Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Sytall's Story

Greetings,
I too had the honor of being kicked out of "DailyCross". I am not a Christian and of a different faith. I just want to tell my story to express my views that even as a non-Christian I do not view Fritz as being a valid representative of Christianity.
It is a very poor representation of Christianity, to show fear over a person's belief in another faith. I will repeat myself and say I do not view that site as being represntative of all Christians and understand that you have your share of oddballs just as they exist in my faith.
I know we do have differences, but gentleman of all faiths will disagree with dignity and honor, not with temper tantrums.
I did not initiate any posts promoting my faith. I was simply answering direct questions to me, from members to clear up misconceptions.
Thank You,
sytall (aka Woodrowx2)

[e-mail addresses removed by Badge Postmaster]

Dear sytall,
You have recently been engaged in activity in our Community in a manner or with content determined by our site administrators to be in violation of our Terms of Service. As a participating member of our Community, you agreed to abide by these terms. As a result of this violation your account has been disabled, pursuant to #19 of the Terms of Service. (http://l.salemweb.net/CommunityTermsOfService)
We must unfortunately insist that you not make any attempt to participate further in any of our Communities, even under a different name.
This decision is final and is not subject to discussion.
Sincerely,
Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

[further links to Salem's numerous venues removed by Badge Postmaster.]

Thursday, July 12, 2007

William's Story

Note: This entry has been edited only to handle the e-mail addresses more expeditiously. -Badge Postmaster


I joined Crosswalk as “Liberalguy.” Despite the provocative handle I tried to engage in serious and civil discussion. I’m not that far to the left, it’s just that Crosswalk’s conservative milieu made it easy to be a “Liberalguy.” There were a few TOS issues during my three year membership. On occasion Fred Alberti surprised me with his fairness, but I felt that it was begrudging and that my status was precarious.

In the thread “Why do we need a Pope?”(in the Christian Doctrine folder) I got off topic discussing religious tolerance with someone called Turretinfan (after the Reformer Francis Turretin.) Some of this discussion can be found on pages 62-63 of the thread. Citing Leviticus 24: 16 Turretinfan defended the 1553 execution of Michael Servetus for denying the Trinity and said a government’s role in “preventing excessive immorality” applied to suppressing deviant
religious views. I called Turretinfan a “theocratic fascist” and even defined the terms to show that I wasn’t being flippant. Alberti expelled me under TOS 20 (now TOS 19) saying that the decision was final and not open to discussion.

I admit I may have been a bit pugnacious. Calling someone a “fascist” is forbidden in the TOS, but I thought it only applied in the context of name calling, not to describing someone who thinks it’s ok to put people to death for their beliefs. (Isn’t that the definition of fascism?) Knowing I probably couldn’t appeal my expulsion I felt that Alberti at least owed me a better explanation than an “Alice in Wonderland” rule that allows him to pronounce the sentence without a verdict.

After two e-mails he cited other TOS numbers.

What got me was that Turretinfan was not expelled or openly reprimanded. Even if my expulsion was justified you’d think Alberti would still take issue with someone advocating capital punishment for hersey. He has zero tolerance for inclusive language Bibles and gay rights. Why didn’t he apply the same policy to what can only be described as a Christian Taliban? Under the circumstances I had to conclude that either Alberti thinks it’s ok for Christians to advocate
executing heretics or his bias got the better of him.

Ten months after my expulsion, on a whim, I wrote Alberti about readmission and asked him about this discrepancy. He said he doesn’t believe in executing heretics and that he enforces the TOS impartially, which seems to imply that Alberti must think it’s acceptable for other Christians to advocate executing heretics even if he doesn’t agree. When I e-mailed him for further clarification he said the matter was closed to further discussion.

Though lengthy, here is the correspondence so you can judge for yourself.

Dear Liberalguy,

Thank you for taking the time to request a review of your status with our Community. Before progressing further, I would like to ask you a few questions.

1. What have you learned during your absence from our Community, and how do you hope to apply it in any future participation?

2. Do you agree to refrain from participation in Current Events folder as well as homosexual related topics?

3. Have you reviewed our Terms of Service, and do you promise to conduct yourself in our Community in a manner that conforms to the rules of conduct as outlined therein?
(http://l.salemweb.net/CommunityTermsofService)

4. Specifically, do you agree to #19 of the Terms of Service? (Included below for your review)

Salem Web Network reserves the right to:

> respond to the violation of any of the above Terms of Service with any of the responses available to Community administrators and moderators without warning including involuntary movement to another area, "booting" (involuntary expulsion from chat and forums), and various forms of prevention of access to all community services including "Private Messages" for any duration of time including permanently at its sole discretion.

> report any violations of the Terms of Service to law enforcement and/or the Internet Community Alliance.

> remove any content which is considered to be disruptive to the Community and that is in violation of the Terms of Service.

> bar, restrict, block any user including Internet Community Alliance offenders for any reason as well as remove any content at our sole discretion.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to these questions. Your responses will assist me in reviewing your status and determining your future participation in our Community.

To clarify, this email does not guarantee your return to the Community. However, we are hopeful of a positive resolution and complete restoration.

Sincerely,
Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

From: (William's e-mail)
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 6:34 PM
To: Fred Alberti
Subject: Re: [ Liberalguy Status Review ] RE: Rejoining?

Dear Mr. Alberti,

My answer to question 2 is no. While I agreed to stay away from homosexual related topics, the majority of my posts were in the current events folder.

You could have just said no, instead of imposing obstacles.

Regarding my dismissal, why was Turretinfan allowed to remain when he was advocating the execution of heretics? Even if calling him a "theocratic fascist" for it justified my expulsion I would have expected you to have the same zero tolerance for what amounts to a "Christian
Taliban" as you do for same-sex marriage advocates. Did your biases cause you to overlook this or do you think that such views are within the pale of Christianity?

Sincerely,
William Jarrell, once known as "Liberalguy"
Greensboro, NC

From: "Fred Alberti" (F. Alberti's e-mail address)
Date: 2007/06/05 Tue PM 08:38:32 EDT
To: (William's e-mail address)
CC: (salem's "community" e-mail address)
Subject: RE: [ Liberalguy Status Review ] RE: Rejoining?

Hello there!

Thank you for taking the time to write us with your question.

Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to discuss the status of other users with unauthorized personnel.

Clearly, our is not the ideal platform for your activity. Fortunately, the World Wide Web offers you a number of alternatives which I'm sure you will find more accommodating of your style of participation.

Sincerely,
Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

From: (William's e-mail address)
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:08 PM
To: Fred Alberti
Subject: Status, no status

Dear Mr. Alberti,

I'm not interested in the status of other users, only as to why you have a double standard and why you tolerate such egregious views when other views are unacceptable in CW forums? I would think that executing people for their religious views would be as unChristian as same sex marriages and inclusive language Bibles.

I know that you never had any intention of readmitting me. Your questions were deliberate obstacles. How was I suppose to answer the first question, "What I have learned?" when you never really told me why I was expelled. Ever read Kafka?

I recently discovered a blog where exCW members share their experiences.

No doubt, you are aware of it. I am thinking about submitting my impressions of CW but I am willing to show you the fairness that you never showed me. As I said assessing your handling of my expulsion left me with two possible conclusions:

A. You think it's acceptable for Christians to advocate the execution of heretics. I'm not saying you're a theonomist, but you must think that such views are within the pale of Biblical Christianity. Perhaps you are a theonomist.

B. Your bias (either against me personally or against liberals in general) allowed you to overlook such egregious views. A sort of "they all stick together" if you will.

If there are other possible conclusions I'd like to know since I do not want to misrepresent you. But I'd welcome any clarification of this before submitting comments which might be posted online. (Personally, I tend to think it was B.) After being expelled during an exchange with a person who thinks it's ok to execute people for their religious opinions how else would expect me to assess the situation aside from a double standard or an acceptance of theonomy?

Sincerely,
William Jarrell
Greensboro, NC

From: "Fred Alberti" (F. Alberti's e-mail address)
Date: 2007/06/06 Wed AM 10:00:01 EDT
To: (William's e-mail address)
CC: (salem's "community" e-mail address)
Subject: [ Liberalguy community participation ] RE: Status, no status

Hello there!

I appreciate the offer. Unfortunately, your options are based on assumptions based on the participation of other users of which I am not permitted to discuss with unauthorized users.

1. I do not support executing people just because they are opposed to Christ and/or the Word of God.

2. I enforce the Terms of Service on users despite their political persuasion, religious affiliation, or any other characteristic.

Please do not email me further as I am clearly not going to be able to address your concerns without delving into issues regarding other participants of our site.

I wish you the best in finding a community that is better suited to your style of participation.

Sincerely,
Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

From: (William's e-mail address)
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 12:15 AM
To: Fred Alberti
Subject: Re: [ Liberalguy community participation ] RE: Status, no status

Mr. Alberti,

Taking your response at face value I think it's fair to conclude that you must think it's acceptable for Christians to advocate executing heretics even though you do not personally subscribe to this position.

William Jarrell
Greensboro, NC

Dear Liberalguy,
After the recent emails and prior incidence(s) requiring a ban from our Community, it's apparent that our website is not the ideal platform for your style of participation. Fortunately, the World Wide Web offers you a number of alterative communities that I'm sure you would find more agreeable.

Unfortunately, as caretakers of our owned and operated communities, we must at this point insist that you make no further attempts to participate in any of our chats or forums, even under a different name.

This decision is final and not subject to negotiation or any further discussion, so please refrain from further contact.

We appreciate your cooperation in respecting our decision in this matter.

Respectfully,
Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

Saturday, March 24, 2007

K's Story

Hello, brothers and sisters in Christ-

I, TOO, have had an awful experience with Mr. Fred Alberti (aka Fritz) of Crosswalk.com. I figured there must be others who shared my experience. However, I didn't know until now how many there were and that there have been many run-ins with Fritz that are even worse than mine. Here's my story:

Late in 2005, I participated in the forums at Crosswalk and started posting on a thread about the war in Iraq. I disagree completely with this war and made my feelings clearly known. Another poster (named Son In Me) obviously took issue with my comments and continually addressed me and others as "you liberals." It was also obvious that he couldn't respond to my messages in a mature fashion and had to resort to minor name-calling. I found it frustrating and was also perturbed that the mods never slapped Son In Me's virtual hands. Quite the opposite happened.

Son In Me posted a message about an offense he had taken (not from me, I don't think) and it was rather vague. So I asked for clarification by saying, "Did someone call you a $*&^% or something?"

That was it. And the grawlixes ($*&^%) were typed as just that, not as an actual word or insult.

Fritz informed me, without warning, that I was to no longer post on that thread. He eventually kicked me off of Crosswalk entirely. I miss some of the people there and found the fellowship was generally very good. However, the experience was enough to make me grateful I no longer have to deal with Fritz.

Thank you for creating this blog. At least I know I’m in good and, unfortunately, plentiful company.

In Him,
K

Saturday, March 17, 2007

JL's Story

G'Day...

I've been threatened with being booted from Crosswalk Forums - http://forums.crosswalk.com - for the following (and I quote) "lengthy list of offences"...

1) In a thread started by a practicing LaVeyan Satanist where he was being dumped on and accused of the whole 'goats and orgies' garbage (great way to reach out to someone involved in the occult and show the love of Christ guys - NOT!) I posted saying that I was sorry for the way he was being treated by some of the others at the Forum and that as an ex-practitioner of the Left Hand Path myself (tho' not a Satanist) I had some idea of where he was coming from and invited him to join "'The Son and the Moon Forums' - a Forum set up and maintained BY and FOR exWitches, exPagans and others who have come to Christ from an occult background" ... Something I had done several times in the past when I had encountered similar behaviour at Crosswalk Forums.... My offence... "advertizing another Forum in breach of our Terms of Service"...

2) In a thread where someone was asking whether it was "permissable" for a married couple to enjoy sex or whether it was purely for procreation I said "God made orgasms for a reason" ... the offence? The use of the word "orgasm"...

3) In another thread I mentioned the site "GodHatesFags.com" as an example of what NOT to do... My offence? I said "Fags" not "gays" or "homosexuals"... Sorry guys but "GodHatesHomosexuals.com" is NOT the name of the site I was talking about...

Just glad I can say "Puritanical IDIOTS!!!!" at my own Forum - http://sonandthemoon.10.forumer.com/ - without setting off the Thought Police...

Yours in Christ
JL

R's Story

(Unedited except for substituting an initial for the author's name--sorry, R, but I simply don't have the time to do a proper edit.)

I have been a member of Crossdaily/Crosswalk chat for over a year now.
Ever since the inital buyout of crossdaily by salem web networks, as
I'm sure those of you who are familiar with this site know, there has
been an administrator there by the name of Fred "Fritz" Alberti. I am
sure that I'm not the first to register a complaint about this
administrator, nor that I will be the last.

Here, in a nutshell is my experience with him:

Earlier this past summer, I was initially banned from this site for
behavior which was in violation of the terms of service. Eventually I
apologized for this and was allowed back into the chat. I played by
the rules from this moment on, careful to make sure that I was chatting
within the TOS of that site.

On saturday the 17th of February, I recieved this email:

Dear r,

You have been engaged in activity in our Community in a manner or with
content determined to possibly be in violation of the site's Terms of
Service.

Unfortunately, as a result of this activity, we must restrict your
involvement in discussions related to the following topics under our
right reserved under #19 of the Terms of Service.
http://l.salemweb.net/CommunityTermsOfService

RESTRICTIONS:
No PMing other users
No using chat as dating service
Theology/Doctrinal discussions *New restriction*

Please understand that this decision is final and will not be subject to
further discussion.

Sincerely,

Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

Now, on a Christian chat site, it seems strange to ban any user from
theological/doctrinal discussions. Its my understanding that I was
restricted from this because, as a non-christian, he felt that I was
somehow threatening the beliefs of other members of this chat. In my
discussions on this site, I simply discussed my beliefs and contrasted
them to the beliefs of Christianity. It was not my goal to change the
beliefs of anyone, but instead to foster a healthy discussion of
beliefs, politics, and any other topics which may come up.

On Wednesday, the 21st of February, there was a general spirituality
discussion going on, and I was participating. Fritz interpreted this
as discussion theology or doctrine. I found this 'restriction' to be a
bit much, and told other members of the chat that this restriction was
put on me. At this time I was banned from participating in this chat.
I then recieved this email:

Dear r,

You have recently been engaged in activity in our Community in a manner
or with content determined by our site administrators to be in
violation of our Terms of Service. As a participating member of our
Community, you agreed to abide by these terms. As a result of this
violation your account has been disabled, pursuant to #19 of the Terms
of Service. (http://l.salemweb.net/CommunityTermsOfService)

We must unfortunately insist that you not make any attempt to
participate further in any of our Communities, even under a different
name.

This decision is final and is not subject to discussion.

Sincerely,

Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network


My response to this initial email:

From: R
Date: Wed, Feb 21, 2007 4:19 pm
To: Fred Alberti <fritz@salemwebnetwork.com>
Cc: community@salemwebnetwork.com
Bcc: rick@salemwebnetwork.com

Subject:
RE: r Community Restriction
From:
R
To/CC:
Fred Alberti <fritz@salemwebnetwork.com>, community@salemwebnetwork.com

So Fritz, exactly how is pleading my case to other members of the
community a violation of the TOS worthy of banning me? I feel like I'm
being treated unfairly, and I'm trying to support my cause by letting
people know my situation. If you have a personal problem with me, I
wish you would take it up with me instead of going about it this way.
Instead of giving a nonanswer to this, I wish that at least my case
could be given a fair chance at being heard by both admins and members
of the community. It makes it difficult to be treated fairly when I
can't even discuss my circumstances with members of chat, who I feel
have a right to know what is going on. I have asked you on a number of
occasions to discuss this issue with me, but you have always refused or
referred me to emailing you, as to 'keep a record' of our discussions.

I would simply like an open dialog where we can discuss why you have a
problem with me, and how we can resolve it in a way that benefits you,
me, and the community in general. I don't think that banning me
because I told people about my restriction is exactly a way to foster a
healthy and mature resolution to this problem, and I'm still having
trouble understanding why this restriction was put on me in the first
place, as it has NEVER been a problem with any other moderators or
members of this community.

As a non-christian I can understand that my viewpoints sometimes
conflict with the viewpoints of other community members, but it has
never been, nor will it ever be my intention to try to change people's
beliefs. I simply enjoy discussing the differences and raising
questions that I myself am curious about with regards to Christianity,
as my knowledge of the faith was rather limited when I was a christian.
Yes, at times this can cause a spirited debate, which many at
crossdaily chat have come to enjoy, and I, as a community member, also
enjoy. I respect the beliefs of others, even when I'm handed down
condemnation and damnation for my differing in belief. I've never seen
any problem with having a spirited discussion about various issues nor
do I see anywhere in the TOS how this type of discussion is not
allowed.

I believe I at least deserve a fair shot at either recieving an
explanation about why I was first restricted from discussing any topic
relating to (as you can see in the emails below) Theology or Doctrine,
and then, without any notification, I was essentially restricted from
discussing anything relating to faith, belief, philosophy or anything
along those lines. I feel that this is an unfair restriction, and if
one would simply go over the chat logs, you would find that it is not
my intention to cause anyone any harm, spiritually or otherwise.

This issue aside, I am currently banned (as of about 3:55 this
afternoon) from chat altogether. The only reason I can see for this
would be that I was discussing the restrictions that have been placed
on my chatting with other people, and encouraging people, if they feel
that it is also unfair, to email the admins of this site and work
something out, so as to foster a positive environment in chat, where
people like me, and those I'm frequently chatting with/debating with,
can feel free to discuss the topics of our choice (within, of course,
the bounds of the TOS). I feel that this was done unfairly, and
without a just reason. Again, referring to the chat logs, which I am
sure exist, you can see that I said no bad things about the
administration of this website, I simply explained my situation to
other people in chat, and asked for their support. If this is grounds
for being banned, I would like to see exactly where in the TOS this
falls, and why it is justified.

So to sum up, I've been first restricted from talking about anything
spiritual (which certainly seems strange for a Christian website), and
then banned because I was explaining my situation to others, and
encouraging them to write to the administration if they disagreed with
this situation. I feel that this has been done unfairly, and that I
have been singled out for this for no good reason.

Any and all response to this is greatly appreciated. I enjoy chatting
on your site, and I feel that I've done nothing wrong, and when I was
told that I had, I was given no reason other than rule #19 of the TOS.
I would like to continue to chat here, and I would like to at least be
allowed to plead my case and/or be given a reasonable explanation for
why this has all occurred.

Thank you and God bless,

R

His response in my asking for an explanation to this was:

Dear r,

After the recent incidence(s) requiring a ban from our Community, it's
apparent that our website is not the ideal platform for your style of
participation. Fortunately, the World Wide Web offers you a number of
alternative communities that I'm sure you would find more agreeable.

Unfortunately, as caretakers of our owned and operated communities, we
must at this point insist that you make no further attempts to
participate in any of our chats or forums, even under a different name.

This decision is final and not subject to negotiation or any further
discussion, so please refrain from further contact in an attempt to
debate and/or to gain re-entry.

We appreciate your cooperation in respecting our decision in this
matter.

Respectfully,

Fritz
Manager of Communities
Salem Web Network

To which I responded with this:

From: R
Date: Thu, Feb 22, 2007 9:51 am
To: Fred Alberti <fritz@salemwebnetwork.com>
Cc: rick@salemwebnetwork.com

Subject:
RE: [ r Review Request ] RE: r Community Status
From:
R.
To/CC:
Fred Alberti <fritz@salemwebnetwork.com>, rick@salemwebnetwork.com

I undertand that you don't like me Fritz, but I don't understand how
I've negatively affected the community here enough to warrant first
being restricted to only the most generic forms of chatting, and now I
have been banned altogether. Aside from your not liking me for
whatever reason, I have in no way violated the spirit of the TOS of
this site. Again, I am submitting all of this correspondence to Rick
Killingsworth for his review, because I feel like I'm up against a wall
unfairly here, and I would like someone else to take a look at this
situation.

I was never given any kind of explanation as to why the restriction on
speaking about theology and christian doctrine was put on me, besides
the fact that you said you'd been lenient up until this point (I
believe this was last week). I respected your restriction and stopped
talking about this. Yesterday, you told me that this restriction
covers speaking about belief, spirituality, and anything else relating
to any sort of philosophical or spiritual matter. In disagreeing with
you on this, I asked for the opinion of members of the community, and
did not mention your name, and did not say that I was being treated
unfairly, nor did I speak badly of any moderators or of you
specifically.

If anyone would speak to some members of the community on their
opinion of me, I think you would find that they find me to be a
valuable member of the community, and while many people do disagree
with me, they respect what I have to say. I'm not sure why you have
singled me out for this, and I feel that you're being very heavy-handed
for no real reason.

I respect you Fritz, and I know that you're a reasonable person, which
is why I'm trying to work this through and come to some kind of common
ground. I'm a reasonable person also, but when I feel that I've been
wronged, I won't rest until I right the situation, so please work with
me here and lets find some common ground. I am a firm believer in
resolving conflicts, and not leaving bad blood. I don't want there to
be bad blood in this situation, and I would like to resolve it. The
sooner we can do this, the better, because this current situation is
only going to foster bitterness. Remember Ephesians 4:26-27 "In your
anger do not sin"[d]: Do not let the sun go down while you are still
angry,and do not give the devil a foothold".

I want to do work this out as members of the same community, not as
adversaries.

R


After which I recieved this final email:

Dear r,

I'm not angry.

It is clear that this community is not the ideal platform for your style
of participation.

Fortunately, the World Wide Web offers you a number of alternative
communities that I'm sure you would find welcoming of you.

This decision really is final and I think it would be best we separated
in peace.

Please do not email us further.

Respectfully,

Fritz

This dispute was all over rule #19 in the Terms of Service of this
website. These terms of service may be found here:
http://forums.crossdaily.com/Terms_of_Service/m_2164/tm.htm

To make things a little easier, this is rule #19 of the terms of
service:

19. Salem Web Network reserves the right to:
- move any discussion in community areas to a different folder or room
for any reason at our sole discretion
- edit any discussion, post, or chat room title for any reason at our
sole discretion
- respond to the violation of any of the above Terms of Service with any
of the responses available to Community administrators and moderators
without warning including involuntary movement to another area,
"booting" (involuntary expulsion from chat and forums), and various
forms of prevention of access to all community services including
"Private Messages" for any duration of time including permanently at
its sole discretion.
- to report any violations of the Terms of Service to law enforcement
and/or the Internet Community Alliance.
- to bar, restrict, block any user including Internet Community Alliance
offenders for any reason as well as remove any content or chat rooms at
our sole discretion.

The final clause in here was the only stated reason for my banning from
this community. I have heard from many other former members of
crossdaily chat that this was the same 'catch all' rule that Fritz has
used in order to get them out of his chat. Other members of this chat
are afraid to speak up about it, because they also run the risk of
being banned. I CC'ed all of my correspondence to Fritz to Salem Web
Networks executives and executives at Salem Communications, but have
heard no reply at all.

This behavior seems to be very unchristlike, and I'm at a loss to
explain why this happened to me, since Fritz continues to give me no
answer, and ignores my requests for an explanation, or requests to
settle this dispute (which I don't understand at all) like adults.

This is my crossdaily story, and I'm glad to have found this website,
where I can voice my frustrations.

R.