The burden we carry

Originally posted by @rajk999
Yep and when he looks into your heart and see that you are without remorse for creating duplicate factious accounts contrary to your agreement, and you do it over and over and over .. you are going to get into some sorer punishment 😀

This is the only account I have. I’m not Becker, and it seems you’re bearing false witness against me, which is one of the “no no’s” in the Ten Commandments🙂

Originally posted by @rajk999
Yep and when he looks into your heart and see that you are without remorse for creating duplicate factious accounts contrary to your agreement, and you do it over and over and over .. you are going to get into some sorer punishment 😀

You don’t know the condition of Becker’s heart any more than I do.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Seem's your lack of understanding about what constitutes 'deception' is matched only by your lack of understanding about the laws of gravity and curvature of the Earth.

The assumption you make--- that your standard of assessment--- is fallen short of by my standard of assessment is demonstrably wrong.

I know what the term means every bit as is necessary for a clear understanding, and your insinuation that I've missed some key element or even some nuance thereof is wrong.

What is being missed here, the actual crux of the matter, is your understanding--- and it appears to be a misunderstanding--- of the representation and nature of identity as it relates to this medium.
In the example I gave, the goal of the double-identity poster is to convey a message.
He isn't attempting to gain in any way, shape or form any appreciable physical benefit.
No money, no contracts, nothing intrinsic or facile wherein one could feel cheated of property or good will, or could one gain property or good will of any service in the exchange.
With a gain of nothing more than expressing one's thoughts without the barrier of another person's prejudices, it's impossible to infer intention to deceive in any fashion other than what is routinely employed by literally every person on here.
With the only difference being quantity, there's simply no way to pin deceit with all its requisite intents for fraud and unfair advantage on the person who has more than one.
... as far as we're concerned, of course.

The administrators will have a decidedly different view as it pertains to creating multiple identities for the purpose of circumventing the game limits.
But their perspective on the loss of sunscription fees isn't the concern of those in discussion on topics.
What is the concern of those in discussion--- what should be of concern--- is the content of every post.
Each one all by itself and on its own merits.
Not the merits the reader projects onto the post on account of their inability to look past the person posting it... which is nearly 100% of what occurs on this site.

As far as the other topics you raised, I guess I can only thank you for illustrating, under the power of your own free will and through no undue force from me or anyone else, my above point.
I say something you can't refute or one-up?
Why, pull out the ol' flat earth discussion to infer a poisoned well.

Weak.

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
row , row , row your boat
gently down the stream
merrily, merrily, merrily
life is but a dream

words to live life by people. Row 'YOUR' boat, don't try to row other people's. "Gently" down the "Stream" of consciousness . Merrily times 3.
Life is a dream people.

this little piece of honey will get you through.

y thumb down? why? seriously

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Creating multiple accounts becker is a violation of RHPs Terms of Service.

It's also extremely sad.

sad stuff. transparency is honest and golden. simple stuff people

Originally posted by @freakykbh
The assumption you make--- that your standard of assessment--- is fallen short of by my standard of assessment is demonstrably wrong.

I know what the term means every bit as is necessary for a clear understanding, and your insinuation that I've missed some key element or even some nuance thereof is wrong.

What is being missed here, the actual crux o ...[text shortened]... efute or one-up?
Why, pull out the ol' flat earth discussion to infer a poisoned well.

Weak.

I'm glad we're in agreement sir that the 'flat Earth' stuff is a weak addition to any discussion.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I'm glad we're in agreement sir that the 'flat Earth' stuff is a weak addition to any discussion.

Your attempt was weak.
The topic itself has a way of revealing the weakness of a person's thinking on a profound level.
It could almost be considered a litmus test for critical thinking and demonstrating how a person builds the edifices of/for their beliefs.

Originally posted by @freakykbh
The topic itself ['flat Earth' stuff] has a way of revealing the weakness of a person's thinking on a profound level.

Your 'flat Earth' stuff revealed the weakness of your ability to debate people on a topic which was painfully trite, which had you simply regurgitating unoriginal stuff from daft web sites, which exposed you as a pretentious dodger and deflector - and little else - and which had nothing whatsoever to do with a person's ability to think on a profound level.

Originally posted by @fmf
Your 'flat Earth' stuff revealed the weakness of your ability to debate people on a topic which was painfully trite, which had you simply regurgitating unoriginal stuff from daft web sites, which exposed you as a pretentious dodger and deflector - and little else - and which had nothing whatsoever to do with a person's ability to think on a profound level.

I think even Freaky himself realises he 'poisoned his own well' with his persistent ''the Earth isn't curved 'man didn't walk on the moon' 'gravity doesn't exist' nonsense and that he inevitably carries such nonsense with him into every thread he enters. - Even if he were to venture into a thread about cheese and tried to make a serious post about gorgonzola, people would still view him as the guy who believed every image of a spherical Earth was faked.

Irony is, of course, he believes none of that stuff and has been 'hoisted by his own petard.'

Originally posted by @fmf
Your 'flat Earth' stuff revealed the weakness of your ability to debate people on a topic which was painfully trite, which had you simply regurgitating unoriginal stuff from daft web sites, which exposed you as a pretentious dodger and deflector - and little else - and which had nothing whatsoever to do with a person's ability to think on a profound level.

Your assessment--- although popular and erudite-sounding with its childish insults--- is demonstrably wrong.
Whatever harping was employed by me was a direct result of the several who refused to answer two exceedingly direct and simple questions, which forced a repeated need to bring them back to the table.
Much pushing of peas around the plate, but literally none were eaten.

It wasn't a debate, which requires a rebuttal to a statement.
The 'you're an idiot, therefore you're wrong' method does not qualify as a rebuttal on its surface or in its content.

And, again, completely irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I think even Freaky himself realises he 'poisoned his own well' with his persistent ''the Earth isn't curved 'man didn't walk on the moon' 'gravity doesn't exist' nonsense and that he inevitably carries such nonsense with him into every thread he enters. - Even if he were to venture into a thread about cheese and tried to make a serious post about ...[text shortened]...

Irony is, of course, he believes none of that stuff and has been 'hoisted by his own petard.'

The people who lack the ability to retain an open mind are not my concern.
Although I don't begrudge their audience, I refuse to waste too much of my time trying to pry it open.
If someone is so immature in their thinking as to dismiss everything from a person on the basis of disagreement with them on some point or another, why would their opinion be valued for anything otherwise?

Have some scale of values which honors objectivity!

Originally posted by @freakykbh
The people who lack the ability to retain an open mind are not my concern.
Although I don't begrudge their audience, I refuse to waste too much of my time trying to pry it open.
If someone is so immature in their thinking as to dismiss everything from a person on the basis of disagreement with them on some point or another, why would their opinion be valued for anything otherwise?

Have some scale of values which honors objectivity!

It doesn't take an open mind to entertain the notion of a flat Earth, it takes a weak mind.

Originally posted by @rajk999
Suppose someone [djbecker for example] continues to operate several accounts knowing that it is willful deception, would God continue to forgive him over and over and over. At what point does it end, and would God eventually write him off.

Bear in mind that the Bible says that Christians who sin willfully will find no repentance.

real question is could he forgive himself?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Seem's your lack of understanding about what constitutes 'deception' is matched only by your lack of understanding about the laws of gravity and curvature of the Earth.

no gravity on moon. no atmosphere

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
It doesn't take an open mind to entertain the notion of a flat Earth, it takes a weak mind.

It takes an open mind to question everything.