Censorship Isn't Christians' Biggest Social Media Problem

[Squire Robertsson]

There has been suspicion for some time that those running this board know little if any of American culture and especially of Christianity, not to mention their English is not very good. (While it should be obvious, I will spell it out clearly here. That last statement was sarcasm. )

While we do get the random Canadian or Englishman, the Admin Team at the moment is American.

 

[JonC]

While we do get the random Canadian or Englishman, the Admin Team at the moment is American.

Even @Salty ?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

While we do get the random Canadian or Englishman, the Admin Team at the moment is American.

Quite. And the more important issue is that the Baptist Board is a Baptist board run by Christians who are Baptists and not new to the faith.

 

[Salty]

Even @Salty ?

I am proud to say that I am a Mutt-American!!!

 

[Salty]

Sorry, I misunderstood your question. I was not referring to the ownership of this board. I was referring to the hatred and meanness that is often exhibited by posters towards those who disagree with them, especially in the "News & Current Events" and "Political Debate & Discussion" forums.

I think we could add C-vs- A to that list!

 

[JonC]

I am proud to say that I am a Mutt-American!!!

Huh. It wasn't you that called me to let me know the IRS needed my bank information?????

 

[Salty]

Huh. It wasn't you that called me to let me know the IRS needed my bank information?????

Nope, Squire used to call me quite a bit - only to inpersanate me!

 

[SGO]

Running the Baptist Board is not the same as owning it.

That is, unless the mods and admins are shareholders.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Running the Baptist Board is not the same as owning it.

That is, unless the mods and admins are shareholders.

Perhaps not technically, though usually an owner ultimately controls what goes on.

But what is the point, if any, of noting such a technicality here?

 

[Salty]

... That is, unless the mods and admins are shareholders.

I wish!

 

[JonC]

I wish!

Is Brent still an owner?

 

[SGO]

You guys are on the inside and you don't know who owns this forum?

 

[SGO]

Perhaps not technically, though usually an owner ultimately controls what goes on.

But what is the point, if any, of noting such a technicality here?

Sorry not a "technicality".

This is from post #1:

"19 of the top 20 Christian Facebook pages are actually not run by Christians trying to encourage other Christians with gospel truths—they’re troll farms run by Eastern European internet mobs that use encouraging Christian(ish) messages to manipulate and deceive Christians who don’t know any better."

He who has the gold rules in the secular world.

Don't you want to know IF there may be an underlying bias or potential bias on this forum?

 

[JonC]

You guys are on the inside and you don't know who owns this forum?

You joined a forum without knowing who owned it????

Last I heard Brent acquired the board. This was 3 or 4 years ago. This kinda goes with another Christian board. Andrew had it before then, but not for very long. But Brent professes to be a Christian. And the owners do not run the board. I do not know that he has been on this forum since his intro back then. I think it is just an investment.

I assumed you guys must have heard something new.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Don't you want to know IF there may be an underlying bias or potential bias on this forum?

Nyah. No worries. It's already obvious to me.

In a post or a thread, I can usually find the links provided and check the trail if I really want. For an article, I can typically discern what the author is about. See post #19 for a quick rundown in this particular case.

For a board, I can generally discern its bent and intentions, if any. I've decided this one is a Baptist board just as its name says, and those running it are decidedly biased toward the Baptist position. There are also personal biases expressed by them, but so what? Baptists are not a monolithic group.

In any case, unless I miss my guess, KH had no intentions of suggesting this board is owned or run by any Eastern European mobs. The point was about how Christians are treating each other, and sadly, we don't need such mobs to set us at each other's throats. That sort of nonsense was happening long before the Internet or even computers were around.

 

[Salty]

... and those running it are decidedly biased toward the Baptist position. There are also personal biases expressed by them, but so what? Baptists are not a monolithic group. ...

aint that the truth!

 

[JonC]

aint that the truth!

You can say that again!

 

[SGO]

That Baptists are diverse is proven by this forum.

But if you don't really care if or think that ownership can exert influence of board policies just because the day-to-day operations are overseen by the mods and admins, ok for you.

I am reasonably sure KenH did not have this intention when he first posted the thread.

However, the general principle about ownership exerting pressure on what is published, in a general sense, is borne out by who owns the US mainstream media.

Who are the 6 companies that own US media?
By 2000, six corporations had ownership of most media, and today five dominate the industry: Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany and Viacom.
Who are the 6 companies that own US media?

Here is one from Yahoo,com today:

Iowa's GOP leaders stand by Trump as he repeats false claims

No bias here, eh?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Quite frankly, the lack of discernment or desire to apply it here is most concerning, if not appalling.

The articles and "report" have nothing to do with the functions of the Baptist Board. The articles are very misleading. The vulgar report also, though it sort of admits it up front.

There are several concerning points in them all. They should not be accepted at face value.

The main concerns the report expresses have to do with profiting off others' efforts and steering people away from the original producers.

Saying there are bad actors out there manipulating people, while true, is nebulous. It has nothing to do with the Baptist Board or even with the expressed concerns of that "report." I cannot say the same about the "report" itself or the MIT article. The article KH posted unwisely cited them.

 

[JonC]

There is also an issue with the concept of "free-speech". The definition of free-speech is "the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations".

What many seem to mean my "free-speech" is "freedom from responsibility".

This is especially true when it comes to politics. Some use "free-speech" as an opportunity to freely misrepresent.

I'm going to use this example as it is recent

on another forum I made this comment:

... I am vaccinated. That is me taking responsibility for my health. @asterisktom is not. But he has considered the risk of covid...Both of us are responsible for our health even though we have chosen differently.).

A member quoted me as saying exactly the opposite of what my post communicated:

"That is me taking responsibility for my health. @asterisktom is not."

For some reason there are Christians who are able to set aside their faith when it comes to controversial topics (particularly with politics).

But I suggest it is in exactly in these types of situations that Christians should behave with integrity.