Here is the latest Post there from Pahoran in Response to another Poster there on that Thread on the MA&D Board:
Pahoran:
QUOTE(Severian @ Jan 9 2007, 01:24 PM) They probably love both of you. So does making a link to Mormon discussions.com signal the start of a new glasnost?
Based upon the moderator comment above, I think that depends, probably upon whether this degenerates into some kind of board war. Shades' "discussion" (heh heh) forum really is a sty of a place, and the risk is that some of the swill may overflow here. Should that start to happen, I would hope that the mods would take appropriate action.
As for "glasnost," I fail to see that this forum lacks openness in any meaningful way. It is certainly no less open than Shades' board.
Brackite wrote:Here is the latest Post there from Pahoran in Response to another Poster there on that Thread on the MA&D Board:
Pahoran: ...
As for "glasnost," I fail to see that this forum lacks openness in any meaningful way. It is certainly no less open than Shades' board.
Regards, Pahoran
Does Pahoran actually believes what he writes over there?
Someone should ask Pahoran how many posters on FAIR/MAD have been banned from this bb (I would ask, but I'm banned from even viewing FAIR/MAD), and then compare that figure (which I'm sure is ZERO) to the number of posters here who have been banned from FAIR/MAD (which is SEVERAL). That should answer quite easily which forum is "less open" than the other.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Brackite wrote:Here is the latest Post there from Pahoran in Response to another Poster there on that Thread on the MA&D Board:
Pahoran: ...
As for "glasnost," I fail to see that this forum lacks openness in any meaningful way. It is certainly no less open than Shades' board.
Regards, Pahoran
Does Pahoran actually believes what he writes over there?
Someone should ask Pahoran how many posters on FAIR/MAD have been banned from this bb (I would ask, but I'm banned from even viewing FAIR/MAD), and then compare that figure (which I'm sure is ZERO) to the number of posters here who have been banned from FAIR/MAD (which is SEVERAL). That should answer quite easily which forum is "less open" than the other.
Well, when the faithful here are called arrogant, pompous asses all the time, and derided at every turn, with little effort to engage in focused substantive discussion, what the hell are they supposed to do.
By the way, I enjoyed your information about Elder Packer's talk and to whom it was delivered etc etc.
Plutarch wrote:Well, when the faithful here are called arrogant, pompous asses all the time, and derided at every turn, with little effort to engage in focused substantive discussion, what the hell are they supposed to do.
This might be a good example for the 'confirmation bias' thread.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
Plutarch wrote:Well, when the faithful here are called arrogant, pompous asses all the time, and derided at every turn, with little effort to engage in focused substantive discussion, what the hell are they supposed to do.
This might be a good example for the 'confirmation bias' thread.
Not having read that thread, I cannot comment. However, I note that every single one of your posts always fails to engage in any possible substance of any sort.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
I tried to make a post without 'any substance of any sort', but it wouldn't let me. I had to put something in - i chose a period.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
Plutarch wrote:Well, when the faithful here are called arrogant, pompous asses all the time, and derided at every turn, with little effort to engage in focused substantive discussion, what the hell are they supposed to do.
This might be a good example for the 'confirmation bias' thread.
Not having read that thread, I cannot comment. However, I note that every single one of your posts always fails to engage in any possible substance of any sort.
P
Engaging in substance? So that is the key to having the faithful called arrogant, pompous asses. Being faithful, I have been unable to confirm this due to never engaging in substance. by the way, is substance always telling someone they are wrong?
Makelan, for what it is worth, I have read your posts and enjoyed them.
Mak, show me where FAIR/MAD has a rule that says a poster MUST register under a SPECIFIC nickname and no others. Because I never knew there was a rule that said I had to register as harmony and couldn't register any other nickname.