Seebach Exhibit 7

Amüsing ways to poke fun.

The folks at ChristianForums have now enacted a de facto policy that any reference to uberchristians (note: no umlaut) is obviously somehow "spam". Whether or not there's a link, whatever; it's always spam.

So, there's some talk of trying to figure out a way to communicate to the people still left there that, in fact, they are not required to stay, and that the "beatings will continue until morale improves" atmosphere may not be the only way Christianity can ever be practiced.

Obviously, we can't use little stick-figure fishies, because that's been done.

Arbitrarily, 'ü' was selected. It's nice. You can put it in anything; it's a single letter, so it can't easily be searched for. It occurs naturally in lots of words, like names of German theologians.

Anyway, to celebrate the occasion, I made a cat macro:

The slogan comes from a recent debate in which someone started talking about how, if Paul ran an inquisition, various people wouldn't live up to it. I pointed out that, after Saul's experiences running an inquisition, the thought seemed unlikely, so the topic turned to what would happen if God ran the inquisition. I say that everyone would be found small and a little scared, and condemned to hugs.

ChristianForums: Hey, edit this.

So, in response to the new policy allowing only clinic-bombers to have ribbons, a few things happened. (Note: I have used slight hyperbole. In fact, everyone who identifies as "pro-life" can have ribbons. No one else can.)

One of them is that one of CF's last remaining real ministers walked away. He posted a powerful message, then scrambled his password and logged out. He quoted Numbers 5 (the passage describing an abortion), then wrote:

pro life, anti new policy

The Bible is not as clear as folks would have you believe, there should be room at the table for both views--I doubt any of us have it right. Let's be a little less sure of our having "the Truth" and more sure about the love of Jesus and proclaiming His Name to the least, the last, and the lost.

Farewell.

it's sad, really--people think this is about abortion--it's not, it's about political statements in sigs--never before allowed on CF. to those who I've wronged by words, actions, silence or lack of action I apologize.
blessings
tommy
someone should copy this quick, it won't last

He was right; it got deleted quickly (albeit restored later).

As is so often the case when a good preacher makes a great point, many felt moved to respond. I wrote:

I cannot disagree with Auntie's claim: You are needed here.

However, under this policy, you, and me, and many others, are not welcome here, and the Christian practice has always been to go, not where we are needed, but where we are welcome.

The Gospel According to St. Matthew, Chapter 10, Verses 10-15

Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat. And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence. And when ye come into an house, salute it. And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Goodbye. Not to herev, whom I am sure I will see on and off both in years and eternities to come, but to CF. I will go back to Internet Infidels, where they let me preach the Gospel with fewer restraints, and to other places with fewer restraints still.

This was, of course, edited. Here's the revised post:

I cannot disagree with Auntie's claim: You are needed here.

Now, you might think that changes the sense of the post. It does.

It was edited by one of the staff who has long maintained a certain amount of hostility towards me (and, I must admit, I towards her as well). It was edited without following any of the usual procedures, such as notifying someone of an edit.

It was also edited despite not violating any rules.

Why? For the same reason that the thread was deleted. Speaking truth to power never goes over well with power.

Many of us are leaving. The forum's active membership has been declining; now it's declining faster.

All the wants you waste
All the things you've chased
Then it all crashes down
And you break your crown
And you point your finger
But there's no one around
Just want one thing
Just to play the king
But the castle's crumbled
And you're left with just a name
Where's your crown King Nothing?

Those annoying car stickers

So, every so often, someone plasters my car with little stickers advertising some kind of "earn $$$" thing. "If you have an extra 8-12 hours per week and desire to earn an extra $8000-1,000 a month".

I got one of them to call me back. Melissa (at 651-636-6628) works for "Maverick Applied Concepts". They may or may not be registered with the secretary of state; I show a "MAC international", but I don't think that's the same one. (There could be more than one.) Their web site (which is mostly defunct) is at the most obvious name.

What do they sell?

Fake drugs. Here's the core of their pitch:

"60,000 - 140,000 Americans will die this year from adverse reactions to FDA-approved over-the-counter and prescription drugs?"

You get the idea.

Anyway, Melissa got sort of snippy about how I was wasting her time, but apparently she has enough time to put little stickers on everybody's cars. Poor baby. I gotta find out whether that's actually illegal, or just really annoying. (I'd file a BBB complaint for grins and giggles, but contrary to their claim, they are not discernably registered.)

Why didn't they make us sing this in school?

The Fúfumal is an epic tale of magic and heroes.

Oddly, we sang a sort of simplified version of this in school. But why not this version? It's much better.

Instant review: Ruby

I like to learn new programming languages from time to time. Some, I like better than others; I put in a few years on the ISO C committee (and I'd still be there if I had funding). Others, I don't like so much; my first gut response to PHP was "I think this language may be uglier than perl", and the impression has stuck with me.

One of my friends recommended that I look at Ruby. I was not initially well-disposed towards Ruby; the first time someone pointed me at some material about it, the tone was practically cultish; I felt more like an onlooker in an old Dr. Pepper commercial than like an engineer, and the page I was linked to would have been only marginally creepier with background audio of voices whispering "one... of... us...".

But I got a recommendation that I might like it from my friend Dave, whose judgement on computer technology is often quite good. So I took a look. I'm glad I did.

Ruby is an object-oriented scripting language. It feels more designed than accreted; the philosophy of the language seems both well-considered and consistent. It tends to gently encourage reasonable coding practices, without being dogmatic about questions of style. There's a fair amount of convenience and syntactic sugar, but that's not always a bad thing; when it's not done at the expense of clarity and sanity, syntactic sugar shows respect for the programmer.

If you enjoy programming, you will probably enjoy Ruby. If you program for need, but have never seen why people enjoy it, Ruby might be a good starting place for finding out that it can be fun to tell a computer what to do.

ChristianForums: AM I NOT MERCIFUL?

There's been some discussion at CF. Any time someone's signature or avatar or other "bling" mentioned pro-choice positions, drama ensued, so a policy was reached where only pro-life things could be said, but drama ensued, so the policy was that no one could put comments like this in signatures or avatars; you can talk about these things in posts in certain forums, but not in others, and the ruling was that putting such things in signatures was "discussing" them in other forums. This has been changed! Read on.

Pro-Life Ribbon/Signature Policy

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

There has been quite a controversy lately over the topic of Pro-life and Pro-choice signatures.

As is well known, CF has long had a policy of not allowing mention of either position in signatures and avatars, although we do allow for discussion of the topic within certain forums. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

And while that policy has served its initial intended purpose at CF, it is also true that CF is like a living thing that grows and matures over time. Sometimes circumstances dictate that we revisit certain policies. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

In this case the voice of many members has been heard that they would like to express their pro-life views within the context of their signatures, avatars, and profiles.

This has been a difficult decision for us to make. That is not because we don't all have strong opinions on the matter - because we do. The difficulty comes in finding a way to accomodate those who want to express their pro-life stance, while at the same time respect others who either have a contrarian view, or those who may be hurting due to past decisions or actions. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

The fact is that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of CF members whose lives have been directly touched by abortion. And while not everyone has the same experience, the truth is that many people struggle with deep pain and trauma for many years because of it. This is especially so for those women who have come to regret having had an abortion. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Even those who have become active participants in the pro-life movement because of having experienced this trauma are subject to renewed pain and anguish through the careless or thoughtless words of those who may mean well, but do not always express themselves in a sensitive or compassionate manner. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

So should we permit free speech in the name of a good thing (i.e., defending life) become an occasion of sin by being insensitive to those who are hurting? Is our need to express our pro-life beliefs so great that we can trample on the sensitivites of the very people we most need to minister to? ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

And yet, it is, objectively speaking, a good thing to promote life-affirming ideals. In this day and age when there are so many other alternatives to abortion, there is no reason why a Christian website should not allow the pro-life message to be expressed in some form. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

There are many aspects of the pro-life movement that can be expressed in a positive way. After all, there are messages pertaining to alternatives to abortion, such as adoption. And there are also messages that can be focused more on love and healing than they are on the conflict between pro-life and pro-choice advocates. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Another consideration we struggled with is that this is a ministry with a mission toward "Uniting All Christians As One Body" - it is NOT supposed to be a mission to exclude those Christians we may personally disagree with. And the fact of the matter is that there are some pro-choice Christians who are happy to promote life affirming goals such as adoption and the healing power of those organizations that minister to women's emotional health issues. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

While pro-choice is not a stance that I can personally agree with, the truth is that CF has hundreds of members who take this view. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

And so are we Executives to send the message that CF is really only interested in Uniting All Pro-life Christians As One Body - or - do we really mean it when we claim to offer a welcoming environment for ALL Christians - period? ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

That is a very serious question.

Before the pro-life advocates reading this statement just dismiss the pro-choice members as immaterial to the question at hand, I invite them to think in terms of the WITNESS that their pro-life message is supposed to reach. For if the very people you seek to witness to feel unwelcome at CF in the first place, and leave this website because of it, then to whom are you witnessing? To put it bluntly, if all CF members are pro-life because the pro-choice members have left, then you will be preaching your pro-life message to the choir. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

The only way for a pro-life member to effectively engage in a discussion with a pro-choice member (within certain restricted forums of course) is to make the pro-choice members feel just as much a part of the CF community as the pro-life members are. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Therefore, the Executives want to LOUDLY affirm our commitment to the mission of uniting ALL Christians as one body - even those Christians whose worldview may differ from ours. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

There is also another affirmation we want to state clearly and without equivocation: we advocate the pro-life position. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

We are not, as a site, neutral on this question even though we do not want to stifle the free exchange of dialog on this topic in certain forums. We are not neutral on life even though we will be neutral in how we moderate our forums. We will be fair and balanced and will hold to the standard of mutual respect for the opinions of others. We demand this of all forum participants as well as of our own staff. We will remind members that we have people on staff who fall on either side of the pro-life/pro-choice debate. We include Christians from all sides on our staff, and hence this ministry really does embrace its stated mission. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Our position is that life will be affirmed at this website whenever possible, while remaining sensitive to the needs of those who are either hurting or those who wish to hold to a pro-choice position. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Brothers and sisters, this has not been an easy challenge to perfectly overcome. We are well aware that no matter what decision we make, there will be some who disagree. We may lose some members over this, and this does distress us. There is no such thing as a perfect win-win situation when some aspects of the question are mutually exclusive. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Therefore we have come up with the following decision in an effort to speak to the needs of all of our members while still remaining faithful to the gospel message of life, the healing ministry of Jesus Christ, and the mission statement of this website. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

We have decided to permit PRE-APPROVED pro-life ribbons and/or other pre-approved CF images in members' signatures, avatars, and profiles. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

We will offer a selection to choose from (please be patient as we gear up - we will make them available as soon as possible). We will offer a variety of tasteful and non-offensive images and ribbons that will inspire hope, healing, love, and life to those members who choose to sport one. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

For example, we will have a standard simple pro-life ribbon that many people already seem to be pushing for. We will also carry a pro-adoption ribbon. We will try to have a tasteful image of Jesus holding a hurting woman and a baby: a message of love and healing. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Many of the choices will be something that even pro-choice members might want to have. Most pro-life and most pro-choice members are in favor of pro-adoption and pro-healing to those in need. We need to seek out common beliefs where possible without denying the sanctity of life. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

We have just begun working on this, and if you have a suggestion of things you would like to have, please give us your ideas. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

But, beloved in Christ, there are two things that we cannot and will not permit.

The first is that we will not allow any member to put additional text or commentary alongside these pre-approved images. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

This is not because we want to stifle people's right to express themselves. Rather it is in an effort to avoid unintended hurt to those who may be pained by possibly aggresive messages. It is also an effort to keep the website peaceful from potential flame wars breaking out between those on both sides of the divide. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

The second thing we cannot permit at this time is a pro-choice ribbon or any other image promoting a pro-choice view. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

As I explained, this is not an easy decision to come to because we truly do not want to make our pro-choice members feel unwelcome or not a part of the CF community. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

So we tried to come up with a decision that would come up with some life-affirming ribbons and images that even pro-choice people can agree with. By keeping these ribbons, etc. simple and tasteful and not allowing extra commentary, the pro-choice people should not feel attacked for their views. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

And we will remind all members that if they desire to dialog and discuss abortion-related issues with other members, CF has long offered places where members are permitted to do so in a respectful manner. That policy and those places remain unchanged. Please ask a staff member if you are not sure where they can be found. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

Brothers and sisters - if you are a prayerful person - please remember this ministry and our members in your prayers. Please remember the hurting in your thoughts. Pray for those you disagree with. Do not attack them with righteousness - but rather love them into the Truth. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

If you are pro-choice, please know that you are welcome here and that your dignity will be respected and protected. While you may be disappointed about not having a ribbon, please remember all the other ways you can share your views in our forums, and also consider wearing some other life-affirming ribbon that you can embrace. ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

With much prayer, respectfully submitted,

Christian Forums Executive Committee

ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL?

---

Boy, that sure is welcoming. (I added the "ARE WE NOT MERCIFUL" lines; I felt they made it more welcoming.)

The problem here is that there's a small but very vocal group of people who are not only anti-abortion, but absolutely opposed to any recognition or respect for people who are not absolutely opposed to all abortions in all circumstances. I have seen people at ChristianForums told that they should have died in screaming agony from a ruptured fallopian tube, because the alternative (aborting an ectopic pregnancy) condemns them to eternal damnation. That's okay. CF staff supports and endorses telling people you wish they'd died painfully.

We've decided to try to be welcoming to members of the "Executive Committee". Obviously, we want them to know that we are ABSOLUTELY committed to welcoming them. To make this clear, we're saying so, once, here, in this post. There will be no other signs, ever. We are encouraging people to design and wear buttons that say "all members of the Executive Committee will burn in hell forever". We are also encouraging people to design and wear buttons that say "The executive committee is a hellspawned lie." We regret that, at this time, we cannot allow people to wear buttons that express any condoning of the existence or wellbeing of the Executive Committee. We will allow people to make individual posts in which they condone the Executive Committee under restricted circumstances, or conditionally, but we reserve the right to edit or delete these posts, or ban posters, in the event that such posts are reported by people who hate the CF executive committee.

AM I NOT MERCIFUL?

Fanboyism

Engadget has a poll up, for "best console of 2006". I first saw this through a link on a Playstation fan forum, where someone had cheerfully commented that "second place isn't bad, with all the negative press". Now, consider that, of the other three contenders, one is the Nintendo DS, which was released before 2006, and one is the "GP2X MK2", a specialized hobbyist console. Obviously, the third is the Wii. The numbers were pretty solid last I checked; the Wii was at 63% of the vote, and the PS3 at 24%. Second place is, in this case, quite bad.

In fact, right now, a lot of PS3 owners are pretty touchy, and inclined to say some pretty mean things about people who like the Wii. It's pretty easy and casual to dismiss them as "fanboys" -- people too devoted to a thing to appreciate its faults, or to see the merits in its competition.

What seems to be hard for people to understand is that, at some level, fanboyism is the default state of humans. Fanboyism is the root of "religious violence", and it is the root of football hooligans. It's the basis of "partisan politics". When we divide people into groups, powerful instincts kick in. We not only side with the people in our own group; we filter our experiences, giving them the benefit of the doubt, while denying it to members of competing groups. We remember others as stupider and less competent than they are, while playing up the skills and attributes of those who are like us.

Fanboyism is dangerous and powerful, and easily manipulated. One of the first things a good scammer will do is mention religion; in America, generally Christianity. Trying to get someone to participate in a scheme wherein you send them fraudulent checks and they send you real checks for some of the money? Start by talking about your strong Christian values. (Russell Seehafer wrote an excellent article on a related note, exploring why GodTube is stupid.) When people talk about the importance of "Christian values", they're relying on fanboyism to make people who identify as Christian rubber-stamp a policy which is, more likely than not, anything but.

This is a hard thing to overcome, because it's a powerful instinct, bred in the bone for many generations. A few things to try:

1. Make a point of associating with people you don't agree with, or don't identify with.
2. Don't get into tit-for-tat games. The fact that someone in "their" political party was also corrupt does not make it a non-issue that someone in "our" party was corrupt.
3. Reject privileges that come from groups. If special privileges are being extended to you because of your religion, or your color, or even just because of your favorite football team, reject them. Accepting these privileges leaves you even more emotionally invested in the distinctiveness of your group.
4. Include, rather than exclude. Don't define policies in terms of the people you can remove or exclude; define them in terms of the people you are actively seeking. Don't kick people out for not fitting the mold; welcome them for broadening your horizons.

Good luck.