This is the last post I make that will have anything to do with JayneK.
Right now some people are mad at me because I deliberately derailed a farewell thread. As part of this I attacked the reputation of another member here.
By "another member," you mean Vetus Ordo. You attacked the reputation of Vetus Ordo. Why not write "I attacked the reputation of Vetus Ordo here"?? You might as well be specific. Like in the thread about closing the forum:
However I do vote to get rid of the fish count. I think it incites meanness.
I've noticed this too.
But how can everyone express their hatred of you than Jayne?
Just kidding. I don't see much point to the fishies either, and I actually have a good ratio.
My number of fishies is not a problem in itself. In a recent thread
some people started taunting me about it. Some people will use any weapon in an argument and fishies just give them one more.
By "some people," you meant me. You meant to say "tmw89 started taunting me about" the Fishies. You conveniently neglected to mention this came after you "attacked the reputation of" Vetus Ordo.
And that is only your latest convenient inconsistency.
All of you reading this who are not JayneK, please try to understand: I read this forum for years before I registered. I remember reading the forum even before Vetus registered (August 27 of 2007). For whatever good you think the user JayneK has brought to the forum, it is far outweighed by case after case of just what I've shown above – mini-mod type behavior (even along the line of “I'm acting in the general interest of the forum since I know better, so I'll break the rules here”), followed by baiting, followed by feigned hurt feelings and taking that moral high ground another user mentioned in this thread. This doesn't happen on a monthly basis. It happens on a near-weekly basis, even numerous times in a given week. Anyone with eyes should be able to see this pattern. In fact, just look at this post from the Vetus thread:
Jayne, I'm not trying to just be a jerk, but it's sort of convenient that you're going to supposedly take the high road now that you've got all your slander out on the forum.
Go back and look at thread histories - this is what she ALWAYS does!
I registered on this forum on August 7, 2009. For 133 days after I joined, the forum was JayneK-free.
On the 134th day after I registered, December 19, JayneK joined Fish Eaters.
I like and use this forum despite JayneK. When Rosarium posted the Ignore Code on June 25, 2011, I immediately modified it for my own use and JayneK was the first user I decided to include. Later, I had to deal with a user I'd put in the code, so rather than edit the script I disabled it. While I noticed JayneK up to her usual tricks, I tried my best to overlook it.
Then Vetus was banned.
I made the mistake of interacting with JayneK in my Farewell to Vetus Ordo thread – a thread I started not to circumvent a rule about questioning Vox Clamantis, but because I thought other people who don't check the Cornfield would wonder about him, and want to say their goodbyes. I maintain that if Jackson Eskew got such a thread in the Hello/Goodbye subforum, for what it's worth Vetus more than deserved one, too.
But it wasn't enough to be the cause of the ban for JayneK. Read her posts from the thread: she thinks sees her own judgment as mod-level, as evidenced in the Vetus thread:
Due to some comments in the Corn Field, I took this thread as a way to get around the rule about arguing with moderator's decisions, so I have no qualms about disrupting the thread.
That was a call for Vox Clamantis to make. Not JayneK. Because JayneK is not a mod.
But at any rate: nevermind the ejection of a long-time user elicits comments such as these from friends and critics and lurkers alike:
A fair, honourable, and articulate Traditional Catholic
He is a Catholic gentleman, and a friend.
[ . . . ] I often disagreed with him on minor points of theological opinion, but he was a solid, orthdox Catholic poster as well as a fine example of a Catholic gentleman.
Vetus is one of the folks that made FE great.
I'll miss his unmatched analysis and wit.
I've disagreed with him more than a few times, but he's hella smart, and always had insightful points to make, even if they were wrong
But seriously, he really is an asset to FE.
Vetus is one of the folks that made FE great. If his ban is permanent then we've lost something irreplaceable and we should count ourselves as quite unfortunate.
I mostly lurk on here, but this 100% correct. Often times I would be skimming through posts and when I would come to his I would stop and actually read it.
His knowledge of Traditional Catholicism is incredible and once he posted, it was elegantly worded.
[ . . . ]
I truly admire Vetus Ordo.
Vetus is one of the folks that made FE great. If his ban is permanent then we've lost something irreplaceable and we should count ourselves as quite unfortunate.
This.
God bless you, brother Vetus.
[ . . . ] he added much.
The man is a great writer, well learned in the Faith
I've learned so much from him about Traditional Catholicism. He's a very bright young man who is deeply in love with God and Church.
I've been a long time lurker on this site, and I have to say that Vetus Ordo was my favorite poster. His knowledge of the Catholic faith is amazing, and his posts were always well written and informative. [ . . . ] I learned alot from him.
[ . . . ] Vetus was one of the most intelligent and open-minded members of this forum.
No, nevermind all that. JayneK felt the need to post these gorgeous nuggets of insight which were totally essential to the Farewell (“Farewell” = Fare + well) thread:
He questioned whether I was really Catholic and called me a crypto-Jew.
I remember the time I started a thread for reaching some post number milestone. As is the custom, everyone else congratulated me. Vetus posted about how vain and frivolous it is to care about post counts. He disliked me and made no secret of it.
After trying to defend her comments (which were inappropriate to the thread) against many well-deserved rebuttals by various users, JayneK follows up:
I should not have posted about something he apologized for and I plan to confess it and do penance.
This would have been fine
IF SHE HAD STOPPED THERE. BUT NO:
But I do not plan to shut up in this thread.
Because unless JayneK is the center of your attention, you're doing it wrong.
But I take especial offense to this:
Vetus is not dead and this is not a eulogy.
What JayneK fails to realize is that not everyone here uses multiple social networks. For all any of us know, Fish Eaters is the only forum to which several or many users belong. Some users are more skillful than others in finding banned friends and acquaintances elsewhere. For many, Fish Eaters may be the only outlet through which users have known and will ever know Vetus. If he is gone for good from here, there's a fine chance they may never read another new word from the man. JayneK conveniently forgot about that just like she's conveniently forgotten so very many other things in the 767 days since she registered.
I prefaced this post by telling all of you that this is the last post I make that will have anything to do with JayneK. I mean that. After I read through this thread, I re-enabled Rosarium's Ignore Code – after editing it down to solely include JayneK. When I look at the first page of this thread now, here's what I see:
Check out the link in my signature (“Fire on the forum?”) for info on how you, too, can block JayneK from your Fish Eaters experience. Here, I've even done the heavy-lifting for you in finding her UID and modifying the code – instead of what Rosarium wrote (which blocks DK), copy and paste this to Textpad or Notepad:
/*******************************************************************************
dk.js:
Copyright (C) 2011 J. F. O'Neill
This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
*******************************************************************************/
function hidePost(UID)
{
var UIDString = "http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?action=pm;sa=send;u=" + UID;
var allLinks = document.getElementsByTagName('a');
for (var i = 0; i < allLinks.length; i++)
{
if (allLinks[i].getAttribute('href') == UIDString)
{
allLinks[i].parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.style.visibility = 'hidden';
}
}
}
window.onload = function()
{
var UID = ["1138580"];
for (var i = 0; i <= UID.length; i++)
{
hidePost(UID[i]);
}
return true;
}
It's one thing to try to work out and resolve conflicting issues to work toward reconciliation. In most cases, striving toward that is part of our call to Catholic charity. In JayneK's case, all that does is create a lull before the next convenient inconsistency, misunderstanding, in some cases banning, until the cycle must be repeated again. And again. And again. There's being Catholic, and there's recognizing that interacting with JayneK goes nowhere really fast.
If anyone takes issue with what I wrote, remember what JayneK herself has written here:
Please post your criticisms of me here.
I started this thread to give people an opportunity to vent. [ . . . ] It is not fair to scold them for being uncharitable when I invited this.
This was my criticism. This was my venting.
That is all.
