JP Cusick
New Member
Mr Know-it-all, sir.
Posts: 258 
|
Post by JP Cusick on Sept 19, 2011 8:11:37 GMT -5
This Internet forum called " Political Forum Net" has just banned me as SPAM on my very first posting and it was only a nice posting on their Introduction board. That forum surely did not and does not know me so they see a candidate for the US Senate, link, along with a link to my website, and they deem me as SPAM. I guess the Moderator could have searched my identity before the banning, but even that would mean they were afraid or hiding from some thing when the point of a forum is to invite discussions. Of course if I or anyone registers anonymously under some silly or irrelevant and anonymous screen name then that would be fine and wonderful and welcomed. That pitiful forum even has a section on the 2012 elections and yet I got banned at first contact. I find this to be shocking and stunning, as in people want and expect lies and deceptions, so that when one like that forum is confronted with the truth and a real life candidate then they can not face it or deal with it. FYI.  |
|
|
|
Post by bookworm on Sept 19, 2011 22:46:38 GMT -5
I belong to a forum in which the rules state that you cannot post personal links until you have posted to the forum for a minimum of 10 posts. That is to prevent people from joining up just to promote a business, and that would be SPAM.
I looked at the rules of the forum you mentioned, however, and I didn't even see a rule such as that, so i can understand why you would be surprised. Perhaps the owner considers personal links to be spam even though that is not made clear in the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Booze on Sept 21, 2011 7:43:05 GMT -5
This Internet forum called " Political Forum Net" has just banned me as SPAM on my very first posting and it was only a nice posting on their Introduction board. Why the hell are you going to that forum anyway? Your a candidate in Marland and not any place you want. |
|
JP Cusick
New Member
Mr Know-it-all, sir.
Posts: 258
|
Post by JP Cusick on Sept 23, 2011 8:02:50 GMT -5
I looked at the rules of the forum you mentioned, however, and I didn't even see a rule such as that, so i can understand why you would be surprised. Perhaps the owner considers personal links to be spam even though that is not made clear in the rules. I am not so much "surprised" as I was irritated and resentful of it. IMO, I was offering them a positive improvement to their forum for free with no strings attached and they reject it which makes no sense to me. It is correct that I was surprised by the rejection because I simply do not understand it. It is much like others online who call me as a liar or a deadbeat or delusional because such things make no sense to me, and I get confused as to how to respond to such debased iniquity being thrown at me.  Why the hell are you going to that forum anyway? Your a candidate in Maryland and not any place you want. As I tell on my opening postings on all those other forums - I am not there to campaign but just to discuss the issues. I go to other forums just to spread the word about resistance to the evil Child Support and Custody laws. That is why I go to any such Internet forum. As a candidate for election in Maryland then I have to be a bit more delicate in my campaigning. As like a Newspaper campaign ad says very little about any candidate. I did not make it this way, and in fact it is only the Internet which is improving the situation and the election process.  |
|
|
|
Post by thunderclapp on Sept 23, 2011 10:32:31 GMT -5
As I tell on my opening postings on all those other forums - I am not there to campaign but just to discuss the issues. I go to other forums just to spread the word about resistance to the evil Child Support and Custody laws. That is why I go to any such Internet forum. As a candidate for election in Maryland then I have to be a bit more delicate in my campaigning. As like a Newspaper campaign ad says very little about any candidate. I did not make it this way, and in fact it is only the Internet which is improving the situation and the election process. Just wondering... If you are only there to discuss the issues, why do you tell everyone you are a candidate? I think you have a double intention. You are there to discuss the issues, but you want everyone to know you are a candidate. So it looks like you are still actually campaigning. If I want to discuss an issue, but I put a link at the bottom to my "real life musician" website (which I have done in the past), then of course I have to admit that I not only want to discuss the issues but I also want to campaign for my music "profession". Otherwise, why would I put a link to my music site? I'm just saying that it still looks a lot like campaigning IMHO. It's a disclaimer, but to me, it looks like like you are lying about it. But then again, the purpose of this post is just to ask you a question that I have been wondering about, but since my signature has my website about you, then you might also think that the only reason I asked you this question was to draw clicks to my website. But I really only want to ask you this question and do not want to modify my signature for this one question. I have never posted a message for the sole purpose of advertising my website. I don't mean to go on and on. I'm just trying to anticipate what you might ask me in response to my original question. |
|
JP Cusick
New Member
Mr Know-it-all, sir.
Posts: 258
|
Post by JP Cusick on Sept 25, 2011 8:32:05 GMT -5
Just wondering... If you are only there to discuss the issues, why do you tell everyone you are a candidate? I think you have a double intention. You are there to discuss the issues, but you want everyone to know you are a candidate. So it looks like you are still actually campaigning. You do make a legitimate point here and I am not certain how to address the complication you describe. So I say yes you are correct that I do have a double intention which means in fact that you gave the correct answer to the question. To me this scenario is similar to some people who bum money or plead for money as some will say: "Do you have a dollar?" and I reply by me saying "no" when the truth is that I have lots of dollars. This was a real problem for my truthful conscience so I did actually start telling some of the beggars that: "Yes I have a dollar but I am not going to give it away." Then beggars seem to be hurt when I said that and it felt uncomfortable for me too, so I went back to saying "no" because they are not asking for the truth as they just want me to give them money. As such I changed my personal doctrine away from following the letter of the law over to the spirit of the law based on the doctrine that: God is not a dis-respecter of persons, Acts 10:34-35. So now when I go to any Internet forum then I do want to use my real life identity and NOT to be anonymous which means I am in fact for now a real life candidate for the Senate and I am happy to tell who and what I am, while other people on the various forums do not share my perception of the truth, and per that doctrine then I must not be a dis-respecter of such persons. Therefore people like your self (Thunder) and myself and some others do know and see that I am campaigning anywhere and everywhere because the Internet anywhere is available here in my Maryland for my campaign, while at the same time those other people on the other forums are not my voters or not Maryland voters. So me campaigning and me not campaigning are sort of the same thing and not the same thing both at the same time and I am trying to respect the position of others over top of myself. And in fact I never ask anyone to vote for me and I do not ask for contributions and I never do that even here on the State of Maryland forums either, and those are the criteria of "campaigning" for other political candidates. As such I am both campaigning and NOT campaigning at the same time. I view my position as a candidate as a type of weapon to emphasize the issue of the need to reform the evil Child Support and Custody laws, while I do not care much if anyone votes for me or not as I am not trying to get votes as I am just trying to attack the evil Child Support and Custody laws. Other people put a higher importance and value to being a candidate than what I put on it, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by bookworm on Sept 25, 2011 9:10:14 GMT -5
[And in fact I never ask anyone to vote for me and I do not ask for contributions and I never do that even here on the State of Maryland forums either, and those are the criteria of "campaigning" for other political candidates. As such I am both campaigning and NOT campaigning at the same time. I view my position as a candidate as a type of weapon to emphasize the issue of the need to reform the evil Child Support and Custody laws, while I do not care much if anyone votes for me or not as I am not trying to get votes as I am just trying to attack the evil Child Support and Custody laws. Other people put a higher importance and value to being a candidate than what I put on it, IMO. Actually, if a person IS going to be a one-issue candidate, in order to draw attention to that issue, then I can really respect the idea of doing so without actively asking for other people's money to run the campaign. If you were just a plumber talking about child support, people would listen to you but they may not pay much attention to your viewpoint. As a potential officeholder, you would have clout to try to implement your views, and that causes more attention to be placed on what your views are. |
|
|
|
Post by thunderclapp on Sept 25, 2011 20:21:25 GMT -5
You do make a legitimate point here and I am not certain how to address the complication you describe. Cool. I am glad you didn't take my question the wrong way. |
|
|
|
Post by citygirl on Sept 26, 2011 12:01:13 GMT -5
As such I changed my personal doctrine away from following the letter of the law over to the spirit of the law based on the doctrine that: God is not a dis-respecter of persons, Acts 10:34-35. That doesn't say disrespecter it says " Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" so you changed the words of the bible. You think you are God? |
|
|
|
Post by bookworm on Sept 26, 2011 20:45:26 GMT -5
As such I changed my personal doctrine away from following the letter of the law over to the spirit of the law based on the doctrine that: God is not a dis-respecter of persons, Acts 10:34-35. That doesn't say disrespecter it says " Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" so you changed the words of the bible. You think you are God? There are plenty of things that one could argue with JP about, but I don't think this is one of them. I don't see anywhere in his statement that he was claiming to make an actual quote of the Bible. He didn't put quotation marks around his words. Instead, he described the entire passage as being about a "doctrine" that God is not a dis-respecter of persons. Summarizing a passage into a main point of doctrine is not the same as thinking you are God. If I have any point of contention with JP regarding this, it would deal the idea of whether God's respecting or not respecting of persons really deals with the same kind of respect as one would show to a homeless person. |
|
