Alter Idem wrote:Maybe if Runtu/Notquiteme hadn't chosen a "fop" for his avatar, he would have been spared. Runtu, if they ever let you back, choose someone a little more macho and see if they treat you differently:)
Fop? Macho? Have you seen whyme's avatar lately?
Lazy research debunked: bcspace x 4 | maklelan x 3 | Coggins7 x 5 (by Mr. Coffee x5) | grampa75 x 1 | whyme x 2 | rcrocket x 2 | Kerry Shirts x 1 | Enuma Elish x 1|
Can you link us to conversations you've had with believers in which you attempt to get them to also take responsibility for their own dysfunctional and anti-social behavior?
Thanks in advance.
Pick from any one of my threads and post here that dealt with that subject matter, and you will find me speaking specifically about myself, as a believer, taking responsibility for my dysfunctional and anti-social behavior. Will that suffice?
No it will not suffice, because you didn't address the question.
If you are refering to me providing links, I can do that if necessary (though I can't imagine why it would be. I am quite certain that Beastie is aware of what was written on those threads because she was often an active participant, and even interacted with me there.)
wenglund wrote:If you are refering to me providing links, I can do that if necessary (though I can't imagine why it would be. I am quite certain that Beastie is aware of what was written on those threads because she was often an active participant, and even interacted with me there.)
Beastie appears to think that it is necessary. I sympathize with her viewpoint.
Lazy research debunked: bcspace x 4 | maklelan x 3 | Coggins7 x 5 (by Mr. Coffee x5) | grampa75 x 1 | whyme x 2 | rcrocket x 2 | Kerry Shirts x 1 | Enuma Elish x 1|
wenglund wrote:If you are refering to me providing links, I can do that if necessary (though I can't imagine why it would be. I am quite certain that Beastie is aware of what was written on those threads because she was often an active participant, and even interacted with me there.)
Beastie appears to think that it is necessary. I sympathize with her viewpoint.
I am not sure what difference it will make to either of you if I do produce some links (perhaps you can explain). However, here is a sample:
I'm not asking you to provide links to your discussions on this board. I'm familiar with them and, despite your somewhat feeble attempts to accept responsibility for failures as well, it is clear you focus almost entirely on critics and their fallibilities. Very few believers post here, so perhaps that is understandable.
I am asking you to provide evidence - either on MAD or ZLMB - that demonstrates that you have engaged believers just as much as you have engaged critics to confront their own problems and behaviors that result in failed communication.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
wenglund wrote:If you are refering to me providing links, I can do that if necessary (though I can't imagine why it would be. I am quite certain that Beastie is aware of what was written on those threads because she was often an active participant, and even interacted with me there.)
Beastie appears to think that it is necessary. I sympathize with her viewpoint.
ROFL! No kidding. That's gotta be the wussiest picture of Joseph Smith ever. Not appropriate at all for a humanist marxist -- at the very least Why Me needs facial hair. I say we start a new thread to help Why Me find a better avatar. Eh?
I'm not asking you to provide links to your discussions on this board. I'm familiar with them and, despite your somewhat feeble attempts to accept responsibility for failures as well, it is clear you focus almost entirely on critics and their fallibilities. Very few believers post here, so perhaps that is understandable.
I am asking you to provide evidence - either on MAD or ZLMB - that demonstrates that you have engaged believers just as much as you have engaged critics to confront their own problems and behaviors that result in failed communication.
But, I haven't engaged believers just as much non-believer, nor have I claimed to, and in fact I have given several reasons, among others, for why I hadn't. (It is not unlike were I to ask you for links to where you have criticized the critics in order to demonstrate whether you criticize them as much as you criticize the Church and its defenders.)
So?
That has no relevance to whether you and certain other critics have attitude and behavioral problems or communication deficites that you would do well to acknowledge and correct. It is not as if were I to provide the evidence to your satisfaction, you would suddenly say: "Gee...Wade is not only cleaning his own house, but helping to clean his fellow members homes as equally as he is the critics, so I guess I will let him help me clean my house as well." Face it, you are just using this request as a means to deflect unwanted attention away from unflattering aspects of you and yours.
Sethbag wrote:Well, I just got dinged for something I posted yesterday. It was "temple content", but it wasn't quoting anything, and didn't give away anything that we covenanted never to reveal.
In this discussion, people had been saying that the LDS church doesn't diss other churches like this video they're talking about does to the LDS church. I mentioned talk of the Great Apostasy, and then I mentioned that protestant ministers used to be portrayed as teaching what Satan wanted them to teach, and that Satan promised to raise up Popes and priesthoods and reign in nasty ways on the earth. That's not quite vebatim, but about as close as I can recall what I posted. Seriously. And yet they deleted this "sacred" Temple Content and I get zapped for a week. I think that's pretty lame. Especially since it was posted yesterday, and I'm betting more than one mod had already read it and hadn't had a problem with it. It was not very specific, and was overall pretty tame. But some particular mod was going through reading posts and got their knickers in a twist over it, and now I join Don Bradley and The Dude stuck in the principal's office.
Oh well. Whatever.
I'm sorry, but that's absurd. I am really not happy with the way they're treating critics.
Sethbag wrote:Wade, I don't know why I haven't been banned yet. It's not because I hold back my criticism. It may be related to my efforts to keep my tone as civil as possible. I've tried not to give them an excuse to ban me, and so far they haven't found one. This is my 2nd suspension, actually. The first one was a month or so ago for publicly questioning why a moderator logged into my account controls and ninja-edited my sig line.
Actually, seth, it is called evolution. You are a changed man than when you first came to FAIR/MAD. You have become more bitter and angry in your posts about the LDS church. I call it hanging out too much with the wrong crowd. You are losing your objectivity. And you know this. Reading your posts these days, I can smell the bitter tranquil anger through my computer...something is changing your cyberpersonality. At times, at MAD, you would engage in discussion and at other times, the sour grapes would turn up in your other posts. You have become weighed in negativity.
As you know I have enjoyed my dialogues with you. Hopefully, the old seth will return, if not, you are heading for RFM heaven. Balance is the key to life on LDS sponsored boards.
why me wrote: I call it hanging out too much with the wrong crowd. You are losing your objectivity.
Absolutely right! Even the Beaver could well have been corrupted by hanging out with Eddie Haskel and his scofflaw ways. As the saying goes, "You can pick your friends and you can pick your nose, but your nose will not cause you to lose your objectivity".