Tuesday, June 27, 2006
About Me
- Name: willhuntforfood
- Location: The granola state, United States
I like long, romantic walks on the beach, shooting seagulls with a pellet gun.
Previous Posts
- What a day.
- Insert foreboding music here.
- Here fishy, fishy...
- The Village People, the early years...
- Finally, a doctor with some common sense
- Kids say the darnedest things
- For my derelict hunting buddies...
- Back to the grind
- I'm outta here
- And I thought I was having a bad day.
21 Comments:
OOOOkaaaay!
You better enlighten me on this one - no doubt it has a reference that I think I'm sure of?
My curiousity is now killin' me...
Wow, when they say a picture is worth a thousand words...
Is this really what happened? No. Nothing untruthful was said on Tuesday night. Honesty. That's all what was asked for. That's all that was spoken.
Since you "anonymous" don't have the sand to say who you are, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. I hope you are, otherwise you've got a very long life ahead of yourself.
So... Willhuntforfood,
Is that your real name or are you a little "sandy" too? lol
Interesting.
Let me stand-up and support willhuntforfood on this one.
If anonymous is willing to look at a few other blogs on this site they will clearly see willhuntforfood's face in pics, and even named now and then on certain stories.
Plus anonymous, you and all of us clearly know who willhuntforfood is, and not vice-versa.
Get some backbone and put a name to your anonymity. If you are the holder of all that is perceived truth (since that is all that was supposedly shared the other night) then tell us the truth - who are you?
Afraid to enter a healthy debate with those who don't agree with you like willhuntforfood (and many others) who feel, once again, a fast one was orchestrated?
Who are we kiddin', you'll never name yourself - so don't respond anymore to this blog until you're ready to defend your position with an identity on what for many is becoming a very serious and hurtful thing.
Ditto what Jason said.
Actually, I have a reasonable suspicion as to your identity. And if I'm correct, it makes this whole mess even more tragic.
I'm not interested in carrying on a public debate with you which will only do further damage to our church and the unity of it. If you have something to say, please come to me directly. I'm not a hard guy to find. Like Jason said, there's plenty of references to my name and plenty of photos of me on this blog, you should be able to look back and figure it out. But I suspect that's not really necessary as you already know exactly who I am.
Just to be clear, I am not Anonymous. In the interest of full disclosure...
"My name is Steve and I'm a blogaholic."
[chorus] "Hi Steve"
The TRUTH is that I don't know what the truth is, because I wasn't a part of the process. And now I feel like I have to make a decision about my family's future without all the information. But the disgust I hear coming from people I trust who were a part of the process gives me a reason to be concerned. So, a decision will be made, and I might never be sure if it was the right one, but I've still got to make a decision.
Because you can't eat pie in general (or something like that).
I guess my last comment was so unclear that it even confused my wife.
I am NOT the person who left the anonymous comments above.
I think I need a couple days off.
I'd also like to point out that anyone in the worship service on 6/11/06, when the representative from the denomination's headquarters spoke about "Healthy Relating," should know better than to think that anonymous comments will be taken seriously. You can check out the audio here to refresh your memory. He asked the congregation to abide by several rules - one of which was "I will not pay attention to any unsigned letters or notes." It's at about 4/5 of the way through the sermon. People need to stand up and take responsibility for their words, or expect them to be ignored. I'd hate to think that a leader at our church would be responsible for that.
O.K.....
Here is the truth. Hugh assumtions were made (from more than one person) that the second blog from anonymous was from the same person who posted the first one. They were not. I posted the second one.
I am not a blogger, it was the first time.
I didn't know if it(the system) would identify a different "anonymous' or not. I don't have a profile and with all of this hostility, assumptions, and with the way I can see things can be mis-interpreted (again by more than one person)I don't think I will.
Please forgive me. I DON'T know who you are (willhuntforfood).I saw the irony of complaining about someone not identifying themselves when their profile doesn't readily identify who they are. I just truly thought it funny. Hence the LOL.(I guess I have a bad sense of humor) Do you not see the irony as one new to blogdom?
I am truly sorry for the offense. I am sorry if it brought even more hostility to whom ever posted the first anonymous. I am sorry that it cause anger or any other negative emotion from the readers.
I will stop blogging and continue reading (for a short while maybe).
Blogging is too dangerous, can too easily be misinterpreted, and takes too much time! I do not see that it glorifies God.
Thank you for letting me know your heart!
Keeping you all in my prayers.
Anonymous #2:
I'm sorry I assumed you were the same as Anonymous #1. You can see the kind of problems anonymous posts cause.
I probably haven't been very gracious to anyone the last few days. I'm feeling somewhat hurt and cynical. I probably need to take a break from this for a few days to settle down.
One of the small discouragements about all of this is that its probably a lot of people's introduction to blogging. It's not inherently any more God-honoring or dishonoring than TV, radio, print, or any other form of media. It's a communication tool, and it's the content that should be judged, not the distribution method. If you check out other blogs or this one from ealier times, I think you'll find some things that are worthwhile and some that aren't. I encourage you to keep reading and sharing.
I think #2 should calm down and give people the Benefit of the Doubt in light of the wimpy move by #1.
Steve's point is excellent and dead on. Accept the invite and don't run away...
Easy fix: All it takes is signing your name at the bottom if you don't know how to post your identity.
In fact, I want to welcome you to the blogosphere:
YAY!!! Welcome!!! You posted!!!!
Keep it up!!! I'm looking forward to having a new conversation partner!!!!
=)
All this from a picture..
How exciting! This once again proves that PH is pure genius!
But, we still need to hunt down the mysterious blogger #1, I have a friend who works for the DEA in DC - he tells me he can track someone via the net (i.e. blog) and find out who they are whether they sign on by name or not, shall I pursue? HA!
Blogging is too dangerous, can too easily be misinterpreted, and takes too much time! I do not see that it glorifies God.
You might want to mention that to the senior pastor then, he's got one!
Actually, I already have an ISP tracer embedded in this blog's template - tells IP address, type of web browser used, etc.. It's going to take a little effort but I'll know who it is within a week or so. Care to come clean before you get exposed? Could be mighty embarassing for you!
This will be great fun seeing who is brought into the light. Confession is honesty - so mr. or mrs. "only honesty was shared that night" is going to get a taste of their own medicine back at em', so it would be in their best interest to come clean now.
Also, this is a hoot to see that this blog is gaining ground - no telling how many folks are watching and reading along just chomping at the bit' waiting to see who anonymous is.
Kind of like deep throat and watergate all over again.
Oh, one other comment to make (sorry for the double-take).
Who're you kidding anonymous #2? You're the same bird as anonymous #1. You just got caught with some backfire and now you're trying to cut and run.
Here's what we ought to do before PH rustles the gopher out of the hole - how about we lay odds on who it is? Is this possible? We could give initals. I think I have a 60% surety on who it is given past track records and predictability.
Jason and Paul -
I understand where you guys are coming from, but you're starting to step over the line of civility.
Interesting input. Having thought about it (briefly I'll admit) I disagree. But I'll tell you this, I was just up on the roof of my house doing some repairs in 100+ degree heat thinking about this blog entry (I know it sounds crazy, I was trying to distract myself because I was afraid I was going to fall off & break my neck). I'm actually considering torching the entire comment section. As much as I abhor censorship I don't see anything good coming from this.
You may be right on one level. But I really hope you don't nuke it. In a bizarre sort of way this is what makes blogging unique and interesting.
But again I say, the power of an image is just amazing as it stirs up the emotions in no other way.
Reminds me of the great editorial cartoonists who get lots of mileage out of one simple drawing.
It's okay to let whoever wrote anonymous 1 & 2 to realize words have imapact and statements made need to be justified. Try preaching for a living and you'll know what I mean - every time you get up there and pour out your heart with words, someone agrees, someone disagrees - in it's aftermath you definitely hear from the disagree'in crowd the most.
Remember, this blog would not have taken on a life if true expression and freedom of truth were allowed to be shared when it mattered the most - on that night.
Want a revolution - subdue the spoken truth and look for a scapegoat.
I think the joy of a blog is to let it all hang out. Silliness, mistakes, stupidity, insight, wisdom, corrections, growth, etc.
Isn't that life?
That's reality to me.
Sometimes some people freak out because it's all just too real, but I think that's what helps us grow and become better.
Honesty is the antidote. =)
Post a Comment
<< Home