I don't know if anyone has noticed but when a message on the forum is posted, one of the people it is sent to is a KKK group on Yahoo. I just thought that this was a bit unsettleing. I don't know why they are so interested in our forum. Anyone have some answers?

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), January 07, 2004

Answers

Who knows Scott? Possibly they are beginning to see the light.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 07, 2004.

Scott,

Can you elaborate a bit? What do you mean "one of the people it is sent to"? How do you know this?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 08, 2004.

Paul, after you post a reply and hit "submit", a message comes up with a list of all the people who will get a reply sent to them, including the moderator.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), January 08, 2004.

Maybe we need a new bard then? Perhaps a rpoboard or ez board?

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 08, 2004.

Who cares? Does it really matter if the KKK hears the discussion? The Church has no secret agenda that we are discussing. We are not revealing any top secret info. There is not enough here to let them track anyone down (though I think I will stop adding my last name . . .ah, I'm in Canada they will never get me).

Frankly, they might learn something. Observing Catholics and Catholic thought is a 'dangerous' thing. We are a faith of reason, reason has a way of sinking into the thickest skull. Let them watch, for we gird(sp?) our loins with the truth!

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), January 09, 2004.

The other side of that coin is that by badmouthing them, you'll attract them here, and they'll bring friends.

-- jake (j@k.e), January 09, 2004.

There were a couple of anti-semitic seeming posts here this week. Maybe related to the same email. I've purposely spelled them Klux Kuk Kn (?) once or twice in the past myself, just to make sure some Google search didn't bring the group here accidently.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 09, 2004.

Yes. In the past, when orthodox Catholics have justifiably criticized certain groups' errors, this has caused posts about them to be noticed by users of Yahoo and Google -- thereby attracting to this forum people from marginalized minorities who insist on defending the indefensible (e.g., JWs, Jack Chik freaks, pseudo-trads, atheists, new-agers, rad-fems, etc.). Fortunately, most of them leave quickly. Unfortunately, some do not.

-- (jfgecik@Hotmail.com), January 09, 2004.

That group still exists? I don't know what to say. I thought they were all banished long ago. There are always evil and bad groups everywhere. I suppose it's unavoidable.

-- Abraham T (Lijothengil@yahoo.com), January 13, 2004.

Moderator,
A copy of all messages is now going to at least THREE unacceptable addresses. Some of the other addresses may be bogus.
Please perform the promised clean-up. Thanks.

-- (@@@.@), January 16, 2004.

top,

-- top (1@1.1), January 16, 2004.

The KKK address was removed several days ago. I'll check out the others.

Moderator

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 16, 2004.

Who knows Scott? Possibly they are beginning to see the light.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH

-- jr (none@nowhere.com), January 16, 2004.

topv

-- top (1@1.!), January 16, 2004.

Paul, I just noticed that one of my messages was sent to the following:

sent a note to kkk@kkk.org sent a note to ku_klux_klan@kkk.org sent a note to ku_klux_klan@msngroups.com sent a note to ku_klux_klan@yahoogroups.com

-- AVC (littleflower1976@yahoo.com), January 16, 2004.

So what if the KKK gets a copy? Probably the best thing they'll read all week. What's the concern?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), January 16, 2004.

You're right Frank. I don't think anyone with clandestine motives would publish their address (and thus their intentions) for all to see. Even if their name is deleted from the list, they can merely sign up again to receive the posts or make up a fictitious name/email address to receive them.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 17, 2004.

"The KKK address was removed several days ago. I'll check out the others."

There may have been one "removed several days ago," but there were at least three new ones yesterday, when I left the above request. Now I think that you have removed two of them (plus some other phony addresses) -- THANK YOU! -- but there is still one bad boy out there: admin@kkk.org

"So what if the KKK gets a copy? Probably the best thing they'll read all week. What's the concern?"

I thank heaven that the forum now has moderators who don't think that way. I will answer this question for the benefit of those who will have an open mind to a response.
One who tries can picture the kinds of things that a violent, sick-minded, anti-Catholic organization can do with the contents of these threads. I will mention just two.
They can spam every e-mail address contained in these threads. I have noticed a major increase in junk mail in recent weeks -- to two different e-mail addresses, including an address that I haven't used for two or more years, but which is present in recently "revived" threads.
They can post harassing comments here. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that the "Sara-giggle-man" comes here from the KKK when he sees that she has returned after long absences. Other people at the forum have been harassed through impersonation and/or comments made to foment conflict between two people.
Those are two relatively minor, bad things they can do. I don't even want to mention the major things.

-- (@@@.@), January 17, 2004.

"Even if their name is deleted from the list, they can merely sign up again to receive the posts or make up a fictitious name/email address to receive them."

I guess I spoke too soon. I will rephrase what I said last time.
I thank heaven that the forum has one moderator who realizes that a violent, anti-Catholic, racist organization should not be getting automatic copies of forum posts.

"Even if their name is deleted from the list, they can merely sign up again to receive the posts or make up a fictitious name/email address to receive them."

It's sad to see that no clear thinking went into that comment.
First: When bad people sign up again, the moderators should delete them again and again and again -- until the bad people give up. (That is how banning is accomplished -- deleting people's messages over and over until they realize their attempts are futile.)
Second: If someone uses a "fictitious email address," then forum-generated messages will go nowhere!
Third: If someone uses a real, but "non-kkk" address, then forum-generated messages will go only to that individual. What we have had here, though, is an automated system by which every one of our messages is being copied directly into the other organization's forum without human intervention. THAT is what must be stopped.

-- (@@@.@), January 17, 2004.

– (@@@/@): I will address your comments as follows:

1. Removing them from the “post alert” list will not prevent them from spamming “every email address contained in these threads”.

2. “They can post harassing comments here” anytime they wish under any name - anyone can.

3. I prefer not to waste my time speculating who “giggle man” is or where he comes from. If he posts an objectionable post vis a vis our rules then his post will be deleted as will anyone’s. Removing him or anyone from the “post alert” list will not prevent him from doing this if he so chooses.

4. How do you know “a violent, anti-Catholic, racist organization” is getting “automatic copies of forum posts”? I don’t know that. They could be anyone who has assumed the identity of the KKK. Most of us have been around here long enough to know that some people post under pseudonyms, don’t you – (@@@.@)? This isn’t your real name is it? Not everyone posts solely under their true identity in this forum.

5. “When bad people sign up again...” Who are the “bad people”? Can you pick them out? I certainly can’t simply by reading their email address. Seems to me we have two common sense approaches - continue with the present “alert post” notifications or discontinue them completely to ensure all “bad people” don’t get copies of posts made in the forum. Unfortunately in the latter case, all “good” people won’t get them either. If people on the list are really “bad” and hellbent on doing what you say they will, then do you think doing away with the “alert post” notifications will stop them?

6. “When bad people sign up again, the moderators should delete them again and again and again -- until the bad people give up.” Yes of course, these “bad people” are just going to go away, of course they are! Do you think all bad people are stupid? Do you not think it may have crossed their minds to use a different email address? Anyone can get as many legitimate email addresses as they want instantly these days without proof of proper identification. If they truly are up to evil and not just out to rattle folks like yourself through intimidation by using the letters “KKK” then don’t you think they might be less obvious about it?

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 17, 2004.

My take is someone with "kkk" in their address is likely a 13 year old, not really someone IN the kkk. Of course I also know a minority doctor who NAMED his kid so their initials are KKK as a joke of some kind. How his wife let him do this is beyond me, I know my wife would have left me with rolling pinitis if I tried something like that!

Frank

P.S. "@@@" people on the forum will likely give more weight to your opinion on this when you have posted here for awhile. No offense, but most people here have been posting for some time, and socially, someone who shows up for the first time and wants everything changed to their standards isn't likely to be heeded.

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), January 17, 2004.

Good counter move with that last P.S. paragraph, Frank. Good strategy; I like it.

I don't have any say-so over the rules of the forum, but would like to make a suggestion. The ability for a regular to post anonymously seems an attractive option to keep available for use from time to time, but perhaps the use of anonymous tags should be narrowed in scope a bit. It seems an abuse of an option to consistently use the option as a strategy, if you get my drift. Perhaps some consideration might be given this matter of defining the proper and improper use of anonymous nametags.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), January 17, 2004.

Removing them from the “post alert” list will not prevent them from spamming “every email address contained in these threads”.

When did I say that it would "prevent them?" I did not say that, so why "contradict" what I didn't say? A thinking person realizes that "removing them" from the notification list will greatly cut down on the amount of spamming and harassing they can and will do.

"They can post harassing comments here” anytime they wish under any name - anyone can.

Again, when did I say that the cannot? A thinking person realizes that they are tempted to come here and do it much more often when they are receiving notifications than when they are not. When our stuff goes automatically to their site, all the nuts reading over there are tempted to come here.

I prefer not to waste my time speculating who “giggle man” is or where he comes from. Removing him or anyone from the “post alert” list will not prevent him from doing this if he so chooses.

Astounding! NOT "removing him" helps him to hurt this forum. Maybe your unreasonable resistance to my comments and advice is based in the fact that you have hardly spent any time here in the last year. The other moderator got rid of the KKK addresses. He has been here a great deal in the past year, so he knows better than you on this subject.

How do you know “a violent, anti-Catholic, racist organization” is getting “automatic copies of forum posts”? I don’t know that. They could be anyone who has assumed the identity of the KKK.

Your naivete is mind-boggling. Have you visited the KKK yahoo forum that is getting all of this forum's messages copied to it? If not, you have no business contradicting me. If you have visited it, and yet still choose to contradict me, then I feel very sorry for you.

Seems to me we have two common sense approaches - continue with the present “alert post” notifications or discontinue them completely to ensure all “bad people” don’t get copies of posts made in the forum.

I made it CLEAR that the major objection is to the automatic propagation of all of this forum's messages at the kkk forum. If that was not clear to you, please try to read more carefully. If you are a dedicated moderator, you would remove the obviously bad addresses while leaving the others alone. If you are not dedicated to doing the best job possible, it's probably time for you to resign.

If people on the list are really “bad” and hellbent on doing what you say they will, then do you think doing away with the “alert post” notifications will stop them?

I already addressed this. First, you prevent the messages from going to the other forum. Then, if there are people who are "hellbent," you ban them.

Yes of course, these “bad people” are just going to go away, of course they are! Do you think all bad people are stupid? Do you not think it may have crossed their minds to use a different email address?

Yet another comment arising from the failure to pay attention to my main point -- the propagation of this forum's messages at the kkk forum! If the loonies change the addresses they use on the notification list, then this forum's messags will stop going to the kkk forum! Now do you get it? Lord, give me the strength to endure this!

"@@@" people on the forum will likely give more weight to your opinion on this when you have posted here for awhile.
someone who shows up for the first time and wants everything changed to their standards isn't likely to be heeded.

Haughty people who need to have a person around "for some time" before giving him respect -- immature people who fail to "give weight" to what a person has to say based solely on its own merit -- are doomed to suffer the consequences of their big mistakes. "Socially"? Be an intelligent Catholic, not "social" (another word for politically correct). "Everything changed"? What kind of hyperbole is that, when I have objected to only one bad thing?

What any intelligent person can see in operation here is horrendous defensiveness. Some people have an improper way that they want to do things, and they are unwilling to listen to reason, to change for the better. This is known as immaturity.

I hope that the mature moderator will now delete the FOUR kkk addresses that have been put back on the notification list. The ability for a regular to post anonymously seems an attractive option to keep available for use from time to time, but perhaps the use of anonymous tags should be narrowed in scope a bit.

What astounding hypocrisy! The quoted words are from a heretic who has posted at least 1,000 messages as attempts to undermine certain aspects of genuine Catholicism. This hypocrite has himself used at least a dozen aliases (as revealed by the mature moderator). And if a thousand older threads had not been deleted recently, perhaps another score of this guy's aliases would have been uncovered. There's nothing wrong with using aliases, but there's plenty wrong with heretical hypocrites.

-- (@@@.@), January 18, 2004.

topb

-- topv (1@1.!), January 18, 2004.

The quoted words are from a heretic

What makes Emerald a "heretic?"

who has posted at least 1,000 messages as attempts to undermine certain aspects of genuine Catholicism.

what "certain aspects" are you talking about?

This hypocrite has himself used at least a dozen aliases (as revealed by the mature moderator).

BSD/SCOOP/@@@@@. How many more are there, John?

-- Regina (Regina@lycos.com), January 18, 2004.

regina, when the KKK is reading your posts, and youre putting down their organization, would YOU post your name attached to the thread? I know i wouldnt. second of all, @@@@@@@ has not been revealed to be john, or BSD.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), January 18, 2004.

It doesn't take much for a "thinking person" to realize that BSD/SCOOP/@@@@@ are all John. You can add the infamous but shortlived Thread Restorer to that list.

-- @ (-@-.com), January 18, 2004.

paul,

C'mon, do you REALLY believe that @@@ isn't John? I was just poking fun at him earlier since on a different thread he said he wouldn't respond to me, but feels free to do so as @@@! LOL, the guy might be a piece of work, but there's little question but that it IS him.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), January 19, 2004.

To all you "slow learners" ...

I have thrice -- and this makes four times -- stated that I post lots of messages with anonymous e-mail addresses and usually with no "name." If I had to guess, I'd say that I have used 200 or more different addresses over the course of four years. I have also stated, again and again, that everyone should assume that it is I, whenever such a new poster suddenly appears. Even if it is actually someone else and you assume wrongly that it is I, that won't bother me.

I have also repeatedly explained why I have done this, but I will say it a fourth time for those of you who need to be reminded. Sometimes I have done this because I am in a huge hurry and don't want to take the time to fully sign (as happened the first time I posted on this thread). Sometimes, it is because I want to make a little joke -- or a serious point -- by means of the words in the e-mail address itself. And sometimes it is because I just get unbelievably weary of signing the same real name and real address again and again. If you had posted about 7,000 messages with your real name and e-mail address -- as I have done at this forum -- you might understand how a person can get weary of it.

Obviously, everyone wasted his/her time speculating about whether I was/am BSD, @@@.@, etc., etc.. The point made about Harry the Hypocritical Heretic still stands (and cannot fall). And I am NOT going to say a single word about the heresies involved. That stuff is in the past (pre-New-Year). Read the old threads, please.

-- (@@@.@), January 19, 2004.

I forgot to mention two things ...

(1) I believe that I was +@+.+ a couple of years ago, taking Emerald and Eugene to task for supporting another person who had posted an off-color joke here (something that was offensive to chaste women, as at least one of them told us, agreeing with me). I remember how the two Big E's insisted on being able to laugh at jokes about women's large breasts. I hope that they have outgrown that immaturity by now.

(2) I won't be posting on this thread again (nor reading your responses), so anyone who is immature can go ahead and have fun ripping me apart -- with impunity.

-- (@@@.@), January 19, 2004.

Goodbye, John,
You'll be lurking, naturally. and spreading all of your unhappiness around on email. That's to be expected. Don't email me. Don't worry; we'll (me especially) keep only the memory of your good intent and Catholic fervor; and cast away all memory of this present madness. I know you can't help it. Carry on faithfully and may God give you help and consolation. Please don't be bitter. You believe in the love of the Sacred Heart. Many like you are especially close to Him because they're like tiny birds with wings broken and nerves jagged. They have no way open for escape. Give Him your sorrow; call on Him for mercy. He loves you.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 19, 2004.

And I am NOT going to say a single word about the heresies involved.

Then stop calling him a "heretic."

That stuff is in the past (pre-New-Year).

Then stop calling him a "heretic."

Read the old threads, please.

I don't need to "read the old threads" since I was involved in the "old threads" back when they were fresh ones. You've never explained what makes Emerald a heretic. If you're not going to explain it, but are going to continue with your baseless name- calling, I'll keep asking you to explain or link the thread where it was explained. If you can summon your "Thread Restorer" personality somewhere in that crowded psyche of yours please ask him to restore the thread(s) which will answer my question. He seems to have no problem linking threads to answer other inquiries which have been discussed before.

BTW, "JFG" takes too long to type out...?

-- Regina (Regina712REMOVE@lycos.com), January 19, 2004.

new answers from most of the greenspun boards are being sent to that yahoo group, the KKK are gathering intelligence

-- (dallas_mcdougall@triad.urgentmail.net), January 25, 2004.

good response

-- 7of9 (7@7.com), January 25, 2004.

this is the list I was given by the forum as to who got my last post. The list does make me uncomfortable. Can't we edit this list??

sent a note to CJerry816@Aol.com sent a note to admin@kkk.org sent a note to dewwar@iowatelecom.net sent a note to kkk@kkk.org sent a note to ku_klux_klan@kkk.org sent a note to ku_klux_klan@msngroups.com sent a note to ku_klux_klan@yahoogroups.com sent a note to lenka21988@hotmail.com sent a note to makingtrouble@email.com sent a note to mr2cyclopticfriend@hotmail.com sent a note to sadsack12003@yahoo.ca

-- 7of9 (7@7.com), January 25, 2004.

This list has been edited several times, and in each case the deleted addresses reappeared within 24 hours. The choices are: (1) block this option completely; or (2) allow it to be used freely by whoever wishes to do so. After all, anyone can see the postings on the site by coming to the site, so I see no real problem in letting people see the same posts more conveniently.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 25, 2004.

Also, in addtion to what Paul has mentioned, anyone can obtain serveral anonymous email addresses after we have deleted their names having determined them to be "threatenting". They can remain unidentified/unknown to forum users. How do we then sort the good from the bad? Constant monitoring/deletion in this area is pointless not to mention time-consuming. The choice is clear. Remove this feature or let it continue as it has been.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 26, 2004.

Please vote:

_X_ -- Remove the feature.
___ -- Continue as is.


-- (@@@.@), January 26, 2004.

In fairness to everyone's vote if we're going to have a vote at all, I suggest that only those who have posted to this forum to date be allowed to vote and that only one vote per ISP be permitted. This will ensure that those who operate under several fictitious names/addresses will count for one vote and one vote only, no matter how many times they vote under assumed names.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 26, 2004.

Who cares? Leave it alone.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), January 26, 2004.

Frank, I concur.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 26, 2004.

I vote to remove the feature. (Skoo/Skoobouy)

-- anon (ymous@God.bless), January 26, 2004.

I vote to leave the feature as it is. I'm sure that, should one of the undesirables want to, they would be quite capable of coming here and reading the posts for themselves.

Some people obviously find this capability convenient and I don't see why decent people should allow people such as those to force them into this course of action.

-- sara (sara_catholic_forum@yahoo.co.uk), January 26, 2004.

The concerns are valid, but I still think the forum should stay as it is.

Maybe "they" think they are in some way intimidating us. (gathering intellegence, keeping an eye on us,etc.) I'm personally not a bit worried about them.

Perhaps this vote should be started as a new thread at the top. I only found it by accident; its pretty far down the list now and the results of this poll ultimately affect people who post far more frequently than me.

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 26, 2004.

Since Edward doesn't mind if we vote. I vote to get rid of the feature.

-- - (David@excite.com), January 26, 2004.

I vote we get rid of the feature too. If they want to monitor what we're saying at least make them work for it - come to the forum and go through every post.

-- Fr. Mike Skrocki, JCL (abounamike@aol.com), January 27, 2004.

I don't know if anyone is cognizant of this yet, but "kkk.org" doesn't exist. Those e-mail addresses probably go nowhere at all.

This is a prank by someone who wants to make people think the KKK reads Greenspun Catholic posts. I hope the moderators continue to delete those address at every available opportunity.

-- anon (ymous@God.bless), January 30, 2004.

Perhaps this vote should be started as a new thread at the top. I only found it by accident; its pretty far down the list now and the results of this poll ultimately affect people who post far more frequently than me.

Jim F, are you making the mistake of using the "home page" (this one) as your constant "base of action"? Is that where you found this thread "pretty far down the list now"?

Although I always start at that home page each day (to click on the "unanswered questions" link first), I immediately go from there to the place I recommend that you go -- the "New/Recent Answers" page. That's where you will find all active threads at the top, no matter how old their opening messages are. By using the date shown (the date of the most recent post), you can keep track of things and pick up where you left off.

-- (@@@.@), January 31, 2004.

Jim’s point of starting a new thread concerning the “post alert” feature, for all intents and purposes, now seems moot. Everyone has had ample opportunity to voice their opinion on the subject, and to date, very little comment has been made either for or against. As there seems to be little concern or indication either way, it seems prudent to continue with the status quo and to offer this feature in the future.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), January 31, 2004.

Thanks @@@.@,

"New Answers" is a much better way to see whats going on here.

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), January 31, 2004.

Ed,

It wasn't "moot" for Jim to suggest it. He just learned something new (from the @ poster) by making a suggestion. If he wouldn't have suggested it, then he wouldn't have learned how the forum works.

Be cool "four Jacks". :-)

-- - (David@excite.com), January 31, 2004.

You're welcome, Jim. My pleasure. I'd like to complement you on your many good posts.

-- (@@@.@), February 01, 2004.