| Author |
 Topic  |
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/09/2004 : 8:44:18 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
I reread their comments and they didnt flame anyone. We just couldnt handle them so we banned them. Both of them were plite but we just were no match. I think we shoud just face the hard truth that we cant score convincing points. Thats why I say this is alosing cause.
As a matter of fact, the 'two' persons in question were identified as being the same person. We prefer honest disagreement to deception here. Those of us who have been here a while have little trouble spotting the dual character types. It usually doesn't take them long before the alter-ego makes a remark that identifies the main character as the same person. In this case, I personally recognized the fact in one of the remarks where the alter made a personal reference to Stu that Stu never revealed in conversation or in his profile. To me, this immediately identified them as the same person. (By the way, there were two pairs of dual-identy persons banned.)
Stu and his alter-ego were left unmolested by the Admin for quite some time even though he knew they were one and the same, in order to allow him to make his point. And he made it repeatedly. But there comes a point when the redundancy amounts to nothing more than being an argumentative nuisance. Only after that point was he(they) done away with.
He makes a career of going from nudist site to nudist site to do nothing more than argue. That is a known fact. He goes to these places to speak out against what we do, not to discuss it and exchange opinions. He seems to be on some kind of Crusade.
Every so often someone comes in and tries to disrupt things, having no constructive intent. They get their say over and over again and we eventually tire of it. When enough is enough, they are shown the door. My personal opinion is that people should seek out forums and topics that interest them, instead of going places they aren't interested in.
It's funny how we all go on week after week discussing, agreeing and disagreeing with each other without incident. There is no lost cause here. We do fine thank you.
Randy 
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
 |
|
|
JohnMongomery
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 9:17:06 PM
|
Im beginning to doubt this nudism stuff all the time now. They both admitted freely they had to resign up. They werent dishonst or anythibng. Yet we coudnt handle tehm and banned them. What does that say about are position? I dont think nudism gonna fly to the public were even afraid to debate people following the rules. We have a sinking ship.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/09/2004 : 9:54:15 PM
|
Randy,
AMEN! Thanks for putting that into the right words.
This is strange...why is it that Jon Mongomery is ready to throw in the towel? Why is it that you are so willing to defend someone who did nothing to further the nudist cause but to argue against it with the same rhetoric. As I stated before, if you think this is a lost cause than you have every right to leave this board and the lifestyle. Why is it that you keep returning with posts that our lifestyle is a lost cause or "sinking ship?"
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
JohnMongomery
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 10:05:13 PM
|
I dunno. I believed in nudism a now I think it might be falese. It ays someting to me when we lie about those who are in apposition to us and then only way we can win is by locing the opposing team otu of our site. If we are to grow we have to talk to the textles. The fact we didnt but banned them tells em we dont have strong arguments.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 10:50:35 PM
|
John M.,
I don't think anyone here isn't willing to talk to any textile about our lifestyle. The problem was that the person/person's you are defending didn't want to listen to what we had to say, they just wanted to hear themselves talk through this message board.
Though I refused to banter back and forth with one of those "banned" from this message board, I happen to have a long history of reading nearly every thing posted by that person. Maybe I got the message board mixed up with the other, but believe me, that same person had been warned numerous times about his posts on the other message board. It obviously didn't take this moderator/administrator near as long to see that this person didn't need to be here, there was no positive contribution only arguments.
Enough on this....back on topic!
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 10:59:40 PM
|
John,
You're clearly missing (or ignoring) my point. Let me re-phrase in simpler terms. This guy was not banned for disagreeing. The issue of dishonesty to which I referred, is the fact that he mis-represented himself as 2 people. Using the deceptive practice of joining twice and using one to support the other is not telling the truth. One might even say lying. Not playing fair. If you can't get someone to agree with you, you don't make up another person so you have an ally.
As to the sinking ship: Pa-leeease. In the 15 months I have been a member here, the membership has grown from under 2,000 to well over 4,000. If it’s sinking, it’s because the boat is filling up fast with members. But don't worry about swamping-it's a BIG boat. So what's your story? Did you come here as a nudist and just change your philosophy this week? Sounds like you no longer are interested in nudism because you feel it's a lost cause. It's no cause at all, just something some people like to do. Everyone who wants to express themself honestly is welcome here. But if you don't enjoy nudism, nobody is making you. Quit if you want to. Nobody else is going to.
Nudism is no lost cause. I’d like to say “sorry this explanation doesn’t come with pictures”, but it does. Look to your left. I’m quite nude. Believe in nudism. It exists, and we exist. With or without your faith in us.
FireProf,
Sadly there is never an Amen. Because this sort of thing never has an ending. Every couple of weeks, someone joins with no apparent purpose other than to argue. Instant experts who know what's wrong with us and what happened here two months before they joined. Sound suspicious? I'm not making any assumptions, but I wonder if Clark Kent is going to show up soon.
Randy
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 11:04:19 PM
|
Randy,
Couldn't agree more. I am very suspicious. I think we are on the same track here.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/09/2004 : 11:20:33 PM
|
FireProf,
Agreed. We should get back on topic. Sometimes I just can't keep my mouth shut about these things. The point/counterpoint has been thoroughly done.  Nothing more to be said. Now I think it's time for me to sit back and watch. 
Randy
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
FireProf
Forum Member
|
 Posted - 11/09/2004 : 11:43:49 PM
|
Randy,
Me too! What was the topic again!
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3175 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 02:40:14 AM
|
Whether or not ladies should have the right to bear or not to bear as men do.
Randy
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
sailordave
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 07:06:44 AM
|
John, for one to join this forum with the purpose of arguing a negative point of view of nudism or the nudist lifestyle is no problem at all. My own personal feelings is living the nudist lifestyle should be done in the proper place and time, not to expect everyone to accept my body as I walk down the street or shop for groceries in mall nude. Though there are places where that is acceptable. But to come here for the purpose of causing trouble is something else. A person coming here with an opposing point of view and just wished to debate that point of view would not normally create an alternate identity as a back up and antagonist as this individual did.
My point of view on women's bare breast issue has always been for it to not be criminalized. The act of baring breast in and of itself should not be a crime. If the baring of breast creates a disturbance, that is a crime,...disturbing the peace. A woman is sensitive enough to know if her bare breast would be creating a disturbance and would then cover up to prevent the distubrance. If breast feeding is creating a disturbance then the disturbance is in the minds of the disturbed.
We the willing who are led by the unknown must do the impossible for the ungrateful.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 388 |
|
|
|
JohnMongomery
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 09:57:07 AM
|
Randy, they werent misrepresneting. They had to resign up for pc problms. Maybe Fireprof read their writings before but I didnt adn it wouldnt matter anyway. That we can only react by bannning them means we cant debate them. I think WE DIDNT WANT TO LISTEN not them. The law is on their side ogic on their side. We got our butts kicked on our own turf. That we got our butts kicked on our own turf means well get our butts kicked on their turf as well. We just dont have good argumets. Nudism is a lie.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 43 |
|
|
|
vealj
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 11:00:25 AM
|
Back on topic again....
quote:
Originally posted by sailordave
If the baring of breast creates a disturbance, that is a crime,...disturbing the peace. A woman is sensitive enough to know if her bare breast would be creating a disturbance and would then cover up to prevent the distubrance.
Dave,
I think that is crux of the whole issue. A woman baring her breasts should not be considered to be creating a disturbance by anyone. It is only the men of this world who have created this "problem" by sexualizing a woman's breast. I think as society matures more we will see a more adult approach to accepting the human body. Then again...maybe not if the Religious Fundamentalists get their way.
Take care and ...
Keep it Bare !!!
- veal
http://www.vealj.com/naturist.html
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 285 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 2:22:02 PM
|
Dear Mr. Argumentative,
We sat here and went back and forth for days with him letting him have his say, just like we're doing with you now.
In some posts you say he was banned. And in your imagination, you think you know why.
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
I reread their comments and they didnt flame anyone. We just couldnt handle them so we banned them. Both of them were plite but we just were no match. I think we shoud just face the hard truth that we cant score convincing points. Thats why I say this is alosing cause.
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
I dunno. I believed in nudism a now I think it might be falese. It ays someting to me when we lie about those who are in apposition to us and then only way we can win is by locing the opposing team otu of our site. If we are to grow we have to talk to the textles. The fact we didnt but banned them tells em we dont have strong arguments.
You say I'm lying? I've presented the facts so a 4 year old can understand them. You can't even keep straight the issues of how they left and why. You are a terrible liar. And P.S. Get a new box of crayons. The tips are getting dull. When you scribble and scramble your attempts at words, people don't take you seriously. I mean really, what the hell did half of the above post say?
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
I think woman should be able to walk around without tops. Mens breasts and womans breast teh same. I dont see why these other guys were banned though. Moderator said they could post views and they did. Our arguments are better and make sense. If we ban other views it makes us look bad.
In this one, you say both that they resigned and were banned! Wow! That's a miracle.
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
Randy, they werent misrepresneting. They had to resign up for pc problms. Maybe Fireprof read their writings before but I didnt adn it wouldnt matter anyway. That we can only react by bannning them means we cant debate them. I think WE DIDNT WANT TO LISTEN not them. The law is on their side ogic on their side. We got our butts kicked on our own turf. That we got our butts kicked on our own turf means well get our butts kicked on their turf as well. We just dont have good argumets. Nudism is a lie.
Well, which one is it? Quit or banned, and why? Well here’s what happened and why. Anybody with an intellectual capacity greater than that of a soap dish and who can read, can understand this:
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
Jochanaan
Forum Member
|
Posted - 11/10/2004 : 2:36:28 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnMongomery
Im beginning to doubt this nudism stuff all the time now. They both admitted freely they had to resign up. They werent dishonst or anythibng. Yet we coudnt handle tehm and banned them. What does that say about are position? I dont think nudism gonna fly to the public were even afraid to debate people following the rules. We have a sinking ship.
Hello, John! Glad you're here.
If it had been merely a matter of Stu and the other person debating us over an issue or two, then I would say you had a valid point. But some of us have been on nudist forums including others, for a while now and have had experience with these personas. Stu doesn't seem to have lied at all, and he is unfailingly polite and often witty, but over the course of more than a year it has become apparent that he is interested more in defending his views than listening to ours. He has shown no signs of openness to nudism. The other person--whatever his/her real name is--has been known to create a new persona when the old one has been exposed and, again, is more interested in pushing his/her own views than hearing ours.
The administrators here apparently thought the time had come to close debate, since we were only going in circles. After more than a year of debating I support them, especially regarding "Datona".
|
Edited by - Jochanaan on 11/10/2004 2:38:24 PM |
|
Country:
| Posts: 60 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
Topless Equality
