princessdi,
If you could be so kind as to quote where Gailon or I outed Cindi Randall by saying anything that could tie her to any user at BSDA, I would be most appreciative. Then I will apologize for mistakenly saying that we didn't when we did.
Let me put it this way: Suppose Walt Thompson were posting on BSDA anonymously. Suppose we knew who he was. Suppose we then discussed Walt Thompson here openly without identifying him as that user on BSDA, since he is the 3ABN Board chairman. Would that be wrong to do? Would that be doing Satan's work?
In other words, just because someone posts anonymously and is allowed to do so, I don't think that keeps them from being discussed in ways that doesn't associate them with a BSDA user when they are playing a major role in this saga.
I repeat: The only posts that I think has outed Cindi Randall as a BSDA user is your posts here. And I would not be against the moderators deleting or editing whichever posts identify Cindi Randall as a BSDA user, which would mean deleting or editing your posts, and certain posts which comment on your posts, like this one.
But the original posts that started this discussion do not in any way connect Cindi Randall to BSDA.
Ok, but this is not all happening in a vaccum at AT. Like it or not, this forum is a continuation from what was going on at BSDA. So there are very few if any who would not know to whom they were referring.. Clay's post to my knowledge did not mention any name of who the member was, but I did come to read, and found out from GJ own post. I actually took the inference that she may have not been amember here from Bob's response to Clay. As I said, if I am wrong, my apologies. But it looked like a play on words, basically.
My only point here is that they knew who it was, They knew she posted and/or read annonymously on the internet.....just as you and I do. Now, my info is easily accessible as an Admin at BSDA, I thought that important, so I am not disturbed when some refers to me by my full name as I have in essence given my permission. However, if I was posting annonymously and Bob and GJ had this info, today I would not feel my annonymity was safe. I owuld be one wrong step from being outed.....for the cause. If Bob and GJ were posting annonymously on the internet and I knew their true identities, as I do many memebers as an admin, I would not then think it fair game to go to another site and start posting their identites. That is not right. So it makes no difference who knew besides Bob and GJ, they knew, and they were wrong. It makes no difference where she posts or not posts. They knew. That is my point. Still my brothers in Christ, but in this instance they are wrong. There is no justifying it.
I said it once before the the truth is the truth anyhow.........by any means necessary has no place in God's work, because it most often means working form the devils toolbox.
I see what you are saying, Di. I don't know if she currently posts here or not. But I certainly could not gather that one way or the other from anything that was said here. If anybody outed anybody, it was Clay with his silly little tantrum.
And what about all the outing of people over at the 3ABNDefended Yahoo site and 3ABNtalk.com? Any thoughts on that? 3ABN defenders over there have gone out of their way to FIND people who wanted to remain anonymous and have been downright nasty to them, dredging up stuff from their past and threatening to try to have them disfellowshiped from the SDA church, etc. Made me pretty grateful NOT to be a member! Unless people we know are talking, then the information obtained and presented there was obtained with a defective subpoena, and it is my understanding the defenders have been warned of that.