Lies, mistakes, and being downright wrong

[_maklelan]

Good Lord, Mak. I'd forgotten about that whole discussion. I was thinking of your most recent foray into calling me a liar regarding my temple recommend.

I don't know how you could possibly think that, because I posted the exact same reference to the exact same incident in that post. You must not be reading my posts.

Your interpretation of their rules was simply different than my interpretation. I was there; you weren't. I was Q'd for being harmony and I was banned for being harmony, not for any other reason. If you don't like my interpretation, that's okay, but that doesn't make my interpretation a lie. That just means we have a difference of opinion. That doesn't even make my interpretation wrong, or a mistake. And it certainly doesn't make my interpretation of those events a lie.

You were banned for being harmony because you were pretending to be someone else so you could continue to post. I didn't ask you why you were banned, I asked you if you ever re-registered under a different name after being suspended, and you said no. You then followed by telling me that when you got suspended you re-registered under a different name and posted in a "lowkey" manner to avoid suspicion.

Is there anyone else on this board besides harmony who actually thinks that what she said concerning not having re-registered under a different name is not a lie? To this point everyone just sits and twiddles their thumbs when they demand proof that she lied. Above is the proof. Can anyone else out there actually believe that she didn't lie?

[_Yoda]

What I have a problem with, is Plutarch, Mak, and Coggins, thinking they have a right to judge Harmony at all.

All three of them have tried to speculate on how she lives "real life", and make judgement calls on it. Why is it any of their business, or is it their place to even attempt to judge whether or not she is worthy of a temple recommend?

She has stated that she has a temple recommend, and that her leaders know about her feelings regarding aspects of Church history. Guess what, guys? YOU are in no place to question her!

I don't care if you are a Bishop or a GA. You have NO direct stewardship over her. NONE! And why? Because you are NOT HER Bishop...or HER husband...or a GA responsible for HER.

How can you be a member of the Church....a PRIESTHOOD HOLDER....and not "get" that?

[_harmony]

Good Lord, Mak. I'd forgotten about that whole discussion. I was thinking of your most recent foray into calling me a liar regarding my temple recommend.

I don't know how you could possibly think that, because I posted the exact same reference to the exact same incident in that post. You must not be reading my posts.

Well, for goodness sakes, report me to the authorities. That is surely grounds for excommunication and hanging.

Your interpretation of their rules was simply different than my interpretation. I was there; you weren't. I was Q'd for being harmony and I was banned for being harmony, not for any other reason. If you don't like my interpretation, that's okay, but that doesn't make my interpretation a lie. That just means we have a difference of opinion. That doesn't even make my interpretation wrong, or a mistake. And it certainly doesn't make my interpretation of those events a lie.

You were banned for being harmony because you were pretending to be someone else so you could continue to post. I didn't ask you why you were banned, I asked you if you ever re-registered under a different name after being suspended, and you said no. You then followed by telling me that when you got suspended you re-registered under a different name and posted in a "lowkey" manner to avoid suspicion.

Is there anyone else on this board besides harmony who actually thinks that what she said concerning not having re-registered under a different name is not a lie? To this point everyone just sits and twiddles their thumbs when they demand proof that she lied. Above is the proof. Can anyone else out there actually believe that she didn't lie?

Different interpretations of the rules, Mak. Since I had never registered there as harmony, I wasn't breaking any rules by registering as Blink. I was not Q'd for an infraction; I was Q'd when they figured out that Blink was harmony. Therefore, when I registered as Dill Pickles, I wasn't trying to get around an infraction of their rules; I was trying to get around their not following their own rules.

That doesn't constitute a lie, Mak. That's a time-honored type of social protest. I'm not surprised you don't get it. Social justice doesn't seem to your strong point.

You will probably not notice, but still it's worth pointing out: I never re-registered under another name at ZLMB once I was banned from there. Why? Because I was banned for cause there. I wasn't Q'd for cause at FAIR, so I re-registered and (to make a point about how unjustified they were to Q me without cause) managed to stay under their radar for months posting exactly as I had as Blink until they discovered who the Pickle was, and banned me for being harmony. Just like the first time I was Q'd, I wasn't banned for any infraction; I was banned for who I am. I have not tried to re-register with another nickname because them banning the Pickle made my point.

I can see how you, with your strict black and white thinking, would not be able to see the nuances. You might want to take a class in sociology for a change, and see what the real world has to put up with.

[_maklelan]

What I have a problem with, is Plutarch, Mak, and Coggins, thinking they have a right to judge Harmony at all.

All three of them have tried to speculate on how she lives "real life", and make judgement calls on it. Why is it any of their business, or is it their place to even attempt to judge whether or not she is worthy of a temple recommend?

She has stated that she has a temple recommend, and that her leaders know about her feelings regarding aspects of Church history. Guess what, guys? YOU are in no place to question her!

I don't care if you are a Bishop or a GA. You have NO direct stewardship over her. NONE! And why? Because you are NOT HER Bishop...or HER husband...or a GA responsible for HER.

How can you be a member of the Church....a PRIESTHOOD HOLDER....and not "get" that?

Is the above post a lie or was harmony being honest?

[_maklelan]

Different interpretations of the rules, Mak. Since I had never registered there as harmony, I wasn't breaking any rules by registering as Blink. I was not Q'd for an infraction; I was Q'd when they figured out that Blink was harmony. Therefore, when I registered as Dill Pickles, I wasn't trying to get around an infraction of their rules; I was trying to get around their not following their own rules.

Harmony, for the last freaking time, my post has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rules of the board. Absolutely nothing. My post has to do with me asking you a question and you intentionally giving me a false answer. That is all. Please someone tell me this makes sense. It is absolutely crystal clear inside my head, why can't she seem to answer my question instead of this straw man? Someone besides harmony please respond to this question: did harmony tell me the truth or did she lie when she answered my question in the negative?

[_Jersey Girl]

mak,

Hold your freaking horses ;-) and let me give this a shot.

1. You asked harmony if she ever re-registered under a different name after she was kicked off.

2. She said no.

3. She was registered under Blink and Blink was Q'd, not kicked off.

4. When her posts didn't make it out of the "Q", she re-registered as Dill Pickles.

5. Dill Pickles was kicked off...banned.

6. After being kicked off/banned, she has not re-registered under a different screen name.

Jersey Girl

[_maklelan]

mak,

Hold your freaking horses ;-) and let me give this a shot.

1. You asked harmony if she ever re-registered under a different name after she was kicked off.

2. She said no.

3. She was registered under Blink and Blink was Q'd, not kicked off.

4. When her posts didn't make it out of the "Q", she re-registered as Dill Pickles.

5. Dill Pickles was kicked off...banned.

6. After being kicked off/banned, she has not re-registered under a different screen name.

Jersey Girl

I have always considered being permanently queued being kicked off. I was referring to any kind of suspension, and even after I pointed out the inconsistency of her story she went on this weird diatribe about being ultimately kicked off not because she re-registered, but because she "was harmony." She has not re-registered since getting booted for the second time because they blocked her from doing it. If she wants to split hairs and say that she understood my question to refer to her second booting (despite the fact that I knew absolutely nothing about any second booting) then she can tell me that, but I intended the question to mean any kind of suspension, and I believe that is how she understood it. If she would like to explain that she understood it differently I'll apologize and drop it.

[_harmony]

Different interpretations of the rules, Mak. Since I had never registered there as harmony, I wasn't breaking any rules by registering as Blink. I was not Q'd for an infraction; I was Q'd when they figured out that Blink was harmony. Therefore, when I registered as Dill Pickles, I wasn't trying to get around an infraction of their rules; I was trying to get around their not following their own rules.

Harmony, for the last freaking time, my post has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rules of the board. Absolutely nothing. My post has to do with me asking you a question and you intentionally giving me a false answer. That is all. Please someone tell me this makes sense. It is absolutely crystal clear inside my head, why can't she seem to answer my question instead of this straw man? Someone besides harmony please respond to this question: did harmony tell me the truth or did she lie when she answered my question in the negative?

Mak, you might want to actually read what I said. Blink was never banned or suspended. Blink was Q'd. So no... I never re-registered with a different screen name after being banned or suspended. I re-registered with a different screen name after being Q'd. Being Q'd is not the same as being suspended or being banned.

Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

[_Jersey Girl]

mak

I have always considered being permanently queued being kicked off. I was referring to any kind of suspension, and even after I pointed out the inconsistency of her story she went on this weird diatribe about being ultimately kicked off not because she re-registered, but because she "was harmony." She has not re-registered since getting booted for the second time because they blocked her from doing it. If she wants to split hairs and say that she understood my question to refer to her second booting (despite the fact that I knew absolutely nothing about any second booting) then she can tell me that, but I intended the question to mean any kind of suspension, and I believe that is how she understood it. If she would like to explain that she understood it differently I'll apologize and drop it.

mak,

Being Q'd is to be put on the side and have your posts go through some sort of mod filter (I've never been Q'd) and from what I gather, because of that there is a delay in your posts making it on to the board. It's kind of like being grounded.

Was she "permanently Q'd"? I didn't read that in her comments. I read that her posts never made it on to the board.

When you say "kicked off", I take that to mean banned. Kicked off...get the hell out of here and never come back.

So, in my understanding...Blink was grounded without violation of rules and then she registered as Dill Pickles who was ultimately kicked off and not allowed to come back...without violation of rules..except that you could say she was using a sock puppet at that time.

And she hasn't returned.

Jersey Girl

[_Jersey Girl]

Oh, okay, I just read it. She said she was put on Q and told she'd never get off it.

I think when she says they weren't following their own rules, she means they weren't following the stated intent of the Q rules.

Q rules again, in my understanding that you're essentially grounded to your room and can slip the occasional note under the door with mod approval.

So, she realized they were using the Q as a form of banning without banning her. Why? They probably had no just cause to ban her and they knew it.

So she made up a new name and went back to posting.

Jersey Girl