Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: bonnie on January 26, 2008, 01:00:38 PM
-
Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: CyberGuy]
Stan Jensen Stan Jensen
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 2122
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long Originally Posted By: CyberGuy
All right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
That was banned as they become became a liability to me, and I was not going to carry that burden. The owners of two other forums are going to be served soon, and we are not going to be.
-
The link to the above post
http://www.clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/153611/fpart/5
NOTE: I corrected the link so it will work. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator
-
Here is a better format of the quote from the post Bonnie is referring to there:
All right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
That was banned as they become became a liability to me, and I was not going to carry that burden. The owners of two other forums are going to be served soon, and we are not going to be.
-
I wonder what two forums Stan is referring to?
As this is a brand new one, will this one be added, or is this one of the two?
Also, how is it that Stan of CA knows so much about these type of things?
I also wonder if Calvin of BSDA is aware of this?
-
There are several other posts there in response to the one quoted here.
-
There is much going on at the moment on C/A. Personal attacks have been under discussion and that let to this in some trying to devise rules for a forum.
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. I have had occassion lately to place information with an attorney on the issue of slander,libel and harrassment on the internet
One clear cut thought seems to emerge, Lies, those that are deliberate or an accusation of someone committing a crime without proof and being circulated in a secretive and destructive manner can be dealt with if there is clear proof. A copy of the original slanderous statement identifying the sender and intent is one form of proof. A statment to one party, I think you did this is, is really nothing. When that changes and says Party A is guilty of this crime and it is circulated to a third or more parties the color of the act changes.
So far the statute of limitations are unclear as to the far reach of the internet. However those issues of past occurrence that are no longer viable can quickly become so when the guilty party brings up and includes past incidences with present behaviour.
-
As a result of this threat from 3ABN, be it true or false, I think it would be a good idea to see if we can locate and post about what Litigation on the Internet, especially as it relates to Discussion Boards, such as this one in the USA, and one like MSDAOL in Canada.
I understand that USA Litigation Laws and Canadian Litigation Laws are extremely different.
Perhaps we should devote a whole separate topic about this?
-
There is much going on at the moment on C/A. Personal attacks have been under discussion and that let to this in some trying to devise rules for a forum.
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. I have had occassion lately to place information with an attorney on the issue of slander,libel and harrassment on the internet
One clear cut thought seems to emerge, Lies, those that are deliberate or an accusation of someone committing a crime without proof and being circulated in a secretive and destructive manner can be dealt with if there is clear proof. A copy of the original slanderous statement identifying the sender and intent is one form of proof. A statment to one party, I think you did this is, is really nothing. When that changes and says Party A is guilty of this crime and it is circulated to a third or more parties the color of the act changes.
So far the statute of limitations are unclear as to the far reach of the internet. However those issues of past occurrence that are no longer viable can quickly become so when the guilty party brings up and includes past incidences with present behaviour.
No quite sure what all this is about and where this came from as I am not a member of CA, but I feel that the rules and regulations set down for this Forum are sensible and practical. I look forward to what others have to say. Maybe there is a need for much deeper discussion on this issue.
-
Perhaps this would be the ideal place to research and discuss this.
-
+This is some information I was directed to as a result of an ongoing situation at this time. It includes information pertaining to that and am not sure how much would refer to or be helpful to "Other Two Forums to be Served.
The time limit or statute of limitations can many times be overturned, especially if the party being sued makes efforts and actions bringing in non-viable issues and making them present day..
http://www.carter-ruck.com/FAQs/Libel%20and%20Slander%20Cases.html
-
By the way, Bonnie also posted this over at Maritime SDA OnLine before posting it here, therefore, we are also discussing this there, however, in order for you to be able to read it there, as well as other some of the other interesting topics pertaining to 3ABN, you need to be a registered member there.
In case some of you are not aware of Maritime SDA OnLine, the link is http://www.maritime-sda-online.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
By the way, for those who do not know, I am also the Administrator of Maritime SDA OnLine. :)
-
Re: "The owners of the other two forums are going to be served soon..."
Is this quote by Stan Jensen hearsay?
He didn't reveal its source...
Did it come from somewhere as a means of intimidation?
BSDA was recently shut down for a while. There appeared to be some intense activity before the shutdown involving moderators by some 3ABN/Danny Shelton supporters.
BSDA is open again but the documentory stories and letters that were pinned at the top have been taken down.
Appletree at BSDA has just suggested that the admins of 3ABN stop the 3ABN discussion.
-
For those owning websites
http://www.website-law.co.uk/resources/website-libel.html
-
OK - I have a question. This is simply a question so I hope to not be sued for libel :scratch:...but I seem to recall hearing (or reading??) somewhere (maybe BSDA?) that Stan Jensen was already cooperating with the lawsuit and had turned over his Club Adventist access logs to DS/3ABN attorneys. IF that is true.....wouldn't that explain why he says "we are not going to be [served]?"
Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: CyberGuy]
Stan Jensen Stan Jensen
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 2122
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long Originally Posted By: CyberGuy
All right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
That was banned as they become became a liability to me, and I was not going to carry that burden. The owners of two other forums are going to be served soon, and we are not going to be.
-
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. I have had occassion lately to place information with an attorney on the issue of slander,libel and harrassment on the internet.
If you had that oportunity you must most certainly have run head long into the Lanham act and several decisions from 9th Circuit, 6th Circuit and even the 1st Circuit Courts of Appeal regarding many of these issues. We did that research a year ago in preparation for what we thought the Minnesota firm would come out swinging with, an Ex Parte Motion for Injunctive Relief against Save3ABN.com and other forums; The summary of caselaw did not bode well for such an effort and they clearly opted out of that since they would most certainly have lost. They used their ex parte on a Motion to Impound, which turned out similarly fatal.
In the United States, the First Amendment is the ultimate defense for forums and websites and they can pursue all the forums and every domain they want...all they will continue to do is burn donor dollars...and yes, I have heard that it is not donor money...just how foolish is it to make such a statement when clearly someone other than DLS or 3ABN general fund moneys are not paying, but a supporter/donor contibutes untold sums to try and suppress the freedom of speech???
How much better to resolve the issues, confess the errors, request forgiveness, pay appropriate restitution to the injured parties and move on to complete your mission. But alas, no, better to try and destroy the messengers than show humility and Christian Spirit.
Now, if these internet miscreants would just learn when to cry Uncle!!! After all, administrative arrogance has worked for many years. Why isn't it working now??? And what if these foolish defenders of the Faith and the Right of Conscience actually win???
May the protestant reformation, the right of conscience and the right to free speech endure!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
One clear cut thought seems to emerge, Lies, those that are deliberate or an accusation of someone committing a crime without proof and being circulated in a secretive and destructive manner can be dealt with if there is clear proof. A copy of the original slanderous statement identifying the sender and intent is one form of proof. A statment to one party, I think you did this is, is really nothing. When that changes and says Party A is guilty of this crime and it is circulated to a third or more parties the color of the act changes..
These issues relate to the issue of defamation or libel per se. Problem is, what if the proof is that the allegations are correct or the allegant had reasonable basis to believe they were
correct based upon reliable information? The one defamed does not have to have been convicted, but the allegation, supported by documentation, merely has to pass the IRC or Statutory elements test based upon the testimony of experts. A defmation case will ultimately go down in flames, once the defendants have had a chance to complete discovery to further document the facts of the charges alleged. What a waste of money for the plaintiff and would most likely lead to further discoverable evidence not to the benefit of the Plaintiffs.
One other point of order, the statement here is clearly designed to be fluffy intimidation for two key reasons:
Written false statements are Libel, not slander;
Libel and defamation is not covered by any criminal code that I am aware of and therefore not a crime. They are civil torts, in some cases common law, in others statutory. Not crimes.
So far the statute of limitations are unclear as to the far reach of the internet. However those issues of past occurrence that are no longer viable can quickly become so when the guilty party brings up and includes past incidences with present behaviour.
Yes, statute of limitations is a mysteriously wonderful concept, except, it can even be tolled
under certain circumstances. Now, explain just how it is relevant? And what is this presumption of "guilt"? Of what, using the Freedom of Speech? Excersizing ones Right of Conscience? Just what is the guilt undefined here?
Gailon Arthur Joy
=============
Formatting edit only in order for quotes to show up as quotes. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator
-
Re: "The owners of the other two forums are going to be served soon..."
Is this quote by Stan Jensen hearsay?
He didn't reveal its source...
Did it come from somewhere as a means of intimidation?
BSDA was recently shut down for a while. There appeared to be some intense activity before the shutdown involving moderators by some 3ABN/Danny Shelton supporters.
BSDA is open again but the documentory stories and letters that were pinned at the top have been taken down.
Appletree at BSDA has just suggested that the admins of 3ABN stop the 3ABN discussion.
Of course AT/DS wants it all to go away...he thinks if it's not there for people to read, it means it's not true, and therefore 3abn will claim "victory" again (by way of God of course).
I noticed Calvin's comments on Sisters telling of the TRUE story of what happened to the Fiscalini's when they were there...notice that Ian and AT/DS were quick to attack.
-
Re: "The owners of the other two forums are going to be served soon..."
Appletree at BSDA has just suggested that the admins of 3ABN stop the 3ABN discussion.
Of course AT/DS wants it all to go away...he thinks if it's not there for people to read, it means it's not true, and therefore 3abn will claim "victory" again (by way of God of course).
I noticed Calvin's comments on Sisters telling of the TRUE story of what happened to the Fiscalini's when they were there...notice that Ian and AT/DS were quick to attack.
Seems we think much alike SSOM! :dunno:
-
Re: "The owners of the other two forums are going to be served soon..."
Appletree at BSDA has just suggested that the admins of 3ABN stop the 3ABN discussion.
Of course AT/DS wants it all to go away...he thinks if it's not there for people to read, it means it's not true, and therefore 3abn will claim "victory" again (by way of God of course).
I noticed Calvin's comments on Sisters telling of the TRUE story of what happened to the Fiscalini's when they were there...notice that Ian and AT/DS were quick to attack.
Seems we think much alike SSOM! :dunno:
LOL!! That was figured out a long time ago ;)
-
How any actually affects this situation I don't really know. This was information I was directed to as to my personal situation and how some issues and staements apply directly to that.
In my case without any reasonable expectation of being true, I was accused of a crime. Not anything to call it except a crime, not just a little no-no.
It was not said to me but circulated throughout a forum, by someone I had no contact with for a very long time. It was then finally sent to me thru another party.
It also involves an open solicitation on a very public forum for a new member to contact Member A via pm and he would fill him in on my history. Again, there was no shred of truth and it was no an opinion, The words I KNOW were used. There were threats via pm and a very recent dialog which states as to my Threats to remove you, it worked for awhile didn't it?? Clear intent.
So not always are you protected by the theory of freedom of speech.
It will be interesting to see where this leads. The rules and laws seem ever changing and evolving.
-
Sorry if I am reading between the lines but am disappointed that the attorney from MN could not or would not help you. There are so many variables in this kind of thing I think it will take a long time to work out the kinks. Whish you well in this
Bonnie
-
It appears that Stan also wrote but later deleted, regarding the difficulty of crossing country lines:
The people funding the lawsuit would have no problem going through Canadian lawyers and legal system.. but enough about them..
Who exactly was he talking about?
Danny claimed a year and a half ago that Garwin McNeilus was going to fund a lawsuit if need be. It's Garwin's old lawyer Gerald Duffy that is involved in this lawsuit.
I would like to believe that Garwin isn't involved in any way, except as a new director at 3ABN. However, Garwin has yet to deny Danny's statement.
My hunch is that if Garwin is involved, if his father Linden were alive today, it would put him under. I didn't know Linden extremely well, but I can't imagine him approving of this lawsuit which was filed in violation of both biblical and Spirit of Prophecy counsel.
If Garwin is involved and refuses to change course, I would think that at some point ASI would need to discipline him by removing him from his responsibilities. And the Dodge Center church as well.
If ASI cannot accept into membership someone who speaks out against the cover up of child molestation allegations, private inurement, tax fraud, and unbiblical divorce, then certainly they would not want as a director of ASI Missions, Inc. someone who is funding a lawsuit that tried to muzzle a preacher from speaking out against open, vile sin, a lawsuit that tried to do that secretly through impoundment, something akin to the way the Inquisition used to operate. Thus, one would easily assume that Garwin cannot possibly be funding the lawsuit if he still is a director of ASI Missions, Inc.
I say all that while still maintaining that I want to believe that Garwin and/or his family are not funding this stupid lawsuit, and that Danny was lying when he stated that Garwin would foot the bill. Yet I am still left with the puzzling question of why my membership application was twice rejected, the second time by an executive committee of 9, two of which abstained, leaving 7, two of those seven being Garwin's family.
-
I actually read the quote you provided over at Club Adventist, therefore, are you saying that Stan has since deleted it?
-
I read it too.
-
In fact he has edited the reference to someone else paying for the lawsuite and has edited out the reference to two other forums getting served!!!
Amazing lack of spine, but too late...the originals are already preserved and if two
are served, perhaps we need to return the favor...there are acouple of questions I would like to ask Mr Jensen anyway.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Really! All that editing!
Amazing!
-
I still had my Club Adventist window up when I read GAJ's post about deleting stuff, so I copied and posted it here:
********************************************************************************
#153599 - Yesterday at 07:11 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: CyberGuy]
David Koot David Koot
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 2873
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m Originally Posted By: CyberGuyAll right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
As I recall reading the stuff, it certainly looked libelous to me. Went beyond fair comment. Other than that, there was discussion pro and con. As for criticizing church leaders . . . well, remember, 'power corrupts.' We need the Fourth Estate for checks and balances. As for distinguishing between challenging ideas and personal attacks, that may take some education--but it can be done.
Dave
Edited by David Koot (Yesterday at 07:14 AM)
#153601 - Yesterday at 07:15 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Stan Jensen]
David Koot David Koot
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 2873
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m Originally Posted By: Stan JensenNot all of us are RULES people, I am not in the box.
But Stan, for a public forum involving a lot of people, there HAVE to be rules. Gotta be done, or things will continue to go downhill IMO. Bite the bullet, man.
#153602 - Yesterday at 07:16 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Redwood]
Stan Jensen Stan Jensen
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 2123
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long Most of the problems have happened over differing positions on varies matters, women's ordination, tithe, etc etc
As I have said clearly in the past. Those who have weak positions blow up easy, or something similar.
_________________________
Stan Jensen, Administrator
Our 501(c)3
http://thatotherangelministries.org/
Bloggers Visit
http://www.adventistbloggers.com
#153603 - Yesterday at 07:16 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Redwood]
Neil D Neil D
I ain't for sale
Registered: 08/10/00
Posts: 10658
Loc: Ca., Id, Wa., Or. Originally Posted By: Redwood Originally Posted By: Neil D
I think it unreasonable for a single exclusive person be moderator for 7 days a week, 2 hours per day with no breaks....2 moderators and some flexibliity can do much in a forum....
I said one person on a given day. You assign one different moderator for each day of the week to take care of the entire forum.
Works for me, but I doubt that one person on ONE specific day is gonna work out. While you might like all the tuesdays, I will not do all Saturdays exclusively...
And I doubt you will find 7 moderators for 122 forums....
_________________________
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana
#153605 - Yesterday at 07:18 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Redwood]
David Koot David Koot
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 2873
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m No Redwood, the 'common sense' rule won't work. It is too vague and not enforceable, as well as varying with the individual. You really need specifics. As for ostracization, that is not--repeat not--a healthy basis to rely on in policing a forum. It is an awful thing, and should be avoided rather than encouraged. Not a good way to go. Stan, you need to have rules here. Cmon man, get it over with.
#153606 - Yesterday at 07:18 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Stan Jensen]
Neil D Neil D
I ain't for sale
Registered: 08/10/00
Posts: 10658
Loc: Ca., Id, Wa., Or. Originally Posted By: Stan Jensen
As I have said clearly in the past. Those who have weak positions blow up easy, or something similar.
I think you ought to do it my way! It's just common sense. In fact, I insist that it be done my way or it's the highway....
_________________________
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
George Santayana
#153607 - Yesterday at 07:19 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: CyberGuy]
Stan Jensen Stan Jensen
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 2123
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long Originally Posted By: CyberGuy
All right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
That was banned as they become became a liability to me, and I was not going to carry that burden. The owners of two other forums are going to be served soon, and we are not going to be.
#153608 - Yesterday at 07:19 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: David Koot]
CyberGuy CyberGuy
Registered: 01/27/05
Posts: 868
Loc: USA Originally Posted By: David Koot Originally Posted By: CyberGuyAll right but what about Church leaders then. I remember that Stan banned all discussion on Danny Sheltons divorce of his wife as a personal attack against Danny Shelton. Many of us thought we were just attacking the act of divorcing his wife and marrying someone else. Attacking an action.
As I recall reading the stuff, it certainly looked libelous to me. Went beyond fair comment. Other than that, there was discussion pro and con. As for criticizing church leaders . . . well, remember, 'power corrupts.' We need the Fourth Estate for checks and balances. As for distinguishing between challenging ideas and personal attacks, that may take some education--but it can be done.
Dave
And what happened. All the discussion when to the BlackSDA forum. Get to harsh here and we will lose membership to other forums.
_________________________
Riverside CA
#153609 - Yesterday at 07:21 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: CyberGuy]
David Koot David Koot
Craftsman
Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 2873
Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m Originally Posted By: CyberGuyAnd what happened. All the discussion when to the BlackSDA forum. Get to harsh here and we will lose membership to other forums.
Better that than being sued for being a repeater of libel. That falls under one of the 'big three' I listed: no libel.
Dave
#153610 - Yesterday at 07:21 AM Re: Nominations for the team of 5 [Re: Stan Jensen]
Stan Jensen Stan Jensen
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 2123
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long If people who are 40-50+ lack the skill to play well with others, what are the chances of my wit and wisdom going to do?
This is a FORUM..
Attachments
Description:
Page 10 of 12 « First < 8 9 10 11 12 >
Previous Topic Index Next Topic
Who's Online
19 registered (Gerry Cabalo, carolaa, Bravus, David Koot, Redwood, Sulla, 7 invisible) and 40 anonymous users online.
details
Newest Members
Lissa, Nicky_B, fun2believe, KyleW48, karaokeking
2572 Registered Users
ClubAdventist® is a self-supporting ministry and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by
The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland or any of its subsidiaries.
Copyright © ClubAdventist.com® 1999 - 2007
===========
Edited as requested by Snoopy. - Daryl Fawcett,Administrator.
-
I read it too.
I read it too. I had posts deleted all over the place. One day it was OK to post in 3ABN issues. Then boom! Everything was gone!
-
I know some the ways in which one private citizen concerning another can be impacted. How this impacts a public organization on the public airwaves will remain to be seen.
If I tell you publically that you are mentally unstable. Not in my opinion,not I think, but present it as fact I might be required to offer professional proof of that in a lawsuit and be held accountable financially if pursued.
If I accuse you of a crime and send to others ,others only have to be one third party ,it is libel. Unless that crime is true. If I solicit on a public open forum for others to contact me so that I may tell them who you really are,proceed to "I know" things, let me tell you about Mr. joy, none of which are true,it is libel.
How it affects 3ABN and the problems they are having if stated publically I don't know. They have a huge
responsibility and how they use public money and the airwaves supported by that I am sure has many avenues.
Is it possible that what was seen as to Club Adventist cooperating and turning over records was removed by the administration because of a concern over how others see it.
Many things have gone on and many things have been said that others have the expectation of remaining private. Would it be removed as to not make some of the "natives" restless in fearing that maybe it is not so private anymore. And as in all lawsuits, all it takes is the wrong string to be pulled, and those least expecting to do so, come tumbling out. At one time a statement was made on C/A that C/A administration would never willingly hand over any records of C/A. It could have a chilling effect.
I have the legal definition somewhere, not handy at the moment, but in cases involving statute of limitations....
Some defendents will find they are no longer safe on those grounds if they are in fact the ones to ressurrect them in new issues or keep it ongoing.
-
In our situation a few years ago some surprising things came out in despositions as to what can be brought out.
During mine when asked when I first knew I explained the day and said "I said to my husband" Our attorney got a little concerned and stopped me right there. As a statement made regarding my husband would bring him into it and of course whatever I had said to him concerning this issue, but many other issues would be brought to the table. Not just that one statement but all.
Stautes of Limitations can be tricky things. But one thing those that do so much huffing and puffing forget, many times they are the ones least able to handle the scrutiny. One statement leads to another and soon it is surprising what that has laid on the table for all to see.
What they themselves have done is righteous wrath. When it is done to them the whole thing is outrageous and then they are going to sue, forgetting for the moment their acts will then becme public. I think that some are so convinced of their own cleverness that it never occurs to them that the whole world won't see it just that way.
Not always are the little piggies cowering in a corner of their strawhouse while the big bad wolf is huffing and puffing
Those that are guilty have a tendency to forget what events led up to an action taken. Focusing only on the action by another. Never believing for a moment that reasons for that action just may come back to bite them.
I think it is easier to keep proclaiming faith in a popular individual than actually admit to yourself you may have been duped and what you believed was not true. Then you need to do a little soul searching and many are not inclined to do so.
-
Seems like Stan turned somewhat awry after Linda refused to accept a suggestion of his soon after her divorce.
What was that suggestion Johann?
-
There seems to be questions as to why C/A shut down any discussion of 3ABN that may be considered negative. One possible reason was given
Those that offered an opinion or stated facts they knew regarding DS,the divorce ,and such were seen as some type of gossip mongers. Disregarding of course that DS appears to have begun the trashing of LS.
This seems only a concern when it concerns those that have the money and power.The same scenerio is done many times on that forum with nary a word of caution.
If it is a true heartfelt conviction that it was wrong to state an opinion or fact concerning DS and his behavior, that same action remains wrong, remains wrong for all.
If that is a conviction and not an excuse for shutting down all discussion, then that conviction would run throughout the forum.
You do not Trash an ex-spouse who cannot defend themselves against an unwarrented attack. You stop it based on your convictions. Those same convictions that were stated in the shutting down of the 3AN thread.
If wrong, it is not wrong based on how much power and money you have. It is wrong. Perhaps that real reason for shutting down the topic of 3ABN on C/A will never be known.
But if the reason was as stated,then it is just plain wrong and you will not allow it done to anyone.
There is something a little convoluted about a party that works to get a discussion stopped concerning the conduct of another, then turns around and speaks against his ex, when she is not there to defend herslf, and more imprtantly to me, I never saw anyone ask him for the information.
So for me I do not believe all the geat concern shown over the topic of DS and his divorce from LS.
========
Edited a since deleted quoted post and other posts, as a result of the cleaning of this thread of inappropriate posts that detracted from the intent of this topic. - Daryl Fawcett
-
I guess I understand what you are saying.
Anyway, I certainly agree with your point and there seem to have been some inconsistencies in what happened.
-
I guess I understand what you are saying.
Anyway, I certainly agree with your point and there seem to have been some inconsistencies in what happened.
The stand you take, the conviction of what is right and wrong does not change depending on who is involved.
-
Well in any case, I'm glad we have a forum here that is not being shut down!
-
Well in any case, I'm glad we have a forum here that is not being shut down!
I don't really think that AdventTalk can be compared with other Forums. I see this as a new beginning, a fresh start if you will. I don't see it being in the same street as CA.
-
I agree with Chrissie that AdventTalk is a new beginning - a fresh start for Adventist discussion forums.
The type of "tender chat" you are referring to would fit right in over at another forum, though. Send them over there!!
=====
Edited as a result of the cleaning of this thread of inappropriate posts that detracted from the intent of this topic. - Daryl Fawcett
-
This section has been labeled by Daryl Fawcett "3ABN--for respectfully discussing any issues and concerns pertaining to 3ABN".
I agree first of all with Chrissie, who sees AdventTalk as a new beginning, a fresh start, and different from CA, for example.
And I certainly agree with Snoopy who referred to "another forum" where this non-3ABN related and potentially disrespectful conflict might be more appropriate.
=====
Edited a since deleted quoted post and other posts, as a result of the cleaning of this thread of inappropriate posts that detracted from the intent of this topic. - Daryl Fawcett
-
Thank you, Daryl.
That was the right thing to do.
-
Any discussion about Stan was to be in relationship to the topic itself.
This topic wasn't created for the purpose of bashing Stan, or anybody else, therefore, this thread has been cleaned of posts, quoted posts, and other posts responding to them, as a result of the cleaning of this thread of inappropriate posts that detracted from the intent of this topic. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
Personally, I like Stan, even though he's human, which is the same problem all of us have.
My gut feeling is that Stan must have been talking about subpoenas rather than lawsuits.
-
That makes much more sense!
You're right Bob! Being human is something of a burden to bear...sometimes it gets the best of you!
-
According to Appletree the entire story is absurd...does he know Jensen was the source of this leak? And if it is just subpoena's, they still must be served!!! Talk about expanding the lawsuite, just why would they waste their time when this would be a
public relations disaster??? But, when did that deter Danny, besides he will just blame it all on Linda!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I have had to laugh many times in the past when I read of all the things Danny blames Linda for, which I happen to know she has had nothing to do with. It appears as he thinks he is a prophet and knows more than anyone else. . .
-
I recently had opportunity to be part of a conversation with Lomacang and he has the same disease: Everything is Linda's false and only Danny Lee Shelton tells the truth. He
even was foolish enough to question whether the IRS Criminal Investigation coordinator was real and warned the other party that it was part of an elaborate hoax cooked up by Linda!!! I really felt a bit sorry for that poor deluded sole (the spelling is correct) for just a fraction of a second, and then I realized he really needs a new experience!!! Maybe even a new field of operation...somewhere with the status of Siberia!!!
Any chance for a call in NORTHERN Iceland??? Outer Mongolia??? All right, I will compromize...how about Swaziland...even has a King to worship!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
JL once had a call to conduct a week of prayer in Arild Abrahamsen's home church in Norway. Somehow the call got sour at some point.
-
JL once had a call to conduct a week of prayer in Arild Abrahamsen's home church in Norway. Somehow the call got sour at some point.
Couldn't face Arild after what had been told about him?
=====
Post Reported and Edited per Staff Decision . - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
JL once had a call to conduct a week of prayer in Arild Abrahamsen's home church in Norway. Somehow the call got sour at some point.
Couldn't face Arild after what had been told about him?
Or that it was no longer appropriate.
=====
Quoted post edited to conform with the edit in that post. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
I recently had opportunity to be part of a conversation with Lomacang and he has the same disease: Everything is Linda's false and only Danny Lee Shelton tells the truth. He
even was foolish enough to question whether the IRS Criminal Investigation coordinator was real and warned the other party that it was part of an elaborate hoax cooked up by Linda!!! I really felt a bit sorry for that poor deluded sole (the spelling is correct) for just a fraction of a second, and then I realized he really needs a new experience!!! Maybe even a new field of operation...somewhere with the status of Siberia!!!
Any chance for a call in NORTHERN Iceland??? Outer Mongolia??? All right, I will compromize...how about Swaziland...even has a King to worship!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
This was recent?
At this late date John Lomacang still believes in Danny Shelton?
And questioning the IRS investigation!
That's just very strange.
-
According to Appletree the entire story is absurd...does he know Jensen was the source of this leak? And if it is just subpoena's, they still must be served!!! Talk about expanding the lawsuite, just why would they waste their time when this would be a
public relations disaster??? But, when did that deter Danny, besides he will just blame it all on Linda!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Speaking of expanding the lawsuit, Appletree's recent threats to make whatever efforts might be necessary to reach ouside the United States and sue Johann seemed to me to be some last ditch and irrational delusions on his part.
Do you think any others at 3ABN would share those perceptions?
-
Speaking of expanding the lawsuit, Appletree's recent threats to make whatever efforts might be necessary to reach ouside the United States and sue Johann seemed to me to be some last ditch and irrational delusions on his part.
Do you think any others at 3ABN would share those perceptions?
I do not know. I can tell you that it is not in the best interest of 3ABN to expand the lawsuite as they have a narrow number of issues presently. An expansion would open a new can of worms and cost a fortune.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Who is looking out for the real interests of 3ABN rather than personal pride?
-
Who is looking out for the real interests of 3ABN rather than personal pride?
It is the duty of the directors and officers to look out for the real interests of 3ABN. They have clearly decided that hiding the truth is in the best interests of 3ABN.
They have gone to grreat expense to enforce this effort in Minnesotta and Bob Pickles recent summary says it all:
Background
Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. (“3ABN”) is a publicly supported, non-profit, 501(c)3 organization, and is a supporting ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. From 1985 until September 2007, Plaintiff Shelton was the president, CEO, and managing director of 3ABN, and he remains an influential director of and the only founder still employed by 3ABN.
On June 17, 2004, Plaintiff Danny Shelton in a globally televised broadcast told the world, “It’s your ministry. I’ve said that for years. It’s not our ministry.” He stated that 3ABN belonged to its donors and viewers, that they had a right to know what was going on at 3ABN, that what he did was “very public,” and that “our lives are an open book.” See Affidavit of Robert Pickle at ¶ 1 (hereafter “Pickle Aff.”). Thus Plaintiff Shelton declared to the world his long-held position that the public has a right to know information that would otherwise be private.
Plaintiff Danny Shelton has been the subject of numerous and varied allegations of malfeasance and misconduct, as well as negative internet commentary, long before either Defendant became involved in mid-August 2006. These allegations have included wrongful termination, sexual assault, the ignoring or cover up of child molestation allegations, unbiblical divorce, deceit, and private inurement.
In mid-August 2006 the Defendants launched ecclesiastical investigations into the conduct of Plaintiff Shelton, and began publishing investigative reports in harmony with their First Amendment rights of Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of the Press. The Plaintiffs repeatedly claimed that they had evidence to prove various allegations false while also refusing to provide that evidence to those who inquired.
The Plaintiffs have taken their attempts at secrecy to such extremes that they have yet to produce one single document in the underlying suit, even documents referenced in their initial disclosures on August 3, 2007. The Plaintiffs have taken the unusual position that everything is either confidential, privileged, or irrelevant. See Pickle Aff. at ¶¶ 3–4, Ex. A.
Once again, he has done an excellent summary.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
JL once had a call to conduct a week of prayer in Arild Abrahamsen's home church in Norway. Somehow the call got sour at some point.
Couldn't face Arild after what had been told about him?
I would suggest that you at least attempt to follow the rules of this forum......as you've previously imposed upon me!
=====
Edited quoted post to conform to edit in that post and also removed direct response to the original wording of that now edited post. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator.
-
Retaliation for imposing the rules on you - after a correction has been made? How do you apply that rule on your forum? Just asking.
-
Johann
Retaliation for imposing the rules on you - after a correction has been made? How do you apply that rule on your forum? Just asking.
:cat:
FWIW.....re:"How do you apply that rule on your forum? Just asking." To answer you, would be off topic and would violated forum rules! here. FWIW I am an obedient servant of the local rules which apply here, and have no intention of violating the rules..... irrespective of how much I'm egged on! :D
Sheeeeesh Johann, I'm on your side vs the dishonest activities of DS.....indeed, I consider LS perhaps the sweetest and most charitable Christian I've ever witnessed.
I don't know her personally....but she represents all that good about Christianity VS Danny, who in my book represents all that EVIL and wrong with TV "evangelist." and Adventism and Christianity in general! To know LS as a friend ...IMO would be a blessing, you can be thankful she's your friend.
J.R.
-
According to Appletree the entire story is absurd...does he know Jensen was the source of this leak? And if it is just subpoena's, they still must be served!!! Talk about expanding the lawsuite, just why would they waste their time when this would be a
public relations disaster??? But, when did that deter Danny, besides he will just blame it all on Linda!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
Speaking of expanding the lawsuit, Appletree's recent threats to make whatever efforts might be necessary to reach ouside the United States and sue Johann seemed to me to be some last ditch and irrational delusions on his part.
Do you think any others at 3ABN would share those perceptions?
I thank that litigating against a retired pastor would be a conclusively fatal strategic error. But,
with no disrespect to Pastor Johann Thorvaldson, it would be fun to watch the fools just try stepping into just such a minefield. Can you imagine the horror of the brethren??? ANd the denominational leadership would be unlikely to continue standing on the sideline either.
My best instinct tells me they are sick of the legal fees and the distraction. Motion hearings are getting very lonely now. Just two lawyers and they seem quite intent on doing whatever they can to keep me from participating in the oral arguments. Actually, the Minnesotta hearing, just across the river from the office of the mighty 14, and only a lawyer (an associate) and her clerk showed up. Any day now they may resort to telephone conference calls. Then it will be real lonely!!!
I will admit it is much more interesting when you have an audience to perform for. 14 jurors will liven things up.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Were they successful in keeping you from participating in the oral arguments?
If so, how/why were they successful?
If not, then.....
-
No, they did not succeed and we did get in a couple of very clear points that the bench clearly agreed with. The most important being that teh motion by 3ABN's counsel clearly runs contrary to the local rule and the prior order of the court. But, at the end of the day, Pickle's Publishing will be a decisive factor. All I did was neutralize the vicious spoken poison that 3ABN's counsel loves to try to grandstand on.
At the end of the day, it is all about the Law and Pickle has become quite adept at publishing "THE LAW"!!!.
After this, we go back to Minnesotta and then on to Michigan, Illinois, Washington, DC and California. Oh, yeah, I forgot Missouri and Indiana. Perhaps Wisconsin as well. Have to weigh whether what we get in Wisconsin is worth the effort. We have to depose one of them anyway.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Johann
Sheeeeesh Johann, I'm on your side vs the dishonest activities of DS.....indeed, I consider LS perhaps the sweetest and most charitable Christian I've ever witnessed. I don't know her personally....but she represents all that good about Christianity VS Danny, who in my book represents all that EVIL and wrong with TV "evangelist." and Adventism and Christianity in general! To know LS as a friend ...IMO would be a blessing, you can be thankful she's your friend.
J.R.
I suppose not much has changed since then in this area, However, you never know?
-
I assume you are aware that BSDA closed down?
-
I assume you are aware that BSDA closed down?
That is too bad.
-
Yes, Calvin closed down the site On Dec. 31. Beleive it or not, we are still still together on a page on facebook. All members are encouraged to join the page there.
-
The BSDA 3ABN threads played a major role keeping this issue alive and well until some showed up to charge right up San Juan Hill...or was it Hamburger Hill?
I cannot underestimate the value of those threads and the role in keeping the issue in the forefront. These threads were a perpetual reminder and a thorn in the side for Danny Lee Hselton that he has yet to shake.
Although we began our investigation and assault on a whole different premise and set of facts, BSDA's threads kept the fools talking and frequently with contradictory statements. Fortunately, once a liar, always a liar.
My notes from that era are just mounds of paper now, far outweighed by the actual evidence. I had company phones at the time, including a company Cell Phone. Given the hours and days and months we spent on the 3ABN investigation, my personal cell phone ran more minutes than the other seven phones combined, many times well into the night hours to accomodate the many time zones and hundreds of interviews.
Some have asked, was it worth it??? The pursuit of truth and exoneration of the innocent is a priceless goal and forever worth the effort and costs. And I would not have done a thing any differently...after all, we do not get to do life over again and only given a very few chances to make a difference.
There have been casualties and there will always be such in this life...but casualties cannot be a factor as we pursue the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and the justice that must result.
Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
-
:usa: :goodpost: :thumbsup: