Infymus wrote:Infy, Liz was just the one who posted it. It wasn't her idea. All the mods had a long conversation about this.
You're over-reacting. This purpose of this isn't so members can post a thread that says, "Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and my parameters say he was! There, now try and argue that he wasn't!!!!"
Thanks, Scottie. As usual, Infymus is doing selective reading. I already stated everything you stated on the previous page of this thread, in answer to another of his ridiculous rants. Apparently, reading comprehension is not one of Infymus' strong suits. ;)
Edited to add----Yes, my above comment was ad hominem. Yes, I was "speaking as a man", not as a Moderator. ;)
There is a new feature in the Celestial Kingdom which I feel is antithetical to the purpose of this board. . . Never did I imagine opposing views wouldn't be allowed on this board!
Allow me to clarify: Opposing views are just as allowable now as they ever were. The only difference is that a thread starter may now set down certain parameters for his/her own thread.
In other words, if someone posts his or her testimony of Christ or the divine calling of Joseph Smith, you can't challenge that testimony in the thread itself. You are perfectly free to challenge everything he or she said, but you'll merely have to start a new thread about it in the Terrestrial Forum is all. Title it something like, "Challenge to ___'s testimony in the Celestial Forum" or something like that.
So you're still free to say whatever you want. Thread starters in the Celestial Forum are simply allowed a little more leeway to determine the venue is all.
Most people come to these boards to debate and criticize (hopefully in a constructive way). Therefore, I predict that most threads started under these conditions will have few replies. Those threads with an antiMormon pov will have somewhat more because you guys like to high five, but not too many more because it's the CK forum.
So it's like a mini MADb. LOL. Cool. That's kinda like having a mini market. Heehehehe. Great so now there are gonna be comments from celestial posts everywhere in the other forums?
I really, Really REALLY am not seeing the problem with this.
This is NOT going to turn this board into a mini MAD. Free discussion is still welcome and encouraged. It simply limits A VERY FEW threads into a specified set of parameters to encourage good debate without resorting to the lowest common denominator. It's so easy and so very non-constructive to post "well, yeah, but God doesn't exist anyways" in a thread. Why should we have to re-establish this in every thread??
If it is MY thread, and I don't want to re-debate the existence of God (which has been debate a billion times in the past), what is the problem with me laying down the parameter that we not debate that particular assumption??
Feel free to debate what the post is in any matter you wish, within the guidelines of the CK and the parameters I have laid down.
This does nothing but foster and encourage good, interesting debate.
Do you know how boring it is to have to re-debate the existence of God all the time?
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
Read what Liz wrote in this forum on the stick thread carefully.
So if it isn't like MAD what is it then???
I bet they are laughing their asses over there.
Liz wrote:If you indicate this, then the thread is off limits as far as being challenged or derailed. The following perimeters immediately exist:
If the discussion involves God, then someone shouldn't come in and start arguing the existence of God. For the purpose of that thread, God exists. That's the given. (I.e....God, Buddha, whatever the higher power being discussed is).
So, do tell me where the discussion or debate is in that?
Infymus wrote:Infy, Liz was just the one who posted it. It wasn't her idea. All the mods had a long conversation about this.
You're over-reacting. This purpose of this isn't so members can post a thread that says, "Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and my parameters say he was! There, now try and argue that he wasn't!!!!"
Thanks, Scottie. As usual, Infymus is doing selective reading. I already stated everything you stated on the previous page of this thread, in answer to another of his ridiculous rants. Apparently, reading comprehension is not one of Infymus' strong suits. ;)
Edited to add----Yes, my above comment was ad hominem. Yes, I was "speaking as a man", not as a Moderator. ;)
Again with you Mormons, attack the person rather than look at the facts.
You and the Mods want to turn this into a Mini MAD board.
By all means, go ahead, enjoy it.
Once you weed out the dissenters, perhaps you'll attract more MAADites.
Any forum with "Mormon" in the title would be better served if it actually included Mormons and welcomed them. Trying to get Mormons to discuss issues here is like pulling teeth. Sure, you may say they're welcome, but that's like saying the chickens are welcomed into the wolf's den. The usual polemic gang bang ensues.
People here don't want to accept the fact that they are extremely denigrating towards Mormonism and this turns off many Mormons who would otherwise want to join in and add to the discussions. It seems to me that this measure is being considered by the mods in order to foster debate and discussion with Mormons. You say the restrictions don't prompt discussion, but seriously, where is the discussion taking place now? Show me the last worthwhile debate between Mormon and non-Mormon on this forum? The sticky in the celestial between Bokovoy and myself? That took place many months ago, and it was only between he and I. If you don't have a problem with a thread being a one on one debate between two people, then why protest this measure?
While you say silly things like "This is s discussion forum not a testimony forum," I say it is becoming a testimony forum already, but one for the ex-Mormon/atheistic perspective. Hell, I'm hardly a Mormon anymore but the attitude towards me has taken a 180 degree turn for several posters. The lack of Mormon targets has turned their sights onto me simply because I remain a theist. I'm not even allowed to defend theism without being gang banged and ridiculed.
Who would have thought a year ago, that now I would be going at it with Schmo, Trevor, chap, beastie, Tarski, etc.?
Whereas I was once treated as a welcomed member of this forum, the lack of Mormon targets over the past year has prompted them to do exactly what the Mormons did. They felt they needed to cull the herd and create a uniformity in thought here, so they start going after those who don't share the common denominator of atheism.
One cannot even express belief in God without being called to the carpet and expected to explain how one could be smart enough to leave Mormonism but dumb enough to remain a theist. For me, this is de ja vue all over again, and if I were still an LDS apologist, I highly doubt I would be on this forum. But I'm not, and my skin is much thicker and my tolerance is extremely high. But I don't have the time to do these gang bang debates where I'm the lone theist arguing against a half dozen atheists.
I don't see what everyone is afraid of here. It looks exactly like the Mormons over at MADB rationalizing why they shouldn't allow ex-Mormons to bear their testimonies. They demand a uniformity in thought as well.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein
Shades wrote:Some sites were better than others in this regard, but none of them were perfect. In particular, I noticed a proliferation of "niche" LDS message boards. Some advertised themselves as being for "New Order Mormons." Others advertised themselves as being for LDS members on "the fringe." Others were devoted to believing Mormons only. RfM, of course, is dedicated to the exact opposite.
None explicitly advertised themselves as being for EVERYONE. Or, if they did, they imposed certain restrictions and regulations on what they did or did not want to see posted. In other words, the boards determined the culture, not the other way around.
After I got the final boot from FAIR, now MA&D, I knew the time was ripe to make my move. "If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself," as the saying goes. I hired Keene, who is still a site administrator here, and Bryan Inks to create a message board to my exact specifications. Negative, the other admin. here, taught me everything I know about the day-to-day running of the place. And the rest is history, as they say.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.