Jill, Derick and Israel- Part 17

[lascuba]

So...is this a rule now? No talking about anyone unless they are actively doing something?

O...kay. Your board, your rules.

[OnceUponATime]

49 minutes ago, lascuba said:

So...is this a rule now? No talking about anyone unless they are actively doing something?

O...kay. Your board, your rules.

It's not a rule. It's politeness, human decency, the manners hopefully someone tried (but apparently failed) to teach you when you were young.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

58 minutes ago, lascuba said:

So...is this a rule now? No talking about anyone unless they are actively doing something?

O...kay. Your board, your rules.

Not a rule - an attempt to make a point about the BEC stuff because it's ridiculous and rude.

And not my board, but if I were enforcing a rule I'd have been clear about it - and issue warnings and all that.

 

 

[lascuba]

 

57 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Not a rule - an attempt to make a point about the BEC stuff because it's ridiculous and rude.

And not my board, but if I were enforcing a rule I'd have been clear about it - and issue warnings and all that.

I was actually genuinely asking, because two of you came in with what looked like your helpmeet hats on for something that isn't anywhere near some of the fuckery that gets posted. Saying not to post if Jill and Derrick aren't doing anything "noteworthy" seemed odd as hell.

I was a member of this one board where the mods had two different accounts, one with just their user names, and one with their username plus "mod" attached, so member knew who was talking.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

45 minutes ago, lascuba said:

I was actually genuinely asking, because two of you came in with what looked like your helpmeet hats on for something that isn't anywhere near some of the fuckery that gets posted. Saying not to post if Jill and Derrick aren't doing anything "noteworthy" seemed odd as hell.

I was a member of this one board where the mods had two different accounts, one with just their user names, and one with their username plus "mod" attached, so member knew who was talking.

As has been stated before, if it is being said as a mod, we clearly indicate that.  Since there was no mod box, no *mod hat on* it should have been evident that it was not a "we are lowering the hammer" situation.

However, as has been said on a number of threads by posters of many positions, the amount of BEC lately is seriously unnecessary.  It should be about beliefs and practices, not the color of an outfit or the angle of a photo.  Just because there is "worse" fuckery does not change that.

And, as always, we are not everywhere.  We have asked and continue to ask that if you read something inappropriate, you report it so we are aware of it.

[lascuba]

So to be clear, if one is not posting with their mod hat on and they say something completely rude and uncalled for to me, me responding as I would to any other poster won't get me a warning? 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

46 minutes ago, lascuba said:

I was actually genuinely asking, because two of you came in with what looked like your helpmeet hats on for something that isn't anywhere near some of the fuckery that gets posted. Saying not to post if Jill and Derrick aren't doing anything "noteworthy" seemed odd as hell.

I was a member of this one board where the mods had two different accounts, one with just their user names, and one with their username plus "mod" attached, so member knew who was talking.

We have mod boxes when we say something official.  Which, granted, I always forget to use but then I rarely say anything official.  

I was going for hyperbole but can see I came off angry rather than exasperated. 

In my defense I've called out the diagnosing and medical guesswork from pics/vids since long before I was a mod wherever I see it because I do personally find it crosses the line where it's not snark and just invasive and rude beyond what IMO people deserve even if public figures.

Also in my defense (can I get an FJ appointed attorney  ) I've never once lobbied for any rule based in my personal pet peeves - as long as I can express moral outrage as an individual I'm good.  

We do like to keep the BEC stuff to a minimum, but if I were speaking as a mod there would have been something to the effect of "knock this shit off" in there.

But point taken - I could have been clearer.  And less of a bitch.

 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

2 minutes ago, lascuba said:

So to be clear, if one is not posting with their mod hat on and they say something completely rude and uncalled for to me, me responding as I would to any other poster won't get me a warning? 

Right.  Rules are enforced - there is no rule you have to be nicer to a mod than any other poster.

If you get a warning for how you spoke to a mod it would be for something you'd get a warning for if you spoke to anyone else that way (rules stuff...hate speach, etc.). 

But since we don't always see everything there may be things that go unwarned because no one reported it. 

People should be civil when mods are doing their jobs because they spend a lot of time and effort and the only reward shouldn't be verbal abuse...but we should be civil as a rule anyway, right?

But no, you don't need to be nicer to me than anyone else....I may fire back as a poster (or not...I am easily distracted) but you won't get a warning unless it would apply if you said it to anyone. 

[SpoonfulOSugar]

1 minute ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

But since we don't always see everything there may be things that go unwarned because no one reported it. 

Just to add - because we don't make warnings public, it may *appear* that fuckery goes unaddressed. 

 

[twinmama]

2 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Not a rule - an attempt to make a point about the BEC stuff because it's ridiculous and rude.

And not my board, but if I were enforcing a rule I'd have been clear about it - and issue warnings and all that.

 

 

Honestly a huge part of what we talk about here is BEC-like. The main anti-fundie topics are abuse related. We have no idea if Jill and Derrick abuse Israel, we have no evidence of that, Jill seems happy and not forced to be with Derrick. If we aren't in BEC territory, there's basically nothing to talk about regarding them. Izzy is even over a year old and not a big brother yet. 

[lascuba]

2 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

We have mod boxes when we say something official.  Which, granted, I always forget to use but then I rarely say anything official.  

I was going for hyperbole but can see I came off angry rather than exasperated. 

In my defense I've called out the diagnosing and medical guesswork from pics/vids since long before I was a mod wherever I see it because I do personally find it crosses the line where it's not snark and just invasive and rude beyond what IMO people deserve even if public figures.

Also in my defense (can I get an FJ appointed attorney  ) I've never once lobbied for any rule based in my personal pet peeves - as long as I can express moral outrage as an individual I'm good.  

We do like to keep the BEC stuff to a minimum, but if I were speaking as a mod there would have been something to the effect of "knock this shit off" in there.

But point taken - I could have been clearer.  And less of a bitch.

 

I didn't take anything you said personally, but you did come on strong in a way that felt very much like pronouncement, and since three of you came in here one after another to berate us for the exact same thing, with @OnceUponATime being really fucking obnoxious and personally insulting me  for no other reason than--I don't know, she's a white woman with dreadlocks who was personally offended by my post is my best guess--and @Coconut Flan overreacting to what was clearly a joke about serial killers...it just seems disingenuous to say that you're just posting as any other member. You three basically shut down this thread with your posts, and it seems like that's exactly what you guys wanted. 

[Edhelfin]

On Wednesday, July 06, 2016 at 6:30 PM, lascuba said:

Jill expression is downright threatening. It's like aliens pretending to be human, knowing that smiling is the way to look friendly and approachable but doing it all 

 

Second time I heard that example - I hope it will not be followed by "the damn Yurugu lacking a hueman soul" diatribe like the first.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

I didn't take anything you said personally, but you did come on strong in a way that felt very much like pronouncement, and since three of you came in here one after another to berate us for the exact same thing, with @OnceUponATime being really fucking obnoxious and personally insulting me  for no other reason than--I don't know, she's a white woman with dreadlocks who was personally offended by my post is my best guess--and @Coconut Flan overreacting to what was clearly a joke about serial killers...it just seems disingenuous to say that you're just posting as any other member. You three basically shut down this thread with your posts, and it seems like that's exactly what you guys wanted. 

Yeah - as far as my post goes I stand by my point, but my delivery was uncalled for.  

As to the others, right before @OnceUponATime's post @samurai_sarah posted a very civil and kind post about the snarking on looks and medical fiction.  

OnceUponATime backed her up and while direct I don't see anything rude in her post at all.  She certainly didn't call you or anyone else out.

@Coconut Flan 's comment didn't happen in a vacuum.  In many other contexts the serial killer remark would have been seen as a offhand joke and drawn not notice.  But given that two people had posted about thinking the snark on their looks was shitty my first thought was "really?" and an eye roll, too.  I'm not speaking for her - just my take on this.

and if the thread got quiet because if people weren't comfortable snarking on their looks or none of anyone's business/fictional medical issues then...no, not a huge loss IMO.  People can say what they like within rules, but not with impunity - others will come back at them if they feel they are out of line.  

Rules are usually easy to apply and moderate.  But when things are not ToU violations and no one is getting warnings doesn't mean the mods aren't going to say soemthing if they think the thread is devolving into BEC.  There will always be some of that, but at some point it's just fucking enough.  

I don't know how many times and in how many ways their looks - especially Derek's - need to be criticized but if the people who are volunteering their time to check in on threads feel something needs to be said they can sure as hell say it.  

This is from the welcome to new members letter:

Quote

* Please keep the majority of your comments/snark based on the beliefs/ideology/philosophy of the people who you are speaking about.   It is natural for a snark site to have some "bitch eating crackers" type commentary and that is fine, but please make it the exception, not the rule.

New members are told this before entering and members who have been here for a while should know this.  Its common sense that when two helpmeets post about the BEC of the discussion maybe people could not continue posting the exact same shit.

And that has nothing to do with mods being treated differently regarding what gets warned....it has to do with listening to the people whose job it is to moderate this crap and if one or several have issues maybe listen.

We have loads of members who won't venture int the Duggar forums and if I had a dollar for everyone who told me this kind of thing was why I'd be very wealthy.  

 

[trisprefect]

Hey, so confirmation just came out that Derrick had several girlfriends before Jill. Something that may have been speculated upon frequently, but still nice to know for sure.

http://www.ibtimes.com/jessa-seewald-reveals-she-broke-duggar-courtship-rule-husband-ben-2389335

[HerNameIsBuffy]

From new members email - mod boxing for clarity.

Please keep the majority of your comments/snark based on the beliefs/ideology/philosophy of the people who you are speaking about.   It is natural for a snark site to have some "bitch eating crackers" type commentary and that is fine, but please make it the exception, not the rule.

 

[MatthewDuggar]

OK I'm having some serious brain-constipation - what is BEC?

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Just now, MatthewDuggar said:

OK I'm having some serious brain-constipation - what is BEC?

Bitch eating crackers.

[VelociRapture]

Speaking only for myself, I enjoy some of the BEC discussions that go on around here. For instance, poking a bit of fun at Jessa's culinary skills - her mom makes all these claims about them being raised to be homemakers, but Jessa can barely throw together a decent meal? That's amusing to me (though I do fully give her credit for trying something new and I place a good part of the blame on her parents for not giving two shits in actually preparing her for life in general.)

But I do feel strongly that constantly criticizing or commenting on anyone's appearance or possible health conditions crosses a personal line. I'd explain why, but I feel like I've explained that too many times on this forum for it to really be worth saying it again. Those who agree already know and those who don't agree don't want to hear it anyway. 

And, to be honest, it's one of the big reasons I've avoided QFoD so much in recent months. Jinger courting drew me back in for a bit, but I'm starting to feel like another break is warranted at this point. 

1 hour ago, trisprefect said:

Hey, so confirmation just came out that Derrick had several girlfriends before Jill. Something that may have been speculated upon frequently, but still nice to know for sure.

http://www.ibtimes.com/jessa-seewald-reveals-she-broke-duggar-courtship-rule-husband-ben-2389335

I'm honestly not surprised at all by this. Derick doesn't seem to have had as strict an upbringing as his wife or in-laws. It makes sense he would have dated a bit like Jeremy likely did. 

The only male I could see not having a prior relationship at this point  is Ben - and that's mainly just because of how young he was when he started pursuing Jessa. It's entirely possible he had a girlfriend or two before he met her.

[HereticHick]

1 hour ago, MatthewDuggar said:

OK I'm having some serious brain-constipation - what is BEC?

Thank you for asking this. I had no idea what it meant either.

Ah, you youngsters and your Internetacronyms! Get off my lawn!

[nst]

BEC - I love that phrase 

can that be the phrase for ever

As for Jessa - she was always on the couch in the earlier shows - if you remember watching all she did was organize clothes. I never saw her cooking. Only when Ben moved in did we see her cooking..so for her not to cook and show us videos it's their sticke - 

Jessa gave birth at home - with blood and guts all over the floor - now are supposed to be surprised that weeks later (time frame) we see dust balls and under neath the bed it needed to be cleaned.  Clearly we can snark on that yes ? no ? 

now I am confused - what about how she dresses Ben - can we snark on that

 

 

15 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

Speaking only for myself, I enjoy some of the BEC discussions that go on around here. For instance, poking a bit of fun at Jessa's culinary skills - her mom makes all these claims about them being raised to be homemakers, but Jessa can barely throw together a decent meal? That's amusing to me (though I do fully give her credit for trying something new and I place a good part of the blame on her parents for not giving two shits in actually preparing her for life in general.)

But I do feel strongly that constantly criticizing or commenting on anyone's appearance or possible health conditions crosses a personal line. I'd explain why, but I feel like I've explained that too many times on this forum for it to really be worth saying it again. Those who agree already know and those who don't agree don't want to hear it anyway. 

And, to be honest, it's one of the big reasons I've avoided QFoD so much in recent months. Jinger courting drew me back in for a bit, but I'm starting to feel like another break is warranted at this point. 

I'm honestly not surprised at all by this. Derick doesn't seem to have had as strict an upbringing as his wife or in-laws. It makes sense he would have dated a bit like Jeremy likely did. 

The only male I could see not having a prior relationship at this point  is Ben - and that's mainly just because of how young he was when he started pursuing Jessa. It's entirely possible he had a girlfriend or two before he met her.

can someone find out if 16 year old Ben had a girlfriend ? what was she a Quaker ?

Bueller

I think her philosophy is to be  a good mother 

[Bad Wolf]

Jeremy has a scandalous past. Horrors. Derrick dated before he met Jill, and Benessa talked on the phone without a chaperone. Will the debauchery never end? Maybe they had phone hand holding. I'm afraid this has ruined my good opinion of the Duggars, and I may never be able to watch the show again. 

[lascuba]

2 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

n.  

OnceUponATime backed her up and while direct I don't see anything rude in her post at all.  She certainly didn't call you or anyone else out.

 

Oh come on. Unless you didn't see this (and your fellow mods liking it):

Quote

It's not a rule. It's politeness, human decency, the manners hopefully someone tried (but apparently failed) to teach you when you were young.

you really are being disingenuous. I don't even disagree about the concern trolling over Derrick's health and I said so earlier. But damn, you guys were over the top on this no matter how you try to spin this. You focused on the wrong stuff to get nasty over (serial killers? Really?).

[ClaraOswin]

1 hour ago, Bad Wolf said:

Jeremy has a scandalous past. Horrors. Derrick dated before he met Jill, and Benessa talked on the phone without a chaperone. Will the debauchery never end? Maybe they had phone hand holding. I'm afraid this has ruined my good opinion of the Duggars, and I may never be able to watch the show again. 

I'm guessing they put these little tidbits out there to try to seem more "normal" to the general public. Yeah...good luck with that, Duggars.

[Palimpsest]

 

15 hours ago, twinmama said:

Honestly a huge part of what we talk about here is BEC-like. The main anti-fundie topics are abuse related. We have no idea if Jill and Derrick abuse Israel, we have no evidence of that, Jill seems happy and not forced to be with Derrick. If we aren't in BEC territory, there's basically nothing to talk about regarding them. Izzy is even over a year old and not a big brother yet. 

No.  Not quite.  It is broader than that.   I'd say the threads in the main QOS focus more on the dangers of Fundamentalist belief systems, which can and do include abuse. 

If you can't talk about the Dillards and co. without straying into BEC territory then perhaps there really is nothing note-worthy to talk about?  Perhaps the threads should slow down until something new happens.

When chatter devolves into internet diagnosis then it needs interrupting.  That is consistent across all the threads on FJ and it is pretty much a majority decision.  

As for snark on photos, IMO: "hippies on spring break" = amusing. "Serial killers" =  over the top and not funny at all.

11 hours ago, lascuba said:

Oh come on. Unless you didn't see this (and your fellow mods liking it):

you really are being disingenuous. I don't even disagree about the concern trolling over Derrick's health and I said so earlier. But damn, you guys were over the top on this no matter how you try to spin this. You focused on the wrong stuff to get nasty over (serial killers? Really?).

Perhaps you can take this over to Community Discussion and thrash it out there if this is really bothering you?  That's why that sub-forum is there - so as not to disrupt threads too much.   http://www.freejinger.org/forum/219-community-discussion/

I personally don't think any of the mods were out of line.  They are allowed to express their opinions as regular members and none were speaking officially.  However, if you get an official warning for simply disagreeing with a mod who isn't wearing her official hat - then we should definitely talk.

I should probably hand over another cyber dollar to @HerNameIsBuffy because I'm one of the people who thinks the BEC is really out of control in the Duggar area.  It is not just this thread.

[ClaraOswin]

On 7/5/2016 at 11:19 AM, jozina said:

HippieJesus sure did post a racy Bible verse for today.  He tweeted:

Happy Tuesday! Proverbs 5:18-19 and have a great day

Happy Tuesday full of boobies and ravishment peeps!!!

Well, I still want to know what went through his mind before posting a bible verse that's basically about his wife's breasts or whatever. I just don't really get why he would post this. But I'm not really into the bible, I guess.