The Old Is Gone, The New Remains (Old Signposts GONE!)

Signposts02 heritage has been taken off the web. The old signposts is officially gone!

liquidpixel.com that is still on the case with CCC, was using the original Signposts to link to sources from the original. If I remember correctly, were there certain individuals who decided to save all the contents of the Signposts website onto their computers? If so, please e-mail me at specks_and_planks@hotmail.com .

Some articles might be worth looking through!

I’ve already e-mailed liquidpixel and I’m sure if he replies to me via e-mail or here, they would value if you could supply him with the information that is now taken down.

Signposts will be sorely missed by many!

RIP Signposts

 

S&P


32 thoughts on “The Old Is Gone, The New Remains (Old Signposts GONE!)

  1. On http://groupsects.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/the-prodigal-theologian/#comments the following person left this ivnvite for the original Signposts to get together:

    I am trying to create a facebook group for anon users who used to blog on the old Signposts . Is there any interest out there? It will be an invitation only private group that will not appear in the profiles . I am particulary interested in hearing how blogging on Signposts helped people but all comments would be welcome -Katharine / 4 July 2009 at 11am

    Has anyone contacted Katharin further? Or know her from the original Signposts? I briefly talked to her via e-mail. Even though I am not of the original, she said I am welcome.

    But I am suspicious as to why she has invited us to something as public as FaceBook. What are your thoughts on this. Lionfish and GregTheExplorer seem to be alright with this.

  2. This is pretty public anyway … I would hesitate to use FaceBook though …

    it’s not as if it is anonymous is it? The whole point is, it isn’t.

    Who is Katharine?

  3. that’s just it. i don’t know. does anyone know her from the original signposts? have they contacted anyone else? i s’pose they got in contact with her.

  4. I was on the original signposts, then Lance’s spinoff, then this one … eventually.

    So who is Katharine?

    Warning!!! Danger Will Robinson! Warning!!!

  5. I’ve got a copy of the original signposts. I’ll email you S&P. Also I did a search and Katharine was a contributor, mainly in 2006

  6. sweet. thanks wazza. I thought it was you. the original signposts was an information gold mine.

    thanks again.
    see you over e-mail!

  7. Yeah. I’ve managed to find out more about Kath. She’s okay. Just being really careful!

    I might join under a facebook alias.
    Ok. I thought it might be archived. Thanks wazza. That’s great. I’ll check my e-mail tonight.

  8. I didn’t want to touch it because it was Facebook also – too many invasions of privacy, apparently even if one of your ‘friend’s’ gets their privacy settings wrong. Maybe I’m just too cautious.

    S&P – good idea to set up this thread. Good to be careful re Katherine’s identity, and also to have it affirmed that she’s OK. I don’t think you are too careful.

    Sad about the original Signposts disappearing. Great you had a copy, wazza.

  9. I’ve been on Facebook for a while now. To me the privacy issue only becomes a problem if I post something that offends others in a more secular way.

    For instance, I love the comedian Eddie Izzard (check him on youtube – hilarious!)His use of the “f” word can be offensive – I don’t like it but his humour, brilliant. In saying that, as a Christian, my conscience on this issue is my problem but I don’t wish to offend others by posting his clips as much as I’d like to!

    Anything else, say religious issues, I’ll happily post because I hold those things close to my heart and want to share them, especially those still caught up in charismania (love that word!).

    Some of my facebook friends still go to C3 and sometimes they get annoyed but at least we can discuss things and quite often agree to disagree!

    I make no secret (on Facebook)of the fact that we left C3 because of their faulty teaching/doctrine.We told PP that when we left. A few years ago, one particular lady challenged me seriously on my doctrinal stance. I thank God for her, she was right and I had the opportunity to thank her – a very special conversation via chatroom took place between us.

    Who knows how many people are going through this spiritual upheaval and need places like this and Facebook to discuss things. As long as we take our faith and God’s Word seriously, perhaps we can make a difference.

  10. That does sound good, Teddy.

    Some of my friends that go to C3 know I post here and aren’t too thrilled by it. Others don’t find it an issue.

    If I did Facebook, there’d have to be no connection with me here though. Privacy issues affect many people, including friends still at church.

  11. come off it Greg.

    Too many people I know, in Church, put their lives on FaceBook. At least one person I know has been deeply embarrassed by it.

    Inevitably, people will make mistakes and other people will be able to access what could be confidential information. If people get identified, then anonymity will be trashed and then the fall out will be very difficult, especially for those who are in a difficult church situation.

    And why?

    Cos Facebook is ‘much more convenient’ to use.

    But it isn’t. We will still have to type it all anyway. It’s just that we will be visible. People will try to link to us, and instead of being rather underground, the potential is we’ll be in everyone’s face.

    So what’s the point of that exactly? I don’t use FaceBook (I’m an IT professional) but my wife has 2 profiles. One for Church and one for Family. The number of people who try to join both …

    Anyway, since I know how people use and abuse FaceBook, why do we want to go there? I’m safely anonymous, but if I were on FaceBook, then that anonymity would be blown completely and then I’d be facing very difficult conversations that would get nowhere. (That’s why I haven’t had them)

    Indeed, I have already had some conversations about FakeLand and serial adulterer Todd “alcoholic” Bentley … you know the guy … the one ‘commissioned’ by Peter Wagner in June last year only for Wagner to say a few weeks later “[Bentley is] a pathological liar and a demonised mess”.

    I’ve had those conversations with people only for other people to attempt to defend the indefensible.

    “Well the problem there was …” No. The Problem was Todd has been worshiping an “Angel” and not God. He then believed his own hype and figured he could do what he liked. So he did alcohol and he did his mistress. It only stopped when it came out. He then decided that he could make things right with God by divorcing his wife and marrying his mistress.

    I feel slightly sorry for the mistress. She’ll be worrying about the next mistress, won’t she? Probably by the time she’s about 6 months pregnant, I reckon.

    The whole charismatic scene is a complete disaster and really, if these clowns had any integrity … Todd would have been excommunicated and his name dragged through the mud. Instead, the church is a laughing stock.

    Boy … it must be the coffee. I am really, really angry now!

    And this is my point. Put this all on FaceBook and we’ll end up at least being thrown out of our local churches. Local schisms could happen which may or may not be helpful. We can pretty much say what we like here. But once it’s on FaceBook … we’ll get a wider audience.
    It’ll be impossible to keep everyone anonymous. I don’t want to create difficulties for anyone, and I don’t want anyone down under causing me difficulties in the old country … know what I mean?

    It’s the law of unintended consequences at work. I’ll be honest … I am concerned if even Signposts02 is mentioned in FaceBook al la “hey google Signposts02”.

    so … be very careful. I don’t know Katharine. Other have vouched for her … great. I am more concerned about FaceBook than I am about A.N.Other.

    Shalom

  12. I’m not concerned about Katherine, but I am about Facebook.

    There was a sad story in the media last week where a Mum killed her two babies. It was a terrible story, and I can’t see any public interest served by publishing their photographs. But media hunted them down on Facebook and they were published over the country.

    The argument was that since they were on Facebook, they were in the public domain, and publishable.

    Anything we say here is in the public domain. But we can keep our privacy if we wish. This preserves the privacy of others as well. I might not like the way my ex-church did things, but I don’t want to publish the pastor’s names or embarrass any people there by accident. If I became known, as with others here, there would be unintended consequences for others here. As RP, I can make observations in a general way without dragging anyone else into it.

    Facebook has the potential to destroy that. So while maybe I’d join someone’s private page with no links to this site, I would not join a site that contains the level of discussion we have here. Even if I knew the people personally, I’d want to be darned sure they were up to speed with all the IT security needed. This is because I understand that you can have all your settings just fine, but if another person linked to you doesn’t, then you can be ‘seen’.

    Anyway, its a personal decision. It might not raise those issues for everyone, and I’m sure those who are comfortable with it would enjoy it. I’d rather err on the cautious side – but that’s typical of me.

  13. “There was a sad story in the media last week where a Mum killed her two babies. It was a terrible story, and I can’t see any public interest served by publishing their photographs. But media hunted them down on Facebook and they were published over the country.”

    Good old MediaWatch!

    I’m with Bull all the way on this. I remember reading an article (on the original Signposts?), that said that places like CCC black-list you if you are against them. Some people they did black-list were people who had some serious problems against what they do.

    I gave Katherine the link here. For some reason, she hasn’t decided to join…

  14. … which is a shame.

    Look, FaceBook is easy to use etc. But it’s fundamentally flawed, security-wise. The new head of MI5 has had his photos found on FaceBook and published in a national newspaper.

    That’s absurd, isn’t it?

    Most of us have friends, relations etc in CCC/Vineyard/Hillsong/super-spiritual-charismatic-pentecostal-WOF-NameItClaimIt-BlabItGrabIt-etc … since we are posting on this site in an anonymous fashion, I suspect that most of us do not wish to have those conversations with our nearest and dearest who are involved in these movements. We are maybe not ready to have our relationships broken over accusations from some pulpits after our names get dragged through the mud, without good cause.

    So … be careful out there.

    Shalom

  15. Anonymity is overrated. And even an alias won’t keep you safe. I was recognised as the ADHD librarian at a conference a few years ago. I was talking to someone and she recognised my writing style from my speaking style (that is quite a skill). So although there are probably things online which I said when I thought I was anonymous I no longer care too much. Hell, a search on facebook for ADHD librarian finds me (and my no-longer secret real name).

    Oh and mark me down as someone who misses the old signposts. But if I had found this version before tonight I had forgotten about it.

  16. Hi Guys,

    just came across your comments about Katharine – still read this blog from time to time but don’t have the time and energy to contribute .

    The facebook idea was not a conspiracy – I do exist outside cycerspace and this was an idea that didn’t work on Facebook due to people being concerned about privacy issues .

    Best wishes to all of you

    Katharine ( a original Hillsong and Signposts member) and friend of Reve

  17. Yes, it should probably be changed back, out of respect for the original. Nonetheless, it is good to remember.

  18. I think we need to have a new banner – we are starting to get a few visitors and as funny as it is, we need to be taken more seriously don’t you think?

    Like “Ostendo Via” – latin for “show the way”

  19. I tried to find Signposts in Latin, a language I tried to study for 4 years. Ostendo via was the closest I could find. Combine the English and Latin? How seriously “smart” would we be taken then? 🙂

  20. I wouldn’t mind a new banner. Even though its fun seeing the little avatars, in a way it might imply a club, and a picture that didn’t focus on personalities might be more general and welcoming to people who aren’t on the banner itself.

    I am not sure what sort of picture though. Perhaps something that reflects the ebb and flow of debate here.

  21. And our methodology will be so popular, it will require a book to be published! Then a Larry King interview, perhaps Oprah – oh the price of fame!

    And the movie – in 3d of course.

Comments are closed.