How lenient should we be to JohnL?

[ken_sylvania]

• If JohnL and MaxPC are actually the same person, her or she has done better than I could at keeping the writing styles segregated by character.
• There's a couple other posters who regularly post half-truths or even outright falsehoods, although that is normally restricted to certain topics and I think they might actually believe what they are posting.
• Not all of us use our real names when posting, and I don't think we should be required to.
• Perhaps the creator of MaxPC and JohnL regards it as a bit of a theater performance - characters playing a role as in a play, and as such perhaps he/she considers it not really lies and deception. Many Anabaptists reject that line of reasoning and in fact that is part of the argument against plays and theater - the actors are pretending to be someone they are not.
• If the moderators do decide to allow MaxPC to stay around, I think it would be better if the rest of us would refrain from constantly challenging his stories. I don't think the constant bickering and sniping is healthy for us.

Any specific thoughts wrt having his grandson contact admin about his death? or impersonating his grandson to do so?
This bothers me an awful lot. Worse, as it was directed to Robert, with whom he seemed to have a special online friendship.
This goes beyond superficial games to me. It’s painful.

Not really in good taste to do something like that. Since I already at that time believed that MaxPC was fictitious, I just assumed that the "grandson" was dreamed up into existence for the sole purpose of delivering the fake death notice in order to close out the old persona.
I can see where if somebody actually believed MaxPC was real then it would have been more painful for them than it was for me.

[temporal1]

• If JohnL and MaxPC are actually the same person, her or she has done better than I could at keeping the writing styles segregated by character.
• There's a couple other posters who regularly post half-truths or even outright falsehoods, although that is normally restricted to certain topics and I think they might actually believe what they are posting.
• Not all of us use our real names when posting, and I don't think we should be required to.
• Perhaps the creator of MaxPC and JohnL regards it as a bit of a theater performance - characters playing a role as in a play, and as such perhaps he/she considers it not really lies and deception. Many Anabaptists reject that line of reasoning and in fact that is part of the argument against plays and theater - the actors are pretending to be someone they are not.
• If the moderators do decide to allow MaxPC to stay around, I think it would be better if the rest of us would refrain from constantly challenging his stories. I don't think the constant bickering and sniping is healthy for us.

Any specific thoughts wrt having his grandson contact admin about his death? or impersonating his grandson to do so?
This bothers me an awful lot. Worse, as it was directed to Robert, with whom he seemed to have a special online friendship.
This goes beyond superficial games to me. It’s painful.

Not really in good taste to do something like that. Since I already at that time believed that MaxPC was fictitious, I just assumed that the "grandson" was dreamed up into existence for the sole purpose of delivering the fake death notice in order to close out the old persona.
I can see where if somebody actually believed MaxPC was real then it would have been more painful for them than it was for me.

i think that’s it. thanks.

And the fact this forum has suffered real loss of loved members. It’s not a game.
https://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?t=4181

i wish Robert were here to address it. he wouldn’t have liked it, but, i think he would have preferred to deal with it.
in his own way, which i won’t try to guess. he wasn’t always predictable.

[ken_sylvania]

I’m going to point out that there is another frequent poster who changed their username, pretended that they were someone else and aggressively demanded that we keep the secret after I figured it out and outed them.
While they have their reasons for this deception, I find them unconvincing.

The issue for me isn’t that this person changed their username, it’s that they deceived the community. While this person was posting under their new username, other participants were asking what happened to this person and why they disappeared.

I find it hypocritical that this user has also been vocally calling out JohnL when they did the exact same thing.

Robert allowed this deception. That was his call and I accepted it. However, If JohnL is going to be banned for deceiving the community about his identity, then I think the moderators should be consistent.

This of course raises the question about usernames in general. I know this will shock you, but “Szdfan” is not on my birth certificate.

Nobody's criticizing JohnL for his username. If somebody doesn't want their forum activity to be easily traceable to their real name I think that's perfectly reasonable. In the case you refer to, the old username was deleted by a forum admin accidentally and there's no reason if a person re-registered to require them to use the same username they had previously. I was active on forum at that time and did not in any way get the sense that the person was trying to deceive the community about his identity. It seemed quite clear that the person regretted having previously used personally identifying information and took the opportunity to start over with a clean slate in that regard. He didn't hide or lie to the moderators that we know of. What I did think was ungentlemanly was your crusade at the time in which you doxxed him and then refused to drop the issue when asked to do so.
The difference with JohnL/MaxPC is that he refuses to come clean with the moderators and refuses to clear up the identity issue in PMs. I don't think anybody really cares whether the connection is posed publicly. The other difference is that most of what JohnL/MaxPC posts is probably fabricated, but we have no reason to think that is what's happening in the other situation you mentioned.

[Szdfan]

What I did think was ungentlemanly was your crusade at the time in which you doxxed him and then refused to drop the issue when asked to do so.

I can accept that I probably should have dropped the issue earlier, but I didn’t doxx him. The information was already public and originated with him.

[Soloist]

I’m going to point out that there is another frequent poster who changed their username, pretended that they were someone else and aggressively demanded that we keep the secret after I figured it out and outed them.
While they have their reasons for this deception, I find them unconvincing.

The issue for me isn’t that this person changed their username, it’s that they deceived the community. While this person was posting under their new username, other participants were asking what happened to this person and why they disappeared.

I find it hypocritical that this user has also been vocally calling out JohnL when they did the exact same thing.

Robert allowed this deception. That was his call and I accepted it. However, If JohnL is going to be banned for deceiving the community about his identity, then I think the moderators should be consistent.

This of course raises the question about usernames in general. I know this will shock you, but “Szdfan” is not on my birth certificate.

Wife: I don’t actually think that’s a fair comparison because he hasn’t denied being the former name, and a few other people changed their usernames after the Mennonite purge of 2025. So maybe he just used a different username, but he did not intend to try to trick us into us thinking he was not his former self. He has admitted straight up that he was the same person.

I certainly don’t want to have our names online although we’ve used our names in PMs with moderators and a couple others before, so I don’t see that being unreasonable.

I don’t know about what to do on John L. I think that’s best left in the hands of the moderators. I certainly don’t hate him, and he has good things to share, but honesty and repentance are important as well.

[Soloist]

I would be fine with the user staying on the forum, but I’d expect a public apology for lying over a fake death notice and repeated attempts to deceive over education, name, religious beliefs…

We have a practice of honesty among fellow Christians, this isn’t just over different opinions or beliefs on politics, this is outright fabrication and lies to fellow believers, if they even are a believer. Some people actually grieved for MaxPCs death.

Without repentance and claiming to be a brother… Paul lays out that he/she will not enter the kingdom and we should have nothing to do with them in order to lead them to repentance.
Now, if they claimed to be an atheist or some other religion then, what is that to us?

This is not to be done out of hatred, but out of a concern for the soul of a brother or sister. They need to understand the seriousness of what they’re doing.

[Szdfan]

I’m going to point out that there is another frequent poster who changed their username, pretended that they were someone else and aggressively demanded that we keep the secret after I figured it out and outed them.
While they have their reasons for this deception, I find them unconvincing.

The issue for me isn’t that this person changed their username, it’s that they deceived the community. While this person was posting under their new username, other participants were asking what happened to this person and why they disappeared.

I find it hypocritical that this user has also been vocally calling out JohnL when they did the exact same thing.

Robert allowed this deception. That was his call and I accepted it. However, If JohnL is going to be banned for deceiving the community about his identity, then I think the moderators should be consistent.

This of course raises the question about usernames in general. I know this will shock you, but “Szdfan” is not on my birth certificate.

Wife: I don’t actually think that’s a fair comparison because he hasn’t denied being the former name, and a few other people changed their usernames after the Mennonite purge of 2025. So maybe he just used a different username, but he did not intend to try to trick us into us thinking he was not his former self. He has admitted straight up that he was the same person.

I certainly don’t want to have our names online although we’ve used our names in PMs with moderators and a couple others before, so I don’t see that being unreasonable.

I don’t know about what to do on John L. I think that’s best left in the hands of the moderators. I certainly don’t hate him, and he has good things to share, but honesty and repentance are important as well.

I agree I probably should have dropped this earlier than I did, and I don’t intend to do a deep dive into the acrimonious history between us.

I don’t remember him announcing that he had changed his username or that the moderators were aware of or approved the change until after the fact. I remember people asking what had happened to the original username because the user had disappeared. I don’t recall the user clarifying things.

Most of the name changes that happened when we had to re-register were closely related to the old usernames and it was obvious who people were (e.g. “Swiss Bro” became “Swiss Brah”).

Again, I don’t want to relitigate this. I recognize that I went on my “crusade” and probably pushed things too far because I felt deceived.

In my view, both JohnL and this user created alternative identities that concealed their previous participation on this forum, and I’m simply asking that moderators apply standards consistently.

[temporal1]

OP:

For quite some time, and more vociferously in several recent threads, accusations have been made about JohnL and his relationship to truth (and to MaxPC, whose relationship to truth also appeared tenuous). If you’ve been reading those threads you are familiar with the situation, so I won’t repeat all of that here. Nor will I post scriptures about the importance of telling truth; we all are familiar with them. But the truth is a serious matter, and untruth is a distraction from the forum community.

The moderators have given him opportunity to respond to several specific questions, and he has left most of them unanswered, or answered only partially in ways that cannot be verified (as did Max in response to a similar request years ago). .. ..

One option is: “Let him post.”
Is there a reason there’s not an alternate option, such as: “He shouldn’t post.” (?)

Most of the options might imply the latter. (?)

[JohnH]

I’m going to point out that there is another frequent poster who changed their username, pretended that they were someone else and aggressively demanded that we keep the secret after I figured it out and outed them.
While they have their reasons for this deception, I find them unconvincing.

I assume you're talking about me. My account got deleted along with many others, so I had to create a new account, and I did so. I couldn't make one with my original username (which is why RZehr is now R7ehr).

You seem to have an expectation that I would have somehow created a new user name as similar to my old one as possible, and that there's something wrong with my choosing to be pseudonymous, despite the fact that you use a pseudonym.

I made a decision I no longer wanted to use my real name on this board and would prefer to be pseudonymous; the main reason I chose to do so is because of harassment I received in the past from either a member of this forum, or a reader of this forum, who called my employer to complain about the content of my posts. I decided I didn't want to deal with that again.

The issue for me isn’t that this person changed their username, it’s that they deceived the community. While this person was posting under their new username, other participants were asking what happened to this person and why they disappeared.

I contacted people privately and mentioned who I was although I asked them to please leave my real name out of things as I simply didn't feel like doing that anymore.

I find it hypocritical that this user has also been vocally calling out JohnL when they did the exact same thing.

I never claimed to not be who I am.

Robert allowed this deception. That was his call and I accepted it. However, If JohnL is going to be banned for deceiving the community about his identity, then I think the moderators should be consistent.

Robert sent me a PM, said he thought I was who I am, and I responded that, yes, that is me, and I would prefer to stop using my real name.

This of course raises the question about usernames in general. I know this will shock you, but “Szdfan” is not on my birth certificate.

I don't use your real first or last name when I speak with you here, but rather respect your desire to use a pseudonym.

I think it's interesting, though, that you bring this up. I continue to wonder who it was that decided to call my boss and complain about my posts in an attempt to get me fired from my job. The content of my posts that was complained about was my vociferous rejection of legalised homosexual marriage and some issues related to transsexuality, incidentally.

I don't know who it was (and my boss just laughed at the person), but it wasn't a very pleasant experience and not one I wish to repeat. Regardless, I will not be silent about what I think the scriptures speak of as clear moral issues out of fear of losing my job - my eternal destiny is more important than a job.

I think it would be a good Christian witness (not to mention would be an excellent exhibition of your own faith) to somehow find a way to deal with that acrimony between us. Dude, I'm just a sinner saved by grace who has done a lot of things in his life he isn't proud of and has failed at many things, and has to give up a lot of things in my life to follow the narrow path; some of the things you might thing I promote or support enthusiastically are actually things that are personally painful to me, but that I think are the right thing.

I have never felt acknowledged by you as a person, but do just feel like someone you're hoping to "catch" in something that you're able to ruin my life over (which also reveals that you believe I harbour some terrible, evil secret and am some kind of mini-Hitler or something). It's a terrible way to treat someone, and unfortunately the first place my mind goes is "No wonder his church gradually went away, because I can't imagine how awful it would be for a young person to have a pastor like that." That's not a good thing to think and it isn't charitable, but it's how I feel. I am not an ordained pastor, deacon, leader, or otherwise, and don't claim to be.

Your attempt to have a "gotcha' in this thread towards me just further cements how it feels that way.

[Szdfan]

I think it's interesting, though, that you bring this up. I continue to wonder who it was that decided to call my boss and complain about my posts in an attempt to get me fired from my job. The content of my posts that was complained about was my vociferous rejection of legalised homosexual marriage and some issues related to transsexuality, incidentally.
I don't know who it was (and my boss just laughed at the person), but it wasn't a very pleasant experience and not one I wish to repeat. Regardless, I will not be silent about what I think the scriptures speak of as clear moral issues out of fear of losing my job - my eternal destiny is more important than a job.

So this is information I previously did not know and that context changes things substantially. I am deeply sorry that it happened to you. I can imagine that was a frightening and frustrating experience.

It wasn’t me. I have no idea where you work. I have never tried to locate your address or employer. I have never encouraged anyone to interact or harm you in real life.

On this forum, we disagree about almost everything and don't particularly like each other. As you have previously stated, there's no trust between us.

But I think there's a huge difference between vehement online disagreement and conflict and harming each other in real life. I have no desire to harm you or your family in real life.

I'm sorry for my persistence on this issue. The fact that someone tried to harm you in real life changes my perspective and I find it now understandable why you changed your username and tried to conceal your identity. I regret that I continued pursuing the issue after you made it clear how strongly you felt about it.

I want to be clear that I do not want you harmed, unemployed or punished for your beliefs.