harmony wrote:The only way to sink the good ship MAD is for the critics to abandon ship. Without critics, MAD simply dries up.
I disagree. I think MAD would survive if the only forum they had was the fellowship forum. Besides, even amoung the saints there is disagreement about things.
harmony wrote:Apologists think they can't survive on an unmoderated forum like this one,
No, they think this forum is crude, and often times it is. They may also think that this forum is not worth-while if critics are more interested in proving the church is wrong than listening to how it might be right.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Bond...James Bond wrote:The Dude (and his sockpuppet) hasn't been banned yet. I guess this is keeping in line with the policy of not banning pundits (which apparently has saved beastie thus far). I wonder if they'll simply disable The Dude's posting ability (like Yong Xi is apparently)....making the appearance that The Dude isn't banned....but in reality is.
My sockpuppet is posting on the Stem Cell thread because I feel it's an important issue.
Meanwhile, the moderators PM'ed me about my "Get No Respect" protest to Argos. We'll see if anything comes of it.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Bond...James Bond wrote:The Dude (and his sockpuppet) hasn't been banned yet. I guess this is keeping in line with the policy of not banning pundits (which apparently has saved beastie thus far). I wonder if they'll simply disable The Dude's posting ability (like Yong Xi is apparently)....making the appearance that The Dude isn't banned....but in reality is.
My sockpuppet is posting on the Stem Cell thread because I feel it's an important issue.
Meanwhile, the moderators PM'ed me about my "Get No Respect" protest to Argos. We'll see if anything comes of it.
IMHO, a banning of you, Dude, would be huge. It would mark a major-league crack in both the legitimacy and the quality of the aptly named MADboard. If they were to get rid of you, it would be like they were getting rid of one of their limbs. Something makes me think that they know better, but, as you have pointed out, they'd better watch themselves.
I believe that the MADB folks are not interested in honest, civil discussion. Rather, it's become a group of believing friends who feel the need to exclude those whose presence they don't like. It's kind of like the high school club that kicks people out because they don't fit in, but tells everyone that the outcasts broke some rule or other.
Think about it. Rollo Tomasi used the word "fabricated" and was immediately banned. Pahoran regularly accuses people of being liars, and nothing happens. The Dude calls Hamblin a jerk and is suspended. charity said I was "nasty," and nothing happened. Sput regularly chastised us for our foul tone over here, and nothing happened. I lamented the deteriorating tone over there, and I was banned without warning or explanation.
Most of us understand that a Mormon board is going to be more lenient toward the faithful, but it's not even an unfair treatment. One of the mods once said that they would be pruning to make the community of posters more to their liking. That's really the only honest statement I've heard from them about why they do what they do.
Maybe they should warn people up front. Then people like me won't be so disappointed when the stated goals and rules of conduct from the board turn out to be meaningless.
If it were up to me, The Dude, and other critics wouldn't be banned--at least not for merely calling someone a "jerk". However, it's not up to me.
But let's turn this back to MDB for a moment. What's more important to you? Would you rather have more TBMs, or would you rather have unrestricted fee speech where you can blaspheme and profane to your heart's content? And what do you want with TBMs anyhow? Would you try to learn why they still believe, or would you try to deconvert them?
I'm just saying, people create and associate with the communities they most desire. You can't force a TBM who will cave in to your ideals on a message board any more that MA&D can force critics to behave a certain way. All one can do is limit who is allowed to participate.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
asbestosman wrote:If it were up to me, The Dude, and other critics wouldn't be banned--at least not for merely calling someone a "jerk". However, it's not up to me.
But let's turn this back to MDB for a moment. What's more important to you? Would you rather have more TBMs, or would you rather have unrestricted fee speech where you can blaspheme and profane to your heart's content? And what do you want with TBMs anyhow? Would you try to learn why they still believe, or would you try to deconvert them?
I'm just saying, people create and associate with the communities they most desire. You can't force a TBM who will cave in to your ideals on a message board any more that MA&D can force critics to behave a certain way. All one can do is limit who is allowed to participate.
I try not to blaspheme or profane. I enjoy conversation with people of all beliefs. I'm fascinated with Mormonism, and I enjoy learning about it, even from those with whom I disagree. I don't expect them to cave to my ideals. But a little less arbitrariness would be appreciated. As would a lot less venom.
For the record, I have never tried to "deconvert" anyone, nor would I.
Runtu wrote:I try not to blaspheme or profane. I enjoy conversation with people of all beliefs. I'm fascinated with Mormonism, and I enjoy learning about it, even from those with whom I disagree. I don't expect them to cave to my ideals. But a little less arbitrariness would be appreciated. As would a lot less venom.
For the record, I have never tried to "deconvert" anyone, nor would I.
I think the only problem a TBM would have with you, Runtu, is that you don't believe and don't always believe that TBM defenses are as strong or convincing as they think they are. Perhaps communication between the groups is nigh impossible. Personally I find various takes on the philosophical and theological issues to be interesting. I also realize that sometimes I've gotta play by different rules if I wish to gain something. However, I tend not to be bothered by those sort of rules as I can easily leave for as long as I wish and do my own thing.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
asbestosman wrote:I think the only problem a TBM would have with you, Runtu, is that you don't believe and don't always believe that TBM defenses are as strong or convincing as they think they are. Perhaps communication between the groups is nigh impossible. Personally I find various takes on the philosophical and theological issues to be interesting. I also realize that sometimes I've gotta play by different rules if I wish to gain something. However, I tend not to be bothered by those sort of rules as I can easily leave for as long as I wish and do my own thing.
I don't mind playing by different rules. Obviously, what I say here is different from what I say when I'm in sacrament meeting. I just think in general a lot of people here have experienced frustration because it's not so much that there are "different rules" as there is an "unwritten order of things" and the only way to find out you've violated it is to be banned.
Coggins7 wrote: Hamblin, for example, makes the following point:
There are numberous empirical facts about ancient Mesoamerica which correspond with the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon describes cities, writing, towers, trade, agriculture, warfare, etc.
He forgot to add other things the Book of Mormon has: Human beings, grass, mountains, rocks, dirt, trees, animals, and breathable air. Amazingly, these things also exist in Mesoamerica. The parallels are stunning.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley
"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Coggins7 wrote: Hamblin, for example, makes the following point:
There are numberous empirical facts about ancient Mesoamerica which correspond with the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon describes cities, writing, towers, trade, agriculture, warfare, etc.
He forgot to add other things the Book of Mormon has: Human beings, grass, mountains, rocks, dirt, trees, animals, and breathable air. Amazingly, these things also exist in Mesoamerica. The parallels are stunning.
He also forgot how to spell "numerous." Yep, it's hard to overstate how tenuous the supposed parallels are. I've said before that the apologists' job is merely to make things appear plausible. And the Book of Mormon looks plausible until you actually look at the reality behind the evidence.