Who's Calling the Shots at MAD?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

liz3564 wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:And I agree with what you stated in your previous post, mok. People on these boards need to get over their squabbles.


I agree.

How long has this board war been going on? Three years now?


I guess I'm just past caring about who said what on what board. It's pretty silly for them to have banned so many people, but then it's silly of us to be so fixated on what they do.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
harmony wrote:And wasn't the More Good Foundation founded by DCP and his buddies?

I had nothing to do with founding it, and I have nothing to do with running it.


So... what, then? You just lend it the cachet of your name?
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Post by _Gadianton »

Mister Scratch wrote:It has been less than a year, and already the stability of the aptly named MADboard is beginning to fritter away. With the recent announcement issued by the MADmoderating team that a certain contingent of that board would be, essentially, "migrating" away to ldsforums.com, I think it is worthwhile to once more take up the question of who the actual "owner" of MAD really is. Certainly, many have speculated that it is Dan_G. He played a crucial role in doing the cyber-bidding of Scott Gordon, Allen Wyatt, and John Lynch. But is he going solo nowadays? Or is juliann a major player as well? Who, at base, is calling the shots?

Another reason I ask is this: the announcement regarding ldsforums.com seems epochal. It is yet another retreat on the part of the online Mopologetic community. It also signifies, perhaps, a shift in power and control. I have to wonder: is this all happening in an effort to "get rid" of juliann? It seems that so much of the online Mopologetic drama was the direct result of trying to cater to her rather neurotic needs.... Is this yet another symptom of this ongoing disease?



What I wonder goes back to the thread I created a week or so ago about satisfaction with the current state of the board. Despite the refusal to admit that MAD and FAIR are the same entity and despite the insistance that a bulletin board is very different than the serious scholarly medium of a conference, there is most certainly a desire for FAIR/MAD to be scholarly. And with the exceptions of Bokovoy's attempts to translate a religion that is thousands of years old into the 21st century terms of a remote splinter group of Mormonism known as Internet Mormonism, there isn't a lot of technical discussion. Honestly, most of these threads read like teen threads. Even the horrific reasoning you'd find at the original FAIR still left one with the impression the contributors were adults.

So, if I may indulge in some armchair psychoanalysis, I think there are two thoughts within the FAIR/MAD mind very much in tension. One thought believes that FAIR/MAD is scholarly. Arrogantly, this thought worries that the great scholarly depths of the apologists are too much for the less intelligent, simple TBMs who now abound at FAIR. This thought harbors a maternal instinct that seeks a refuge for these poor and helpless chickeedees from the great intellectual storm the hardened apologists are capable of stirring. The other thought believes that FAIR/MAD isn't scholarly and wishes nothing more than it to be scholarly. This thought holds great contempt from the green contributors, some of them who are perhaps Chapel Mormons that still believe everything the prophet tells them. This thought would like to offload the unwelcome bunch. But, it's not quite so simple. The bet is hedged. Because as long as it's very unclear that FAIR/MAD board will ever be filled with scholarly discussions, FAIR/MAD can control this lesser entity, "LDS Forums", people it, and define MAD against it. The MAD posters who visit LDS Forums are like ministering angels from a superior realm, there to aid the simpletons.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

Gad wrote:So, if I may indulge in some armchair psychoanalysis...


LOL!

I think that's a pretty fair analysis, Gad.

You should become an "armchair psychiatrist"!

;)
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

Runtu wrote:... but then it's silly of us to be so fixated on what they do.


That silliness does have some degree of cosmic significance considering this is a thread about MAD and we are all posting on it.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Re: Who's Calling the Shots at MAD?

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

Mister Scratch wrote:It has been less than a year, and already the stability of the aptly named MADboard is beginning to fritter away. With the recent announcement issued by the MADmoderating team that a certain contingent of that board would be, essentially, "migrating" away to ldsforums.com, I think it is worthwhile to once more take up the question of who the actual "owner" of MAD really is. Certainly, many have speculated that it is Dan_G. He played a crucial role in doing the cyber-bidding of Scott Gordon, Allen Wyatt, and John Lynch. But is he going solo nowadays? Or is juliann a major player as well? Who, at base, is calling the shots?

Another reason I ask is this: the announcement regarding ldsforums.com seems epochal. It is yet another retreat on the part of the online Mopologetic community. It also signifies, perhaps, a shift in power and control. I have to wonder: is this all happening in an effort to "get rid" of juliann? It seems that so much of the online Mopologetic drama was the direct result of trying to cater to her rather neurotic needs.... Is this yet another symptom of this ongoing disease?


The "certain contingent" was not very frequented. LDSForums.com would be a better place for other mods to take care of, in my opinion. Your thread here is a bit drama-laced, especially for one accusing others of drama.

And to label a rarely-frequented board being turned over to another site as a "retreat" is lame. Do you think the internet has so many secrets that we can't all do a simple google search and yield results? Gimme a break, fellas.
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

moksha wrote:Momus threatened Moksha the other day with another banishment if he ever answered a question from another poster about the Shades Board. For a minute Moksha thought the Momus moderator sounded like she who must not be named. I wish these boards would get over whatever squabbles they have. So many people post on both boards that such a chastisement as Moksha received seems rather out of place. I think of this post as a Letter to the Editor asking for a greater degree of reasoning to be applied in those instances.

Hopefully ears that can hear will pass it on as a gracious request.


The mods want to avoid board wars. Kinda like the fact that you're over here talking about it.
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

moksha wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:
moksha wrote:Momus threatened Moksha the other day with another banishment if he ever answered a question from another poster about the Shades Board. For a minute Moksha thought the Momus moderator sounded like she who must not be named. I wish these boards would get over whatever squabbles they have. So many people post on both boards that such a chastisement as Moksha received seems rather out of place. I think of this post as a Letter to the Editor asking for a greater degree of reasoning to be applied in those instances.

Hopefully ears that can hear will pass it on as a gracious request.


Huh? What thread was that on, mok?


It was on one called "Rate Your Favorite Anti". Here, Severian responded to a question by LifeOnaPlate:
What is this Shades board?


Severian gave the URL which as deleted and added as an explanation:

Hot off the presses - I noticed LifeOnaPlate is already the newest member. Oh well, trying to be helpful. Day late, dollar short as usual.

Mormon Discussions is sort of the wayward sister version of this board.


It has no relation to this board what so ever. Moksha next time you plug it, you will be off the board again. People know where it is already, and a lot of them choose not to go there. Do not use our board to advertise other sites unless you have our permission.

Momus


The thing is that Severian or Moksha did not feel that responding to an unanswered question was really the same as gratuitous spam or leading the flock into a dangerous pasture, where they would be devoured by a horde of zombie mice. ~ Better watch it Moksha, that zombie mice part was dangerously close to an endorsement for the pepper bar at Quiznos Sandwiches.


Guess you forgot to include the quotes wherein I stood up for Moksha.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

LifeOnaPlate wrote: The mods want to avoid board wars. Kinda like the fact that you're over here talking about it.


Gotta talk about it here. Speaking up to clarify the situation over there could have caused an unpredictable reaction. I really like the greater degree of religious appreciation over there, but I have never truly figured out how to best express myself without ruffling feathers over there, other than to keep the comedy at luke warm.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Guess you forgot to include the quotes wherein I stood up for Moksha.


I thank you for standing up for me. That was very considerate. I thought of including it, and while it seemed extraneous it would have been the better part of valor if I had.

I am happy when MAD posters come over here because I think their voice needs to be heard as a counterbalance to some of the posters here.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Post Reply