CWK: Apologetic Flash Mobs

[Kishkumen]

https://youtu.be/T_QL-6BhcDs?si=tbi7I1vA0vtgeopK

In this episode I talk about the curious phenomenon of sudden online dogpiling of things LDS apologists don’t like. My example is the TIME Lightbox fiasco, but one can point to many other instances in which suddenly a group of apologists shows up to troll, scuttle conversation, add two-dimensional testimonies, or click thumbs down. These are organized efforts, and they are counterproductive, but the apologists keep it up anyway, making themselves and the church look bad.

[Philo Sofee]

It's almost as if they have lost their way........

[Gadianton]

I thought one of the observant comments was near the beginning, almost mentioned in passing; a discrepancy between the way the apologists see themselves and the way others see them. I think this is -- or was -- a real problem. They seem to have the bizarre belief that people are imprinted with an understanding of the fellowship they have with one another as apologists. On Z, it was a standard thing for the senior apologists to continually throw inside material back and forth to each other through a thread or laugh at inside joke derailments, but it was if they expected that outsiders would, I don't know, appreciate it, somehow, rather then be confused or turned off by it?

There seemed to be real shock when reactions weren't appreciative. So the way the mob "flashes" into existence comes with a lot of presupposition. It's not just that they're cross or insulting with people, but confusing, because on the one hand, they're responding to criticism and it might be terse or disingenuous, but they are often responding in ways that only really make sense to themselves -- to other members of the mob. Apologist A might respond to critic X. but the response was really for the benefit of apologist D, who quickly agrees and then responds in a way expected by Apologist A. And then they all have a laugh at some inside reference from apologist D's response, and the critic, or a person just with questions is like, are you guys for real?

Also, one of the best guests ever on a Mormon show.

[Kishkumen]

I thought one of the observant comments was near the beginning, almost mentioned in passing; a discrepancy between the way the apologists see themselves and the way others see them. I think this is -- or was -- a real problem. They seem to have the bizarre belief that people are imprinted with an understanding of the fellowship they have with one another as apologists. On Z, it was a standard thing for the senior apologists to continually throw inside material back and forth to each other through a thread or laugh at inside joke derailments, but it was if they expected that outsiders would, I don't know, appreciate it, somehow, rather then be confused or turned off by it?

There seemed to be real shock when reactions weren't appreciative. So the way the mob "flashes" into existence comes with a lot of presupposition. It's not just that they're cross or insulting with people, but confusing, because on the one hand, they're responding to criticism and it might be terse or disingenuous, but they are often responding in ways that only really make sense to themselves -- to other members of the mob. Apologist A might respond to critic X. but the response was really for the benefit of apologist D, who quickly agrees and then responds in a way expected by Apologist A. And then they all have a laugh at some inside reference from apologist D's response, and the critic, or a person just with questions is like, are you guys for real?

Also, one of the best guests ever on a Mormon show.

Thanks, Dean! Lola likes the spotlight.

Great comments! Wish I had made them because I think it’s the confusion generated that is one of the most off-putting things about it. That effect probably comes from partly from the pre-planning—they know why they’re there and it has nothing to do with the flow of what is already going on. It is about disrupting the flow. So they do their group shtick.

[Tom]

https://youtu.be/T_QL-6BhcDs?si=tbi7I1vA0vtgeopK

In this episode I talk about the curious phenomenon of sudden online dogpiling of things LDS apologists don’t like. My example is the TIME Lightbox fiasco, but one can point to many other instances in which suddenly a group of apologists shows up to troll, scuttle conversation, add two-dimensional testimonies, or click thumbs down. These are organized efforts, and they are counterproductive, but the apologists keep it up anyway, making themselves and the church look bad.

I’m wondering, Reverend, where the marshaling, strategizing, and war-gaming takes place. The FAIR email list? Does Skinny-L still exist? (I believe Skinny-L was more for exchanging funeral potato recipes, complaining about boring Sunday School classes, and sharing faith-promoting stories than engaging in Mopologetics, though I recognize that the address appears in many emails between Mopologists and critics posted on the SHIELDS website.) Who is in command of the dogpiling?

[Kishkumen]

I’m wondering, Reverend, where the marshaling, strategizing, and war-gaming takes place. The FAIR email list? Does Skinny-L still exist? (I believe Skinny-L was more for exchanging funeral potato recipes, complaining about boring Sunday School classes, and sharing faith-promoting stories than engaging in Mopologetics, though I recognize that the address appears in many emails between Mopologists and critics posted on the SHIELDS website.) Who is in command of the dogpiling?

Good question, Tom. The Mopologetic scene has become more fragmented these days, and one wonders whether even a new organ such as Scripture Central has become a place for planning these ops.

[Gadianton]

I have more examples as anyone, including from this board, can be guilty of in-group behavior, and that's almost all it sounds like I'm trying to say. I don't know if it's 'degree' or 'kind' but something is different. The Lightbox example like the Yale conference shows how their odd group mentality strays outside of home court, it's not just on "their board". Yale shows how the mentality I'm talking about goes beyond confronting perceived criticism, even if that's the general use case. Another example, which I think really hits the mark, is the "butthead" incident. I had read a lot of FARMS material and owned the first two or three copies of the "Review" and this was when I was young and I had no idea who these people where and assumed they were all Nibley runners up of some variety. I had no knowledge or interest in politics, and I had an ax to grind against EV's, and so the sarcasm wasn't off-putting to me at all, at that time. Now I can't say for sure how I would have felt about the acrostic had I learned about it back then, but I don't think I would have liked it. And that's not because it was rude, as I would have just assumed the target was "another anti" but I think what would have bothered me is the feeling that's hard to shake, that the essay had been written more for the friend, the editor, then it was for the audience who purchased the book.

Now some would be okay with it upon learning about it, thinking of themselves as being an honorary part of the club; they could then reveal that to people as if they were in the know. But I wasn't looking to be part of a club, I had not the slightest thought that I'd ever interact with any of them. I just assumed these were all accomplished scholars who knew a ton about the ancient world or whatever else, and put that to use showing how the Church was the only game in town. Well, I don't mean to drag this out, but I think a lengthy essay could be written on just what a problematic reveal that was, even completely ignoring the incivility towards the target.

[Tom]

Reverend, I haven’t seen a notice here of the latest CWK episode, “Strange Encounters.” Regardless, I enjoyed it. I’m glad to see you kicked the unhealthy H2O habit.

Best,

Tom

[Kishkumen]

Reverend, I haven’t seen a notice here of the latest CWK episode, “Strange Encounters.” Regardless, I enjoyed it. I’m glad to see you kicked the unhealthy H2O habit.

Best,

Tom

Thanks, Tom! I am glad you enjoyed the episode. I should do a better job of announcing these. At the end of the term, I am usually rushing to complete my grading while doing final planning/buying for the holidays. This year I was also on a hiring committee to fill a position that opened up in our department, and we were interviewing for the past couple of days. I will bring the episode to everyone's attention.

[Doctor Scratch]

A good episode, Reverend. As I recall, the TIME Lightbox incident happened some time around when FAIR launched its ridiculous “Mormon Defense League” project. They publicly stated that these “flash mob” tactics were a key aspect of their mission to counter criticism.

Additionally, though they never admitted to it, I was always under the impression that the L-Skinny list was used to stage and launch these attacks.