Is this the cue for the Last Post to be played on a morbid trumpet? It seems I’ve outlived my welcome here at Signposts02, according to some commenters on groupsects.
Greg the Explorer, who is a sporadic commenter here, made the observation:
‘Isee also that Signposts 2 is not happy with this group of Danny lovers! They really should change te name of their blog – they don;t have a blog that is a shado of the original signposts and they actually insult it’s memory by assoicating themsleves with it’.
I am unable to respond on groupsects, being banned, so I dropped Greg a line, now possibly in moderation, on his blog, as follows:
Hi Greg! All the best with your blog.
I read this on groupsects, and wanted to respond, but I’m banned. You said:
‘I see also that Signposts 2 is not happy with this group of Danny lovers! They really should change the name of their blog – they don’t have a blog that is a shadow of the original signposts and they actually insult it’s memory by associating themsleves with it.’
Which may or may not be true, but I’ll take it as a reasonable criticism. I’m sure you’re very disappointed with what happened to Signposts, as I was, having just entered the blog a few weeks before it closed. But they were right to close down, as long as Lance was being what he was, there was a real danger of litigation, which was clearly their greatest fear.
Thankfully he has toned down and is far more civilised on his present blog, although he still comes close to the mark on occasion, in my opinion.
But as for insulting Signposts, how can that be a fair comment? Things move on, according to personnel. You have every opportunity to bridge the gap by posting on Signposts02. I suggest you contact speckandplanks, and find out how to contribute. He is still overseeeing the blog, although he doesn’t comment as much, or put up posts.
I expect you’re beef is chiefly with me, since I seem to be doing most of the posting at present, and you are less than empathetic with my Christian outlook. After all, I’m a Pentecostal, and I actually like some of the people and ministries you take exception to. But, rather than complain about the direction Signposts02 has taken, why not action your thoughts by posting something which will stir people up?
The way I see it, a blog should be allowed to continue as long as there is a community, however large or small, that is willing to contribute, and thus far, most posts have a reasonable response quota.
But if you’d like to see a different approach to some of the posts there, then I have placed the ball squarely in your court.
Then, not knowing this, obviously, RP added the following on groupsects, clearly in reference to my contributions:
‘Greg, the only commenter there who’s unhappy with this group is the usual one. That one is also almost the only one doing posts now. The blog should probably be renamed after him. Its my fault, since I originally gave him the power to author, in a spirit of non-ownership of that online community. Now that Lance is allowing comments here, that blog has done its job in allowing that community to chat somewhere in the meantime. Email any complaints to S&P, who is the administrator, and the only one with the ability to change things.’
Now, this discussion may or may not continue over at groupsects, much to the delight of Lance, if it continues in this vein, I imagine, but, nevertheless, I will put myself in the hands of regular commenters here, and let you decide my fate.
In fact it seems that moves are afoot to have things terminated one way or another as I write.
But first I’ll say that the main reason I have continued to post here, is that this blog has threatened, a few times, to die completely. I may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but all I’ve done is maintained a flow, and posted honestly, according to my convictions. It is not my fault that others have not chosen to contribute on a more regular basis.
I would probably not have posted comments about groupsects here had I been allowed to contribute there, or had my blog-name kept out of discussions there, as I am unable to comment in defence of my position, or to repent if found wrong about an issue.
That is, I would not post, unless I found groupsects, as with any blog, anywhere, to have been out of order on an issue, and posted a due opinion. The day bloggers are censured for this is a sad day for commentary.
All blogs and bloggers are in the public domain and subject to comment and criticism, unless moderation is applied. Here, there is no moderation per cé, so comments are open and relatively free. Groupsects has the luxury of a moderation system which can cut out comments at the whim of the blog moderator. In short, it is well defended already against controversy in its own right, but should be subject to reasonable criticism, like all sites, and all posts, including mine, on other blogs.
I expressed my position on Signposts02 in my earlier comment to Greg, who now claims that this has become a counter-site for groupsects, which, if anyone comes here regularly will attest, is untrue.
I have, in fact, recently, added three posts, including this one, directly referencing groupsects, out of many posts I’ve personally added on a range of issues. One post criticising the thread, not the post, of a groupsects post. One! And two, including this one, which is really a reply to Signposters, not groupsects, in response to comments made about FaceLift on groupsects, without right of reply!
If you feel I should go, I will. Just say the word, or ask S&P to pull the plug. It would be a great victory for Lance, of course, as he would be allowed to continue his assault on Pentecostals and Pastors virtually unchecked, and with the backing of the residue of ex-Signposts contributors.
I don’t think that was ever the intention of the original Signposts either, and would be an extreme position they would never condone or support.
But that is not really my problem. I am not the blog-master at Signposts02. I am a person who has been given the privilege of posting opinion, for which I am grateful to RP and S&P. I don’t see why RP or anyone should be expected to apologise for this. In fact, I think she should be applauded for allowing herself, at one time anyway, to have that kind of refreshing openness to a variety of opinions. Or should we only have one kind of argument or opinion on this kind of site, and complete agreement in all comments?
One other thing, should I be axed, or this blog deleted, simply because I post here, or have criticised aspects of groupsects modus operandi, the argument against censorship or expulsion of members with a contrary opinion by Senior Ministers of large churches would be forever lost by those who champion sites like groupsects, especially in view of the fact that I have only ever given my personal opinion, and that Pentecostals should be allowed a defence of their position without fear of exclusion or expulsion by those who disagree.
I leave it with you…