in with an apparent intent to throw shit before the thread even began.

QUOTE (mr_sinister_31 @ Apr 08 2005, 18.30)

Bowspearer entered into this discussion with the intention of defending someone he thought of as a great man. I have no problem with that. But to resort to threats and baseless name calling when people do not share your point of view is not acceptable. If he was so emotionally charged about this that he couldn't discuss it, then he should have simply closed this thread...went over to the main board...and started talking about Optimus Prime.

Firstly, perhaps he should have ignored it and posted elsewhere. But I know as well as anyone that its pretty damned tough to ignore a timely, relevant issue thats personally important to you. And its even tougher to respond when it appears that others are treating the issue wrongly or poorly. So I'm not gonna fault him for posting.

Secondly, this isn't about a difference of opinion. Its not about simple disagreement, honest disputes of the facts, or anything of that sort. Its not about not being able to take constructive criticism. Post 3 we had someone praying for the Pope to die. A little later clarifying that all of Catholicism is a 'paganfest'. What the hell is the least bit intelligent or constructive about any of that? And I'm not even including the unsupported accusations or insulting, baseless comparisons. Do you think such comments were intentionally written to incite an angry reaction. And if by chance they weren't, do you think a reasonable person, given the situation and timing, would conclude that they're highly likely to cause such an angry reaction? If you answered yes to either one, don't we call that trolling? And don't we frown on trolling, in most communities, on particularly sensitive subjects?

And at the very least, if we do condone trolling, don't we say 'Damn right' and 'bastard got what he deserved' when someone snaps and goes ballistic on a troller? As I said, most people came into this thread with a chip on their shoulder. Some so eager to defend that they'd find offense anywhere and overreact accordingly. And others so eager for an opportunity to slag the Catholic Church that they'd take every cheap shot they could find and wait for the inevitable reaction.

QUOTE (SAJse @ Apr 08 2005, 19.19)

Well he's very important to people who DISAGREE with him, and they should respect that too.

This is a message board, not a funeral parlour. If you seek solace then go to a church. Not some place which is reknowned for people sticking their oar in.

You can call me what you want but at the end of the day I respect your right to free speech. I won't viciously attack you and I won't threaten your physical wellbeing just because we disagree.

His threats were uncalled for. No matter how heated the discussion, there's no place for violence or the threat of violence. And sure there is free speech. But for the people without the sense enough to know what not to say, and when not to say it, when they do behave poorly, they should expect an often unpleasant response. And noone is trying to limit your speech, but another part of free speech is everyone else's right to rip you a new asshole for saying something extremely wrong or inappropriate.

As you say, its a message board, not a therapy session. With that I agree. But nonetheless, you could predict that sort of likely reaction from the type and tone of statements you were making. You made those statements anyway. I have little sympathy for the reaction you got.

And as I've said a number of times, the comments went far beyond criticism, constructive or otherwise, many were downright insulting and very intentionally so. It appeared, from my seat, that you came in here purely to incite people Sajse.

Well you succeeded.

What the hell are you smoking? I cannot even craft a logical rebuttal to this statement because it is so full of subjective reasoning. I will give you this EHK...you are very good at twisting an issue around on itself. Circular logic indeed. You are lumping everyone who didn't agree with Bow into one category and insisting that we deserved what we got from him. At the beginning of the above quote you dismiss everything that this discussion was actually about and present the theory that everyone only came in here to bait him. Such horseshit. I'm sorry that you cannot grasp the greater truth of this thread.

Sinister, I already went over most of the examples of inexcusable behavior or comments throughout the thread in an eariler post. It was widespread, though there were some who were worse than others.

The worst offender, in my view, was responsible for all the examples in the last post. The issue was, Bow went ballistic and started telling people off, was it justfied/right/wrong/understandable/or out of left field. I wasn't trying to lump everyone into a single category. I simply asked a series of questions to gauge your take on the matter. Did this person in particular intentionally troll or incite this kind of reaction. And if he did troll, shouldn't there be a bit of understanding or even support for the guy who did tell him off? Even if we can agree that bow definately lost control and went to far. Not saying that everyone in the thread created this mess, though there were numerous contributers. But I am curious why there was almost no understanding or support for Bows side, nor condemnation for those who would qualify as 'trollers'.

And the person I was talking about is of course Sajse. Sorry to say man, but you were a textbook definition of a troller in my view.

And dismissed what the thread was about? What about this thread wasn't worth dismissing? 1 post of mourning to start it, than people start flinging shit by post 3? Hitler comparisons by page 3? Pedofile jokes by page 2? The few things that could remotely approach actual criticism were unsupported and somewhat baseless. And when those rare examples popped up, I argued them as I would any other issue in any other thread.

This thread and the conduct within it are good for little else than dismissing. And its probably the best idea for all parties considered.

And I don't think everyone came in here to bait people, but Sajse...I think you did. And if you didn't, you knew that'd be the result of your comments anyway, so its just as bad. Bait was tossed out, someone took it, got pissed off, overreacted...my question is, do you agree there was blatant baiting. And if you think there was, do you find Bows reaction understandable or completely unreasonable?

I became aware of certain things said in here after I left, so let me make a few things very clear! This was never about people having the right to their own opinions- that was never in dispute! When I came across this thread, I honestly went in there taking it on face value, thinking that it would merely be a thread where people of catholic or similar beliefs, or admirers of the pope would exchange sympathies, and that those who had a problem with the catholic church would have had even a basic level of common decency and common couresy (not to mention enough of a lack of egocentricity to realise that some board members felt a connection to the man and would be grieving), realised that the world wouldn't end if they didn't voice their opinions right then and there, and saved voicing them for another time, even during the conclave (when the new pope is elected). What I witnessed utterly appalled me- people with more ego and self-centredness than decency, who either had such an overinflated opinion of themselves that they were compelled to speak their minds regardless of how innappropriate the timing of those remarks might be; or completely vile human beings who decided that distastefull remarks and comparisons were a way of trying to be clever! To say I was caught off guard by it is an understatement- as I found myself having to respond to the extremely poorly timed, the despicale, and the unfactual! This is the very reason why so many people here grew to loathe nazinazinazinazinazinazinazi! I honestly have to wonder after this if some of you weren't raised by wolves!

As for my connection to the pope, to be blunt, in some ways he was like a favorite uncle. Not only was he the head of my faith, but the only one I have ever known. Have I ever physically met the man? No. Having a powerful experience in the pressence of the man however is an entirely different story. In 2002 I had the privelledge of attending World Youth Day (an international Catholic - although it's open to anyone really - youth festival) in Toronto. While I was there, I attended a couple of mases said by him, where I felt an incredibly strong spiritual (for the non religious, possibly substitute spiritual with emotional) connection, and even though it was one of hundreds of thousands of people at the mass, it felt in some ways like I was the only one there. It's the kind of experience (rel;igious or otherwise) that stays with you, and has an impact on you for the rest of your life. So in short, while I didn't personally know the man, I did feel a strong personal connection to the man!

Enlightenment's funeral analogy was spot on. Regardless of what people ight thin or how they might trey to justify it, that was what it felt like! Did I completely lose it? Sure, however by the same token I was well and truly provoked to that point by the end of it! To those who feel I should have stayed away, this thread was never about 'the evils of catholocism', or to comment on where the pope may have not been the best person in the world during his life; it was about the Pope's condition and about condolences, for the man. Ks68 even said as much- I entered it expecting as much! The fact is that it would have stayed that way if certain individuals hadn't decided to disregard the purpose of it and use it as a platform for their own opinions to satisfy their own egos. Last I checked that was known as hijacking a thread! The majority of active posters in this thread have conducted themselves in a way that any person weith any level of common decency would feel pure shame over!

Oh and Angelophile, in regards to comments I made regarding the character of some people on here, there's an old saying: if it barks like a dog, walks like a dog and wags its tal, then chances are it is a dog! Now people here can try to justify their actions here and pass copmparisons all they like, but the fact is that those of you who aren't scumbags and completely without a conscience (and therefore worthy of nothing but contempt to begin with) know deep down what you did was wrong. One day you'll have to deal with it, maybe days, weeks, months or even years from now. When that happens, you'll have your own consciences to deal with, and it is for that reason I will not be responding to anything else I become aware of here. Oh and before I forget- perceptor MC, my condolences for L.Ninio were there in a standalone post- look hard enough and you'll find it. Next time you might want to do what I've been accused of not doing and that's actually read a person's posts.

Lastly, to Enlightenment, Mighty Robot, ks68, Bluestreak_26, Frenzy, Terminal Hasmpster, Grimbot, TheMatrix, GJC, thankyou for standing up for common decency here (yes, that was common decency and not catholocism). Sometimes the easy option is to just let people behave badly, however as the old saying goes- all that need happen for evil to triumph in the world is for good men to do nothing! I commend you all!

I thought you left.

Last word syndrome continues I see.

Enlightenment, you've admitted your own reason for posting in this thread is not because you care about the pope, but rather because you want to have and win an argument. If anything defines a troll it is that.

Sinister has expressed in his posts eloquently the feelings of many of us. There's no point perpetuating this, just go back, read them and understand.

QUOTE (EnlightenmentHK @ Apr 08 2005, 22.05)

As you say, its a message board, not a therapy session. With that I agree. But nonetheless, you could predict that sort of likely reaction from the type and tone of statements you were making. You made those statements anyway. I have little sympathy for the reaction you got.

Who's asking for sympathy? Some guy on a message board said some nasty things about me, big fucking yahoo.

And as for trolling and my intentions in this thread, well you obviously didn't notice that I stayed away for nearly 3 pages in the hopes that this thread would die and divisions wouldn't become so great as to be irrepairable. As it happens the insanity and twisted logic got to such a level that by the end of page 4 I just couldn't resist the urge to post.

Will I apologise for that? No.

What else do you want from me because I certainly don't agree with you?

From the goldfish bowl POV I have as completely non religous I find this thread amusing in parts.

No, I'm not laughing at a dead guy, I'm laughing at the whole suggestion that one day we'll 'pay ofr sins' or consciences or whatever.

And fair enough, Bow pointed out how he once was in a mass with the Pope and so felt close to him. But like with the Princess Diana thing, I completely fail to understand how one can grieve, and I mean GRIEVE, not 'just' be moved or upset, for someone they don't know. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm saying I, personally, find the concept about as boggling as a chocolate teapot.

So maybe I'm an ignorant, maybe I'm enlightened. Maybe I'm goin to Hell, maybe I'm going to Heaven. Maybe, when I die, I'll decide where I'm going or I'll have no say in the matter because, well, I'll be dead quite frankly.

But by far the saddest thing I've come across here is Bow judging people and categorising them. Surely the only person who can judge us humans from Bow's POV is indeed Bow's God. How's He gonna react when he sees His disciple trying to do His job?

At the end of the day, comes night. Also, this IS an internet forum and with the best intnetions, anyone's thread may get hijacked and discussion is encouraged in the free world, even if it does unfortunately turn into extremely bad taste. But, get over it, stick to your own opinions and may your socks never smell too bad. Peace out.

QUOTE (Angelophile @ Apr 09 2005, 03.39)

Enlightenment, you've admitted your own reason for posting in this thread is not because you care about the pope, but rather because you want to have and win an argument. If anything defines a troll it is that.

Anglo, where the hell exactly did I ever admit this? Some revisionist English going on here without my knowledge?

QUOTE (Angelophile @ Apr 09 2005, 03.39)

Sinister has expressed in his posts eloquently the feelings of many of us. There's no point perpetuating this, just go back, read them and understand.

Right...if I disagree with his arguments, its simply because I don't understand them, and should of course dutifully reread until I do. Thats rather arrogant and quite presumptuous of you. The argument is 'bad' so 'I' should sit down and shut up? Why doesn't that standard apply universally?

And on a side note, most of Sinister's response wasn't very applicable. I can only assume that it resulted from a misinterpretation of one of my earlier posts.

QUOTE (SAJse @ Apr 09 2005, 04.30)

And as for trolling and my intentions in this thread, well you obviously didn't notice that I stayed away for nearly 3 pages in the hopes that this thread would die and divisions wouldn't become so great as to be irrepairable. As it happens the insanity and twisted logic got to such a level that by the end of page 4 I just couldn't resist the urge to post.

And I stayed away for 2 pages and a few days until 'I couldn't resist' anymore...and of course got criticized for not letting the thread die. But I hardly think you should be applauded for exercising restraint only after you exercised none at all.

QUOTE (SAJse @ Apr 09 2005, 04.30)

Will I apologise for that? No.

What else do you want from me because I certainly don't agree with you?

Perhaps some recognition of the fact that you are the person singlely most responsible for the state of this thread and the more than ugly turn that it took. (Or at the very least, one of two most responsible).

Nope. Many people expressed their views on page 1. I only returned after Bowspearer started raving like some possessed lunatic and attacked me.

And before you say it I don't agree with his reasons for doing so. He can say what he likes because it's a free world(ish) but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

I can only agree to disagree.

Sajse, the tone and direction of this thread was compromised, and really pretty much destroyed, the third post in here. Where you appear to 'pray' for JP to die because of your personal disatisfaction with the Catholic church. This was before Bow or anyone else showed up or made a comment the least bit controversial.

You later call him deluded and the church a paganfest without provocation. And of course, the entire faith is 'crap and crud' in your view. You set this entire thread up to fall. You're conduct set the groundwork for our present state of affairs. It was unprovoked, uncalled for, and really quite inexcusable.

You were 'attacked' because you did nothing more then lower your shoulder and mindlessly attack yourself the moment you began posting in this thread. And don't act surprised that Bow started 'raving like a possessed lunatic', you helped more than any other individual (except Bowspearer himself) make that possible.

Why did you think it was 'ok' to say what you did? Not from a 'legal, free speech' perspective, but from a 'what would a decent human being do in the same situation' sort of perspective?

1. WTF?! I didn't say we should pray for his death. I was talking about him "seeing the light".

2. I was provoked. When you ask someone to clarify their post you are provoking them.

3. See 1.

4. Posting in emotive topics weeds out the nutters. I'm glad we found one before some poor bastard meets up for a pint and gets glassed over a disagreement. Remember the carving knife?

EDIT: In that last part are you talking about me praying for the Pope's death or saying he was deluded (along with the crap n' crud comment)? If it was about the latter comments then I admit I could've worded them in a less confrontational manner but that is all.

QUOTE (ks68 @ Apr 01 2005, 16.01)

Right now, his condition keeps worsening. Let's pray for him.

QUOTE (MightyRobot @ Apr 01 2005, 16.08)

Agreed!

QUOTE (SAJse @ Apr 01 2005, 16.26)

Although considering he's the head of the Catholic church I think we'll be praying for different reasons.

*note the lack of smilies*

Ummm...exactly what am I misinterpreting here? One post offers condolenses and prayers for his well being. You suggest that you're not praying for the same reasons, the 'lack of smiles' to imply that you're serious about it. Factor in your rather obvious hatred of the Catholic church and the fact that you never clarify just what you are praying for...what other reasonable conclusion are we to reach? Am I to be faulted for assuming the most obvious conclusion? And if 'seeing the light' is the explanation, its represented absolutely nowhere within your posts nor can it reasonably be assumed by their context. And if I can ask without 'provoking' you, can you clarify what you mean by 'seeing the light'?

And how is 'can you clarify that' provocation? And isn't it a bit disingenuous to claim you were provoked...when you spent your first several posts doing nothing but provocation? Isn't it a bit late to claim victimhood by than?

And the last part of my most recent post was in reference to all your earlier comments...and probably some of the later ones.

this thread has gotten WAY to philosophical. if you want philosiphy, then listen to the philosipher song by monty python.

if people wonder why there are massive wars and shit goin on due to religion, read this thread. dag, yo. this is why im not religious, i do little things to appease others, but i havnt actually gone to church in two years. i dont feel like i've missed anything, but if you all want to go on and drag this topic on and on and on with everyone gettiing pissed at each other, ok. i'm gonna go turn sunstreaker into a GTO.

Agreed. Bow was the only one who clearly cared what he was talking about. Enlightenment's just arguing for argument's sake now.

Troll.

Enlightenment - I can't be blamed for your faulty assumptions. First you assumed that I as a Christian would wish death on someone, as opposed to them having a change in heart (seeing the light >IMO<). Whatever you thought about my character you already failed on my above point. You went through ten pages of this thread thinking I would wish death on a person while siding with a guy who actually arrived at a point where he DID wish death and physical harm on someone.

it's a pretty disgusting thing to wish death on a person and if you thought that too you should have raised your assumption MUCH earlier, rather than go through ten pages of a thread with that baggage.

Again, I don't claim to be a victim. I'm just arguing my point here. If someone asks for clarification of my posts (knowing there could be an answer they don't like) then they are provoking a reply regardless of the content.

provoke - to call forth

That's all I'm saying. I'm not blaming you or Bow for anything I say. I'm just using the word in its most basic form (sort of).