This is why people leave

[zil]

2 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

She wasn't stirring up anything. You want to stir up something? I just used one of your fountain pens to stir my tea. 

::evil laugh :: 

Demon!

[Midwest LDS]

This is one of those topics that can be perenially upsetting. I think all of us have bad experieinces with other church members being offensive to us. If we are being honest with ourselves, all of us have probabbly offended someone at church too. Usually when we do it, we excuse ourselves ("I was tired, I didn't mean it the way they took it, they shouldn't be so thin skinned etc etc.") While I think it's perfectly acceptable to point out things to our leaders and fellow members, such as the OP's repeated cleanings of the ward making it someone else's turn, we should strive to turn the other cheek especially with our fellow saints (this very much applies to me as well). I think we always want justice when someone does it to us and mercy when we do it to someone else☺.

Edited December 19, 2017 by Midwest LDS

[Shath]

5 hours ago, my two cents said:

For those who aren't aware - Cleaning the building is one of the things those who've gotten help from the Church should be asked to do in return for the help they've received. You may want to inform the powers-that-be if that doesn't seem to be happening in your unit. 

How is that considered help then.  That's considered paying them.  If you force people to work, you need to pay them a fair wage.  Charity does not work by forced labor.  I do not know this part of the church.  Why don't they hire a janitor?

If members want to help clean, they can.  If they do not, why would you want to force them to do that?  If someone needs money, don't call it charity, just hire them for a job.  You can pay them the minimum wage or whatever to clean the church.  I know in some churches that is a full time job.  I think it would take 8 hours for a good clean after a church meeting.  That means you can pay them a wage of 8 dollars and they get 64 dollars after each church use.  Mormons meet at least two days a week.  I think they meet three or four times sometimes.  That can be 128 to 256 dollars a week. 

Why not pay people instead of forcing them to do something they don't want to do?  Why do they call it charity if they force people to work for it.  If they don't pay them, isn't that illegal unless it is completely voluntary?

[askandanswer]

6 hours ago, MormonGator said:

She wasn't stirring up anything. You want to stir up something? I just used one of your fountain pens to stir my tea. 

::evil laugh :: 

You have a fountain pen in your house?! I'm sorry Gator, I just lost so much respect for you. I thought you were a nice guy.

[Midwest LDS]

@Shath You are misunderstanding what was meant by charity. Someone who receives welfare assistance from the church, anything from food assistance to having bills taken care of or a million other things the church provides, is often (but not always) asked to do something in return for the assistance, like pick up around the church. It's not a full time job, and it helps them feel better about themselves for the help received. I know it did for me when I received assistance. We are also a volunteer church. All of us have worked unpaid to clean the church unless we are physically unable too. Someone is assigned too put a schedule together for all of the members in the ward to participate. That's just part of being a Mormon. I don't want to be paid for that because I consider that service for the Lord. 

Edited December 19, 2017 by Midwest LDS

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Shath said:

How is that considered help then.  That's considered paying them.  If you force people to work, you need to pay them a fair wage.  Charity does not work by forced labor.  I do not know this part of the church.  Why don't they hire a janitor?

If members want to help clean, they can.  If they do not, why would you want to force them to do that?  If someone needs money, don't call it charity, just hire them for a job.  You can pay them the minimum wage or whatever to clean the church.  I know in some churches that is a full time job.  I think it would take 8 hours for a good clean after a church meeting.  That means you can pay them a wage of 8 dollars and they get 64 dollars after each church use.  Mormons meet at least two days a week.  I think they meet three or four times sometimes.  That can be 128 to 256 dollars a week. 

Why not pay people instead of forcing them to do something they don't want to do?  Why do they call it charity if they force people to work for it.  If they don't pay them, isn't that illegal unless it is completely voluntary?

You can't call this force.

No one is holding a gun up to their heads.  No one is dragging people out of their homes.  No one is threatening excommunication.  The greatest amount of force may be "guilt".  But find a charity in the world that doesn't use guilt to encourage donations and volunteer work.  For that matter, have you never had a boss at work guilt you into taking an assignment that is optional?

Edited December 19, 2017 by Guest

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

  But find a charity in the world that doesn't use guilt to encourage donations and volunteer work.  

This sounds self serving  but most charities I donate to have never guilted me into it. They usually bend over backwards to thank me for donating even small amounts.  I think some members of the church (some, not all, some)  can get an entitled/ungrateful attitude to service and volunteering without remembering that it can be a sacrifice to many people. 

Edited December 19, 2017 by MormonGator

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

This sounds self serving  but most charities I donate to have never guilted me into it. They usually bend over backwards to thank me for donating even small amounts.  I think some members of the church (some, not all, some)  can get an entitled/ungrateful attitude to service and volunteering without remembering that it can be a sacrifice to many people. 

We've had different experiences.  I get a call a month asking for donations.  When I say no, they always lay on some guilt trip.  (we may just have a different definition of "guilt trip").  On the flip side, those to whom I do donate always are very gracious in saying thank you.  

I think that we tend to believe that all the work we do for the Church is just something that is expected of us.  It is our duty.  But it is always a good principle of leadership -- and even general social interaction -- to say thank you.  It's just a gracious thing to do.

I say thank you to my subordinates at work.  I say thank you to my kids for simply doing their regular chores, or even simply coming to me when I call them.  I guess we could all use a lesson in thanking people for doing their callings and all the extra stuff beyond our callings.

Edited December 19, 2017 by Guest

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Carborendum said:

I think that we tend to believe that all the work we do for the Church is just something that is expected of us.  It is our duty.  But it is always a good principle of leadership -- and even general social interaction -- to say thank you.  It's just a gracious thing to do.

 

I agree. If we want to keep people happy and active it always helps to make them feel appreciated. That, and it's just basic manners to say thank you when someone donates their time, effort and money to your cause. 

I donated once to a charity in LA that helps with music education and schools. I got a personal phone call from their director saying how much the charity appreciated it and thanking me. It was fantastic. Obviously, it made me want to donate again-so it's beneficial for everyone to show gratitude. 

[anatess2]

8 hours ago, Shath said:

How is that considered help then.  That's considered paying them.  If you force people to work, you need to pay them a fair wage.  Charity does not work by forced labor.  I do not know this part of the church.  Why don't they hire a janitor?

If members want to help clean, they can.  If they do not, why would you want to force them to do that?  If someone needs money, don't call it charity, just hire them for a job.  You can pay them the minimum wage or whatever to clean the church.  I know in some churches that is a full time job.  I think it would take 8 hours for a good clean after a church meeting.  That means you can pay them a wage of 8 dollars and they get 64 dollars after each church use.  Mormons meet at least two days a week.  I think they meet three or four times sometimes.  That can be 128 to 256 dollars a week. 

Why not pay people instead of forcing them to do something they don't want to do?  Why do they call it charity if they force people to work for it.  If they don't pay them, isn't that illegal unless it is completely voluntary?

I'll tell you a true story.

We have this distant relative that was a special forces guy.  His wife got murdered and he ended up doing vigilante justice.  He got kicked out of the military, lost everything, turned to drugs and alcohol.  He became desperate so he begged my dad for money.  My dad said, "I'm looking for a bodyguard for my family, are you interested?".  He said yes, so for a few years, he lived in our house and I got driven to and from school like a big shot celebrity getting shadowed by a special forces bodyguard.  Do we need a bodyguard?  Hah hah, of course not.  But, that distant uncle of mine stayed clean and took pride in his duties to protect our family until he eventually got on his own two feet.

 

Anyway, there's also this fable about this guy during the great depression.  Some passerby would beg him for money and he would say, well, I have this pile of wood that I need to move to the other side of the yard, are you interested?  And so the passerby moved all the wood and the guy would give him money.  So then another passerby would stop and beg him for money and he would say, well, I have this pile of wood that I need to move to the other side of the yard... 

 

And then another true story - my husband was a runway model when we decided to get married.  He lived in feast and famine cycles - he would get a gig, get tons of money, and not find another gig for months, etc.  I already had a good job and a house.  So, after we got married he decided to quit modeling so he can get a "proper career" going.  So I told him he should go to school full-time to finish his Bachelors Degree and I'll work full-time to pay all the bills.  He lasted a month.  He couldn't stomach spending his wife's money.  So he ended up going to school full-time and working part-time.  He was making peanuts and so he was still spending his wife's money but it gave him back his "manhood" (it's what he called it).

 

Anyway, these things is what the Church is doing.  It's not "forcing people to work".  That's silly.  It's a culture thing.  We take pride in work.  My dad takes pride in earning his keep and so did my distant relative, so my dad offered him an opportunity to preserve that honor.  My husband grew up being taught to take pride in earning his keep and being a provider for the family.  The guy with the pile of wood grew up in a culture of earning your keep.  This is what made the Americas become successful enough to secede from the British - the protestant work ethic.  And this work ethic I've passed down to my own children who, I hope, will also pass it down to their own children.

 

Edited December 19, 2017 by anatess2

[NeuroTypical]

9 hours ago, Shath said:

Why not pay people instead of forcing them to do something they don't want to do?  

You keep using that word (forcing).  I do not think it means what you think it means.

But to answer your question, I'd direct you to look a bit deeper.  Check your hidden assumptions here.  We may have a foundational, pivotal difference of opinion.  Nobody owes another person anything.  It is not right to make someone support someone else, when that person can support themselves.

Don't want to?  Don't WANT to?  You mean, they can earn what they need, they just don't wanna, so someone else should just give them money?

Gah.  I'm not easily offended, but the entire notion behind this question offends the heck out of me.

(I'm not saying anything about you Shath, I don't know you well enough to have an opinion one way or the other.  I'm just taking strong issue with the notion you're floating.)

[Guest MormonGator]

36 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I'm not easily offended, but the entire notion behind this question offends the heck out of me.

I got nothing but love for you @NeuroTypical, but this always makes me chuckle a bit. I'm just as guilty of it of course. "I'm not easily offended, but here is a list of things I'm offended by...." Well, turns out I am easily offended, huh? It's like saying "I'm not really much of  braggart, but here's my new Mercedes, four Rolexes and beach house." Or another favorite, "I'm not a racist, but I hate Italian, Polish and Greek people." No, not a racist at all. 

Like I said, totally playing with you and I"m just as guilty of it! 

Edited December 19, 2017 by MormonGator

[Guest]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

And then another true story - my husband was a runway model when we decided to get married.  He lived in feast and famine cycles - he would get a gig, get tons of money, and not find another gig for months, etc.  I already had a good job and a house.  So, after we got married he decided to quit modeling so he can get a "proper career" going.  So I told him he should go to school full-time to finish his Bachelors Degree and I'll work full-time to pay all the bills.  He lasted a month.  He couldn't stomach spending his wife's money.  So he ended up going to school full-time and working part-time.  He was making peanuts and so he was still spending his wife's money but it gave him back his "manhood" (it's what he called it).

I often feel this way about being the breadwinner.  I honestly think it's part of our DNA.  We feel an innate need to be the provider.  This is, of course, sexist.  But so what?  I want to provide for my family and I feel very badly if I cannot perform that role.

[NeuroTypical]

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

I got nothing but love for you @NeuroTypical, but

Saw this on my facebook wall, thought it applied:

[Shath]

8 hours ago, Carborendum said:

You can't call this force.

No one is holding a gun up to their heads.  No one is dragging people out of their homes.  No one is threatening excommunication.  The greatest amount of force may be "guilt".  But find a charity in the world that doesn't use guilt to encourage donations and volunteer work.  For that matter, have you never had a boss at work guilt you into taking an assignment that is optional?

 I'm still at school.  Not sure why a boss would try to guilt another into doing something optional.    Teachers give homework but that's not optional. 

4 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

You keep using that word (forcing).  I do not think it means what you think it means.

But to answer your question, I'd direct you to look a bit deeper.  Check your hidden assumptions here.  We may have a foundational, pivotal difference of opinion.  Nobody owes another person anything.  It is not right to make someone support someone else, when that person can support themselves.

Don't want to?  Don't WANT to?  You mean, they can earn what they need, they just don't wanna, so someone else should just give them money?

Gah.  I'm not easily offended, but the entire notion behind this question offends the heck out of me.

(I'm not saying anything about you Shath, I don't know you well enough to have an opinion one way or the other.  I'm just taking strong issue with the notion you're floating.)

Why do Mormons say this.  It is against their Book of Mormon and Bible.  Mosiah says that we should give and not think bad things about another person.  I think it is also Mosiah that says that we really don't own anything.  God gives us everything.  We are beggars.  We beg him.  If we think bad of those who beg we judge us.  You have that unjust steward thread.  You can read it to say the same thing.  How we treat others is how we are treated.  How we judge is how we are judged. 

We don't earn anything.  It is given to us by God.  We should be glad for that. 

We can work.  Adam was told to work.  But charity is not to give and ask, it is only to give.  Jesus is our example.  He healed without asking for money.  He gave without asking for things back.  He asked for people to worship his father.  A charity is giving to those who need.  We can give for charity, but we don't ask for things back.  This is Christian.  This is what the Book of Mormon tells us.  It is also in the Bible.

[NeuroTypical]

"Why do Mormons say this.  It is against their Book of Mormon and Bible.  Mosiah says that we should give and not think bad things about another person.
...
I think it is also Mosiah that says that we really don't own anything.  God gives us everything.  We are beggars.  We beg him.  If we think bad of those who beg we judge us."

Mosiah says "And if ye judge the man who putteth up his petition to you for your substance that he perish not, and condemn him, how much more just will be your condemnation for withholding your substance, which doth not belong to you but to God, to whom also your life belongeth;"

Indeed it does mean that we don't own anything, and we are beggars, and judging people unrighteously is a sin.
It does not mean we are supposed to just give money to people because they don't want to work.  Read carefully.
And being ticked off at a notion, is not the same thing, as judging a person asking for money.  Read carefully.

 

"Jesus is our example.  He healed without asking for money.  He gave without asking for things back."

Yeesh - you have some pretty selective scripture reading there friend.  Did Christ not ask His disciples to give up everything and follow him?  "Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it" - right?  

Anyway, your main point is valid to a point - we, as individuals, should give without condition.  The welfare system of the church is not individual giving - it's earthly stewards doing what's best with the Lord's temporal resources.  

And for the record, I just got done helping the Bishop distribute Christmas charitable funds to around half a dozen families.  Every year, folks just give the Bishop money - not for tithing or fast offerings or anything - they just give him money and say "give it to whomever needs it most".  I was personally given the assignment from my Bishop to deliver one specific check to a specific family.  The only thing he wanted me to tell them, was "If you want to send a thank-you note or something, give it to the Bishop and he'll make sure it gets to the anonymous donors."

The word "force" doesn't apply here.  The word "condition" doesn't apply here.  Nobody is thinking bad about anybody.

[estradling75]

2 hours ago, Shath said:

 I'm still at school.  Not sure why a boss would try to guilt another into doing something optional.    Teachers give homework but that's not optional. 

Why do Mormons say this.  It is against their Book of Mormon and Bible.  Mosiah says that we should give and not think bad things about another person.  I think it is also Mosiah that says that we really don't own anything.  God gives us everything.  We are beggars.  We beg him.  If we think bad of those who beg we judge us.  You have that unjust steward thread.  You can read it to say the same thing.  How we treat others is how we are treated.  How we judge is how we are judged. 

We don't earn anything.  It is given to us by God.  We should be glad for that. 

We can work.  Adam was told to work.  But charity is not to give and ask, it is only to give.  Jesus is our example.  He healed without asking for money.  He gave without asking for things back.  He asked for people to worship his father.  A charity is giving to those who need.  We can give for charity, but we don't ask for things back.  This is Christian.  This is what the Book of Mormon tells us.  It is also in the Bible.

You totally misunderstand the point of what it truly means to help people.

Two examples

You give a person a fish he eats today but tomorrow he starves because you were busy helping someone else and did not get to him... 

You teach a person to fish today and he eats today, tomorrow and forever while you go else where to help others...

Of these two examples which one is truly helping?  Which one of those is what you think Christ would have us do?

The Church welfare system is designed to support very short term while helping the person get back on their feet.  This includes the mental and spiritual aspect.  Many have already posted how helping a person feel they "earned it" even if that earning did not ad any value to the giver, helped the receivers sense of self worth.  This is an option for the Bishop to use for those receiving help from the church.  Not because it returns fair value for the help given, but because it continues the process of helping the individual involved (if the Bishop thinks that is something that would help the person)

Now a member who thinks for some reason that they should not have to help or serve because the people getting help should do it all... well they are being selfish and judgemental but that is a individual failing not a failure of the Church program

Edited December 19, 2017 by estradling75

[bytebear]

This is why people need to stay.  To help others who have the same struggle. 

[person0]

On 12/17/2017 at 12:27 PM, dahlia said:

No one told me I'd have to be a maid to the Church when I joined. And people wonder why folks become less active.

I do sincerely empathize with your situation, and agree that you should not be required to clean so frequently (assuming there is sufficient membership in the ward to also help clean).  However, just because I can't seem to resist the temptation to point this out:  If you are endowed, didn't you make a covenant to consecrate your time, talents, resources, life, etc to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?  If you made that commitment, technically, this would apply.  Joseph Smith did say:

Quote

Any religion that does not require the sacrifice of all worldly things, does not have the power to produce the faith necessary for life and salvation.

Once again, I'm just pointing this out for introspection, not because I think the person making the assignment was correct.

That said, any person who leaves the Church over an issue like this has probably been going to Church for all the wrong reasons in the first place.

[mirkwood]

13 hours ago, MormonGator said:

 Or another favorite, "I'm not a racist, but I hate Italian, Polish and Greek people." No, not a racist at all. 

What if you hate everybody?

[Shath]

10 hours ago, estradling75 said:

You totally misunderstand the point of what it truly means to help people.

Two examples

You give a person a fish he eats today but tomorrow he starves because you were busy helping someone else and did not get to him... 

You teach a person to fish today and he eats today, tomorrow and forever while you go else where to help others...

Of these two examples which one is truly helping?  Which one of those is what you think Christ would have us do?

The Church welfare system is designed to support very short term while helping the person get back on their feet.  This includes the mental and spiritual aspect.  Many have already posted how helping a person feel they "earned it" even if that earning did not ad any value to the giver, helped the receivers sense of self worth.  This is an option for the Bishop to use for those receiving help from the church.  Not because it returns fair value for the help given, but because it continues the process of helping the individual involved (if the Bishop thinks that is something that would help the person)

Now a member who thinks for some reason that they should not have to help or serve because the people getting help should do it all... well they are being selfish and judgemental but that is a individual failing not a failure of the Church program

Christ fed people not just for one day, not just for a year, but for forty years.  He went to the poor, the disabled, the helpless.  It doesn't matter if you try to teach a man who can't fish to fish...he still can't fish.  Charity isn't normally there to help those who can help themselves, but those who cannot.  Jesus came to help us because we can not help ourselves.  We depend on him entirely.  He could teach us to overcome it, but we are already full of sin.  We cannot fish even if we know how. Without his charity, we go to hell. 

Jesus never said I help you to help yourself.  He came to save us.  He is the Messiah.  This is a Mormon thing.  I do not know why Mormons say what they do.  Charity is not something worked for, but freely given.  It is true love.  Love that giveth without any expectation of receiving anything back. 

Mormons should understand charity.  The Book of Mormon is full of explaining it.  The Bible is full of explaining it.  The Doctrine and Covenants touches upon it (and Consecration is based on it).  This is a Christian idea also.  I think the Book of Mormon is Christian.  Maybe some Mormons are too.  Mormons who expect work for something and call it charity might not be.  They do not understand a basic Christian Principle.  Catholics feed millions a day.  They house millions a day.  They may spend more in a month on charity than Mormons do in 10 year s(40 million), or what Mormons call charity.  Do Mormons really understand charity?

Edited December 20, 2017 by Shath

[NeedleinA]

7 hours ago, Shath said:

Mormons should...

Mormons should do what? Adhere to the condescending opinions and interpretations of @Shath, come here to set the Mormons straight?

7 hours ago, Shath said:

Do Mormons really understand charity?  Does Shath really understand Mormons?

Alma 30: 40
"And now what evidence have ye... I say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only."

Despite the fact that you purport to know so much about the 'Mormons' and how we function as both members or a Church, it is glaringly clear that you have a very poor understanding on how things really are. Your attempts to try to use the Book of Mormon against us are laughable. Equally clear appears to be your lack of connecting the dots between the difference of providing 'relief' to those in true need versus enabling or encouraging 'perpetual welfare'. Those slacking pretend Christian Mormons have system after system in place to provide for the relief of any individual in need, member or not. It almost feels worthless sharing any part of it with you since your bias against the Mormons is so painfully obvious I feel it would simply continue to fall upon deaf ears. However...

We could sit here and spoon feed you the answers over and over again, but that would simply provide you the temporary fish you think works best. Since temporary fish is not the 'Mormon way', here are some links where you are welcome to read, study and learn for yourself. Then once you are done with that, there are some addition links of places you can go visit, explore and educate yourself further. If your desire to learn is sincere, these links will help you get started down a path to feed yourself and become more intellectually self-reliant.

Fast Offerings
Bishop's Storehouse
LDS Charities
Humanitarian Relief
LDS Family Services
Helping Hands
Perpetual Education Fund
Welfare Services
Etc. etc. etc.

Places you can go visit or serve with:
Welfare Square - Desert Industries (similar to Goodwill)
Welfare Locations Map (find services in your area)
LDS Charities Volunteer Opportunities
Volunteer Time and Talent
Just Serve
Etc. etc. etc.

Lastly you have long way to go if your only argument is to complain that the humanitarian efforts of Luxembourg fail to rival those of China.

 

 

Edited December 20, 2017 by NeedleinA

[estradling75]

3 hours ago, Shath said:

Christ fed people not just for one day, not just for a year, but for forty years.  He went to the poor, the disabled, the helpless.  It doesn't matter if you try to teach a man who can't fish to fish...he still can't fish.  Charity isn't normally there to help those who can help themselves, but those who cannot.  Jesus came to help us because we can not help ourselves.  We depend on him entirely.  He could teach us to overcome it, but we are already full of sin.  We cannot fish even if we know how. Without his charity, we go to hell. 

Jesus never said I help you to help yourself.  He came to save us.  He is the Messiah.  This is a Mormon thing.  I do not know why Mormons say what they do.  Charity is not something worked for, but freely given.  It is true love.  Love that giveth without any expectation of receiving anything back. 

Mormons should understand charity.  The Book of Mormon is full of explaining it.  The Bible is full of explaining it.  The Doctrine and Covenants touches upon it (and Consecration is based on it).  This is a Christian idea also.  I think the Book of Mormon is Christian.  Maybe some Mormons are too.  Mormons who expect work for something and call it charity might not be.  They do not understand a basic Christian Principle.  Catholics feed millions a day.  They house millions a day.  They may spend more in a month on charity than Mormons do in 10 year s(40 million), or what Mormons call charity.  Do Mormons really understand charity?

I see you avoided the question... so I will repeat it.

 

You give a person a fish he eats today but tomorrow he starves because you were busy helping someone else and did not get to him... 

You teach a person to fish today and he eats today, tomorrow and forever while you go else where to help others...

Of these two examples which one is truly helping?  Which one of those is what you think Christ would have us do?

 

As for Christ he had powers that we do not... he overcame what we could not.  There is a huge difference in what he can/did do and what we can do to help others

[Guest]

5 hours ago, mirkwood said:

What if you hate everybody?

Some people are equal opportunity haters.

[Guest]

16 hours ago, Shath said:

 I'm still at school.  Not sure why a boss would try to guilt another into doing something optional.    Teachers give homework but that's not optional. 

Why do Mormons say this. . .

I'm really not sure what you're getting at.  If I ask for your help you think I'm forcing you to do it?  Since when did that make sense?

You still haven't explained why you think it's force.  It has nothing to do with us owning anything.  We are stewards of all that God has.  In our churches, we are stewards of keeping up the building.  Where is the force? 

This is one question you keep dodging.  How is any of this "FORCE"?

Do you realize that you're using guilt to try to drive your point home?  "Mormons are the worst people I've ever met."  "They're racist." "This is slavery." Whenever you use charged language like that, you're invoking guilt to make a point.  It's called rhetoric, not reason, not teaching, not evidence, not truth.  If you don't think so, then what do you see as the difference?

The thing is that I don't know what reaction you're hoping to get.  Do you hope that by using language like that, you're going to win points?  You're going to make change?  You're going to actually get people on your side?  You're going to get people to understand where you're coming from? 

No, you've perked our ears.  That's all.  We're listening for the actual substance.  But you're offering nothing but more scathing rebuke of... what?... I can't tell because you don't give any clarifying statements.  We're asking, and you keep dodging by making more rebukes, never answering questions to help us understand you better.

What exactly is your purpose here?

Edited December 20, 2017 by Guest