xjwsforChrist

Don't think she means jwtalk.net, dear LQ (peace, dear brother!). Seems like only active publishers can join there, upon approval and usually recommendation of another member. And they even have "get to know you first."

I could be wrong.

Peace to you!

YSSFS of Christ,

Shel

Theres no feature on JW.Org for comments or chat..
The WBT$ couldn`t afford it,people like me would be there in a Heartbeat..LOL!!..

To sKallys credit..
She relentlessly keeps phoning the WBT$ for them to put the Comment/Chat Feature on JW.Org..
That girl makes me laugh..LOL!!..

......................................OUTLAW

_________________

Feeling is mutual my friend.

Yes, and it's easy to just turn on the utube webam creator and get it all on tape.

MEMO: THIS WAY THE PUBLIC AND JWS CRUISING ALL SORTS OF VIDEOS [PEOPLE WILL WATCH OR LISTEN TO JUST ABOUT ANYTHING ON UTUBE NO] WILL COME UPON IT AND HEAR 'IT' STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSES MOUTH.

We shall see what, if anything, it generates. But these calls recorde, with various issues inquired about, are the way of the internet future. OR THE COULD INSTALL COMMUNICATION FEATURES!

Will they be "wise or stupid?" wt quote feb can't recall year.

_________________
"I am proud to say that I will not lift one finger ( except my middle finger) for the WTBTS."

lq, it's simple to comprehend my isse here once you hear the tape. have you done so yet?

_________________
"I am proud to say that I will not lift one finger ( except my middle finger) for the WTBTS."

No, I haven't, sKally. I'm gonna have to set aside time for that one... a little too long for me at one chunk! LOL! But, I will. I promise.

BTW, I re-read the post where folks here, including me, got the impression jw.org has a forum/chat feature. If I'm reading it right, I think you meant, 'if they did, would you sign up for it'. Is that what you meant?

I don't like these comics at all. They're all OT and they deal with some pretty scary stuff for kids. I mean . . . what's the point, except to scare these kids into submission. Ugh.

heya lq,



I did in fact, mean such.

Example: the text I've emboldened above is what I'd be curious if you would indeed, submit to the comment section below the webpage [NO, THERE IS NO FORUM OR CHAT SYSTEM ON JW.ORG...IT WAS HYPOTHETICAL] IF THERE WERE ONE INSTALLED? And would you submit this feedback onto their installed forum, IF IT WERE TO MANIFEST?

And I'll ask you too, what I posed to zoe, in her new thread:

_________________
"I am proud to say that I will not lift one finger ( except my middle finger) for the WTBTS."

I probably would. Of course, I'm at the point where I just don't care what the org thinks of me. I care what my family thinks, and that's the big hurdle to get over, but I don't care one iota what the org thinks.

Speekin' o' hurdels... howz "sprang" (lak, "Ya'll gwine n' git yo'sef sprang fum dat ol' hawlit, now, ya'll heah?") trainin' camp goin', deah LQ (pease t' ya'll, brutha!)? Ya'll don' hafta reespond, tho'. Ah'z jus' chekin' on ya'll n' wondrin wetha ever'thang iz Ohhh-tay (thus fah). Ah'z also mebbee kurous wetha ya'll myda laid summa dat ol' hawlut's own "lit'cha"' 'roun' de hows n' sech. Y'no, wit de mahgins all writ up lak we'z dun sed? Jus' kurous, tho' - tain't nozee o' nuffin lak dat, luvee, so ya'll mor'n welkum t'say nuthin' a'tall... mebbee ev'n say "Nuna'ya dang bizniss, Miz Shebbie!" Cuz ah kin hannel dat, too, yassuh, ah kin - LOLOLOL!

Pease t'yall n' yall's howshold!

Yer sirvint n' a slav o' de Lawd Crise,

Miz Shebbie

Nothing is happening on that front. She's continued as if nothing has happened, although has been giving me a slightly cold shoulder the past week or so. And she hasn't brought it up, either.

If anything transpires, I'll post it, but it'll be in the Sanctuary.

Got it, cap'n (peace! ). No pressure. LOLOLOL!

Hello again lq,

I see you posted in this thread:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchto ... AjbJ_ldUfQ

Interesting comments.

The poster baltar has it right. And I am taking an educated guess that IF indeed wt did provide a forum, the terms of use would be violated, to their standards, minute by minute.

This jw.org gig will fail.

_________________
"I am proud to say that I will not lift one finger ( except my middle finger) for the WTBTS."

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchto ... AjbJ_ldUfQ

Um, what is to stop anyone from reading the material that one finds on their site, outloud on , let's say, a youtube video? And publishing it? It's just reading outloud, something you see on or offline, but you are recording it.

How is THAT copyright? I'm not cutting, copying or pasting. Or photocopying. I'M JUST READING WHAT IS WRITTEN.

_________________
"I am proud to say that I will not lift one finger ( except my middle finger) for the WTBTS."

Yeah . . . how do you like that? I was very surprised to get that alert.

I'm just not going to use their site anymore. If anyone asks me, I will say, "Because they alerted me to their Terms of Use and said I have to agree to them to use their site. I don't, so I won't."

Of course, they have no less than four different ways of saying they'll 'disfellowship' you from their SITE if you breach in ANY WAY. Suspending your access, prohibiting your access, blocking your IP address (including any computers that use your IP address), demanding that your ISP block your access. This is a pretty strong-handed approach.

Of course, I realize it's just legal junk, but to call attention to it just tells me what I've been fighting all along. It's a business, not a religion. Or, rather, a business masquerading as a religion.

LOL, that and they're probably fighting people who re-post their articles, etc, and counter them on their own sites, while still giving credit and links to the source. There are some pretty large and popular exjw sites out there. Now, if they had an open comment section on their own forum (the jworg one), then no one would need to comment/discuss/dispute elsewhere. But they don't. So...


I didn't see anything about not reading their stuff on a youtube account though, as sKally said ; ) Mind you, I have NO idea whether that is a legal loophole or not. Not a lawyer here, that is for sure.

(the new terms of use should only be able to apply to the timeline AFTER the new terms of use were posted, right?)

Peace to you both,
your sister and servant, and fellow slave of Christ,
tammy

I'm not so sure the disclaimer is for sites like JWN, SixScreens, etc. (peace to you, all!). They've been around a LONG time and the WTBTS doesn't lose enough members for such to be a threat. Remember, they're run by "apostates," so most aren't going to pay much attention to them. There is a site out there... now... however, that may be an actual threat. NOT just in leading people AWAY... but away to another religion (versus atheism/apostasy). That site is "AnointedJW.org". Unfortunately, they may not be much better.

They're not worried about sites that lead people away with OPPOSING views or OPPOSITE teachings - their members don't run toward that. But this one... ALSO claims to be "Jehovah's Witnesses." And so, any "WTBTS" JWs who are disillusioned with that organization and its leadership now have another "where" to "go away to"... another golden calf "called Jehovah"... whose "witnesses" they can STILL be.

Seriously, dear ones... I feel another WTBTS schizm coming. And I think they do, too.

I don't think they're worried about people taking the content and maligning/exposing it; I think they're worried about people using it, by appearing to AGREE with it... to lead folks away. A Catholic/Anglican kind of situation. THAT is a REAL threat to them. Because THAT could REALLY cost them some money.

Que sera, sera.

Peace to you, all!

A slave of Christ,

Shellamar, who marvels at those organizations who think big numbers mean something when it comes to God and Christ, and forget the account of Gideon (Judges 7 through ...