Damack and Dyer

[ArmyMatt]

That’s why Abbot Tryphon’s first posting was made, because that’s how people act right after a mutual break-up/release.

No, that’s how someone acts right after they’ve been cheated.

To quote the Abbot: “I have been dumped...”

The mutual release happened after the dumping which judging by the Abbot’s first post, wasn’t pretty and wasn’t mutual. He was caught by surprise.

A backroom deal was made later on between the two and they decided to part ways. “It’s not you, it’s me.” “We’re better off this way.” This is a classic break-up scenario.

There’s your mutual release. It’s plain as day for anyone with street smarts who wasn’t born yesterday.

it can be, especially if you had been dumped on the way Fr Tryphon had been. at the time he wrote the initial post, both the podcast and blog were still open on AFR. and Fr Andrew said they were still open for him to post. and they both were open for a while afterwards. which means not dumped.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

it can be, especially if you had been dumped on the way Fr Tryphon had been. at the time he wrote the initial post, both the podcast and blog were still open on AFR. and Fr Andrew said they were still open for him to post. and they both were open for a while afterwards. which means not dumped.

You’ve never kept a girls number ‘just in case’ after you dumped her? I have. It isn’t rocket science to figure out why.

 

[ArmyMatt]

You’ve never kept a girls number ‘just in case’ after you dumped her? I have. It isn’t rocket science to figure out why.

no, I haven't. and that's not a good analogy. because at the time of the pic you posted, Abbot Tryphon was still a contributor to AFR. it's actually more akin to someone saying he was dumped because a date was broken off, only for the other person to say there was no break up, and then the two splitting up days later.

 

[Andrei D]

AFR very well might be going that way, but that doesn't it wasn't a mutual release. plus, Fr Damick also posted after this incident twice.

You *might* be excessively naive, Father. Almost all early "deplatforming" events are presented as "mutual releases" or "natural separations". There are always clarifying posts. There are always retractions and apparent resolutions. There is always a statement along the lines of "nothing has changed, we are still xxx and we still stand for yyy, but...". Then there's always an endless debate among honest people as to whether it was a banning or a justified penalty or a consensual parting of ways just like in this thread here and the other one that was used for this discussion (this whole subforum seems to be mostly about vaccines and political chicanery lately - yet another strong sign of the times) . I actually DO NOT know or even suggest anything about the reality of this case, just pointing out that the pattern fits with other things I've seen countless times in other organizations and groups. Take it or leave it, personally I have no interest or involvement of any kind.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

it's actually more akin to someone saying he was dumped because a date was broken off, only for the other person to say there was no break up, and then the two splitting up days later.

I’ll take “illogically, convoluted, fantastical breakup scenarios” for 1000, Alex.

 

[ArmyMatt]

You *might* be excessively naive, Father. Almost all early "deplatforming" events are presented as "mutual releases" or "natural separations". There are always clarifying posts. There are always retractions and apparent resolutions. There is always a statement along the lines of "nothing has changed, we are still xxx and we still stand for yyy, but...". Then there's always an endless debate among honest people as to whether it was a banning or a justified penalty or a consensual parting of ways just like in this thread here and the other one that was used for this discussion (this whole subforum seems to be mostly about vaccines and political chicanery lately - yet another strong sign of the times) . I actually DO NOT know or even suggest anything about the reality of this case, just pointing out that the pattern fits with other things I've seen countless times in other organizations and groups. Take it or leave it, personally I have no interest or involvement of any kind.

you can think that, but seeing as how I know both men personally, I'd have to see something a tad more than I have on here.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I’ll take “illogically, convoluted, fantastical breakup scenarios” for 1000, Alex.

the sarcasm just looks immature.

plus that's more how it happened, if you look at what both sides said after the fallout. maybe there is some knew info out there, that I have not seen.

as a priest, I try not to judge others priests unless I have all the facts. and I know I don't have all the facts, so I will go with what both sides say.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

the sarcasm just looks immature.

I won't say the same about you.

plus that's more how it happened, if you look at what both sides said after the fallout.

I did look at both sides and we came to different conclusions, just like everything else.

maybe there is some knew info out there, that I have not seen.

Not exactly new, but probably new to you as it sounds like you get most of your info here as per your previous post in response to Andrei D.

as a priest, I try not to judge others priests unless I have all the facts. and I know I don't have all the facts, so I will go with what both sides say.

I wasn't aware Damick is serving as a priest at this time.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

Stepford Wife view of Orthodoxy

Now, I'm curious. Does this mean the Church is a beautiful, robotic woman?

 

[ArmyMatt]

I won't say the same about you.

I wasn't being that obnoxiously sarcastic.

I did look at both sides and we came to different conclusions, just like everything else.

okay.

Not exactly new, but probably new to you as it sounds like you get most of your info here as per your previous post in response to Andrei D.

since I said I also know both men personally, it's pretty obvious I don't get all of my info on here.

I wasn't aware Damick is serving as a priest at this time.

he's not the pastor, but he is still a priest and serves attached to a parish.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

I wasn't being that obnoxiously sarcastic.

Yet, when I said we came to differing conclusions you were...

okay.

...with it. Am I not allowed to criticize your version of events as illogically incongruent with interpersonal relationships?

since I said I also know both men personally, it's pretty obvious I don't get all of my info on here.

Hence why asked for receipts of your sources of info and you rebuffed that request. Oh well.

he's not the pastor, but he is still a priest and serves attached to a parish.

Sweet.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yet, when I said we came to differing conclusions you were...

...with it. Am I not allowed to criticize your version of events as illogically incongruent with interpersonal relationships?

you can if it was actually illogical. but when one of your reasons is because you kept the number of an ex because something might happen, you're not running on logic. plus, since personal relationships differ, you'd actually need to know both persons, not assume from others.

and typically when someone responds with that level of snarkiness, it's because they don't actually have a counterpoint to argue at that time.

Hence why asked for receipts of your sources of info and you rebuffed that request. Oh well.

it was rebuffed since they have already been shared on this forum. I don't do others homework for them, especially after being told to post it or it doesn't exist (which isn't logical at all).

 

[Justin-H.S.]

you can if it was illogical. but when one of your reasons is because you kept the number of an ex because something might happen, you're not running on logic.

Same idea behind insurance.

plus, since personal relationships differ, you'd actually need to know both persons, not assume from others.

*Drill instructors looking at you like...*

Interpersonal relationships are very predictable, and to the chagrin of many-a-feminist, repeatable.

it was rebuffed since they have already been shared on this forum. I don't do others homework for them, especially after being told to post it or it doesn't exist (which isn't logical at all).

Share it to one person, not to the other. Got it.

 

[Not David]

Can we chill out please?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Same idea behind insurance.

except what we're talking about isn't insurance.

*Drill instructors looking at you like...*

like I'm correct, as I had drill sergeants when I was enlisted, and work with them as a TRADOC AIT chaplain.

Interpersonal relationships are very predictable, and to the chagrin of many-a-feminist, repeatable.

not in all cases, especially considering how this was played out both publicly and privately.

Share it to one person, not to the other. Got it.

I never originally shared it. someone else did. but I am not going to search for something that another can search for himself.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

I’m sorry y’all. I fell and the demons got me. Please forgive me a sinner.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I’m sorry y’all. I fell and the demons got me. Please forgive me a sinner.

forgive me, as well

 

[prodromos]

I wasn't aware Damick is serving as a priest at this time.

Please use his proper title of Fr Andrew. He is still a priest of the Orthodox Church.

 

[Samizmoot]

Thank you for the info and the link. If the scuffle amounts to bad blood, there is no one to blame but the two of them.

Social media is built on bad blood. No escaping it.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Social media is built on bad blood. No escaping it.

I never thought about it like this, but yes, you are right.