Later..............

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by Amos

I have a question:

Why make critical, negative remarks when a prominent poster tries to be courteous and leave a few kind words as a goodbye message?

EXACTLY!!!!!!

BUT that because they know no other way to respond.

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by Amos

I'm disappointed.

There was nothing untoward in his post.

Why the attitude?

Welcome to the future.....

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

He was a prominent poster?

BTW I see most of you all did not get the reason why he was leaving? You also don't know what has transpired behind the scenes too, of which I can not speak of at this time..... lol

I guess I just have more information to be able to read between the lines and interpret his "this is why I bid farewell" part.....pointing to his nick

That is fine though. But you have to realize usually when someone bids a farewell speech they say outright they have health issues or some reason they can't be here or they take one last stab at the board, the admin team or some individual user and other board members here are sick of seeing them (goodbye threads)

To bad...so sad...get over it...its a free forum.

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by Amos

And now you are casting deep dark aspersions.

Real classy.

Way to go.

No different then what I just said.....

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by NLYP

Because he is not that kind of man.....He doesnt run.
Its the direction the forum is going that is making men like him leave.....
I know...bash away......but it is not going the way it was originally intended.

It is not going the way SOME had originally intended. That is the problem. There were agendas. IMO. I knew the mix wouldn't work from day and even told some. I have never tried to undermine the authority here or take people away or try to "destroy" what was here. Two radically opposed viewpoints can't co-exist. At least not THOSE two viewpoints.

Since JY started the forum, it has gone through many twists and turns and re-inventions and it has outlived many who thought that it couldn't exist without them. I won't make a list. It will continue to move forward with or without those who don't like what is happening. However, MOST will like it because they will have more freedom to be who they are no matter what side of the continuum they are on.

That is NEVER a bad thing. I have moved on from forums before when they didn't either fit me or I them. That is no big deal. It is always that way and will always be that way.

We just need Vicki's slogan put into a sticky somewhere for all who put their thumbs in their mouths and grab their cheese to go with their whine, "Don't let the door hitcha where the good Lord........" well, you know the rest. It actually applies to me as well and I will remember it!

[Ron]

I was the one who posted last on NFCF before It shut down, perhaps history will repeat itse

[OneAccord]

Originally Posted by Ron

I was the one who posted last on NFCF before It shut down, perhaps history will repeat itse

Nope... we're still here.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

Nope... we're still here.

And wilt all the wonderful people who are still here, it looks like we'll be here for quite a while!!

Still having fun and sharpening the "iron."

[stmatthew]

My response is in red

Originally Posted by Alter Ego

This was posted by Timlan on Feb 15th of last year.


I see this forum eventually becoming another GNC.

It's already a good bit down that road.


stmatt - That is definately a false claim, as many liberal folks have continued to post here without fear of discipline


This forum isn't 42nd cousin relative to carrying on Jim Yohe's vision.


stmatt - No one ever stated that AFF was here to carry on Jims vision. We left that behind with NFCF


First is the anonymous owner thing.

It reminds me of the want-ads in the paper: "Come down to such-and-such-address to hear about an exciting, rewarding career!"

Well, the "career" was selling vacuum cleaners

Those guys knew if they put "selling vacuum cleaners" in the advertisement, no one would show up so they had to use a "bait-and-switch."

If owners have to be anonymous, they know that people would be unhappy with the situation if they were revealed.

Jim Yohe had a vision of an open forum and open discussion. He was willing to pay the price for it.

It cost him revivals and income.

These guys, in contrast, have to remain anonymous because they are afraid of getting caught in something "controversial"?

It reminds me of Richard Nixon saying that some men sought political office to make a difference. Others sought it just to "be somebody."

These present anonymous owners are definitely the latter, stroking their egos with being a "forum owner" with their hands on the ban button.


stmatt - This is ridicules. How does one be attempting to be "known as sombody" and at the same time hide their identity? Now as to their wanting to guard their ministry, it seems that they had good cause, as one of them had several issues over their "ownership".


And then we of course have some crowing that on here there is no "preacher bashing" like on NFCF.

I challenge someone to give me a specific example of "preacher bashing" on NFCF.


And most posters are like those little fish in aquariums that swim in groups; flitting from one side of the aquarium to the other, following the lead fish.

Now everyone is talking about "preacher bashing."

I'll tell you what it was a "code word" for on NFCF - when those espousing typical "ole time pentecostal" rhetoric and postions and the same tired old assumptions got their heads handed to them in argument, they then retreated behind the shield that anyone opposing their point-of-view was "preacher bashing."

I said it on the other forum and I'll say it here.

You have a majority of UPC preachers owning this forum and remaining anonymous with a few "libs" as moderators for window-dressing and you'll see bannings for "preacher-bashing" and the owners and such can convince themselves that they are "right" when they can't prove their positions with any substance.

It would be interesting to know what the financial split of paying the bills are among the supposed "owners" and we'd see how much some of the libs are there just for window dressing.

So no.

This forum is not close to NFCF.

I find it laughably ironic that BOOMM and others are on here talking about "preacher bashing" and others following their lead; herd-like, when the root problems at NFCF leading to its closure were caused by a preacher who was a big part of the forum.

If someone has to remain anonymous, it's the same principle, the same "bait-and-switch" as the vaccuum cleaner sales ad.

Of course none of this will bother some; they just need to get their internet fix so they'll post anywhere.


stmatt - more rhetoric. Many were aware of the venomous posting toward ministry of NFCF. And no, I do not believe we saw that here. But then again, you weren't here to see that.


As for me, I don't think I'll be around here long.


stmatt - Now you finally state something that is true. You didn't stay here long.

[NLYP]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

My response is in red

[/B]

AND THAT is why you were in charge!!!!!