Suggestions Please

[_Sam Harris]

Liz, GIMR and Runtu, perhaps you have contracted one of those nasty viruses from the internet. Eat plenty of chocolate. That always helps.

LOL, that reminds me of when my mom first got on the internet, she opened email from everyone, not understanding the danger of viruses. At the time I had a cushy IT job, and she thought I was messing with the computer. The thing blue screened every time we turned it on. We finally had to put it down, and she still thinks I'm the reason it died. Strange, my laptop works fine...

[_Sam Harris]

Hey, I've been sick, too. This gives a whole new meaning to "computer virus".

(or did someone already make that joke and I was too lazy to read it?)

LOL, we're still hacking out the conspiracy theories over here...

You feeling better? I'm praying for complete and robust health by monday. Because I can't be feeling like this and listening to old people complain that we didn't collect their trash on trash day. I work as a dispatcher for my city's trash guys. These people actually CALL IN if you miss their trash collection. Which isn't really possible if you put it out on time and correctly.

Question guys: do they have a number you can call in your city if the trash guys miss your house?

Did you know that it's a hobby for some elderly folk to run after the trash truck in the mornings? I've heard stories from the athletes themselves...

[_wenglund]

Hi Scratch,

I recognize that this is really about you desparately needing some attention, and your willingness to go to whatever lenghts in order to get it. So, please know that you have been noticed by me and that you are loved. Please also know that there are productive ways of meeting your human need for mutual love, value, and respect, which I hope to make available on my proposed site.

In the interim, though, perhaps you and Plutarch can help each other feel wanted and needed by interacting with each other. And, if need be, I am fine with the two of you getting together on the common ground of thinking me an "idiot" (perhaps you could even start a thread to that effect). Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, the above is exactly what people are talking about with regards to feeling a bit queasy about your idea.

If people are going to be made queasy about my proposed board by the rather mild way in which I addressed Scratch's "acting out" on this thread, then perhaps they aren't ready for the board I proposed. And, I am fine with that. I am creating a service that I believe has the potential of greatly benefiting people, but if some don't view it that way, and they are apprehensive or disinclined to participate, then that is their choice.

Over the last several days I have considered the distinct possibility that very few, if any, RFMers or even some of the former and unbelieving saints here, will be inclined enough to participate. I think the lack of trust in me is only part of the issue (very minor in my opinion). But, I think even more so, they are not ready for my Guiding Principles. I think the payoff they have been getting from externalizing their issues (blame game, victimology, teeth-nashing, etc.) may be far too high for them to want to look inward. As odd as it may seem, they prefer the heated battles, vindictiveness, mud-slinging, fragmenting of families, denegrating foes, etc., over mutual love, value, respect, peace, and joy--particularly if the latter means their having to look and change inward. Like Dr. Laura has said, some people are intent on carrying around their bags of poop, and may even stick their hands in it and stur it up from time to time. Sure, the poop stinks and is off-putting to others. But it is their somewhat warm and familiar poop. It is what they know and are used to, and for that reason they tend not to want to get rid of it.

Maybe, though, there are some people out there who are hurting and grieving, who may yearn to be closer to their families, who wish to have a helping hand in rise up from the dust of pain and misery, who only want what is best for all, and who desire functional ways to love and be loved, to value and be valued, and to respect and be respected, enough so that they won't find the least pretense to distrust, and are willing to do what ever they need to to achieve those more lofty and mutually productive goals. If so, I will be pleased to be of service to them at my proposed web site.

In otherwords, I am cautiously optimistic.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mister Scratch]

Hi Scratch,

I recognize that this is really about you desparately needing some attention, and your willingness to go to whatever lenghts in order to get it. So, please know that you have been noticed by me and that you are loved. Please also know that there are productive ways of meeting your human need for mutual love, value, and respect, which I hope to make available on my proposed site.

In the interim, though, perhaps you and Plutarch can help each other feel wanted and needed by interacting with each other. And, if need be, I am fine with the two of you getting together on the common ground of thinking me an "idiot" (perhaps you could even start a thread to that effect). Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, the above is exactly what people are talking about with regards to feeling a bit queasy about your idea.

If people are going to be made queasy about my proposed board by the rather mild way in which I addressed Scratch's "acting out" on this thread, then perhaps they aren't ready for the board I proposed. And, I am fine with that. I am creating a service that I believe has the potential of greatly benefiting people, but if some don't view it that way, and they are apprehensive or disinclined to participate, then that is their choice.

Over the last several days I have considered the distinct possibility that very few, if any, RFMers or even some of the former and unbelieving saints here, will be inclined enough to participate. I think the lack of trust in me is only part of the issue (very minor in my opinion).

Actually, I think this is probably the major issue. Continue reading to find out why.

But, I think even more so, they are not ready for my Guiding Principles. I think the payoff they have been getting from externalizing their issues (blame game, victimology, teeth-nashing, etc.)

This sort of labeling isn't exactly shining example of "mutual love, value, respect, peace, and joy", Wade. Do you not see the irony of your approach here? Once again, you are proving me right: your Mormon Shrink messageboard is really just about you, and making you feel better, so your feelings about your "most precious and dear" Church don't get hurt anymore.

may be far too high for them to want to look inward. As odd as it may seem, they prefer the heated battles, vindictiveness, mud-slinging, fragmenting of families, denegrating foes, etc., over mutual love, value, respect, peace, and joy--particularly if the latter means their having to look and change inward. Like Dr. Laura has said, some people are intent on carrying around their bags of poop, and may even stick their hands in it and stur it up from time to time. Sure, the poop stinks and is off-putting to others. But it is their somewhat warm and familiar poop. It is what they know and are used to, and for that reason they tend not to want to get rid of it.

This is a classic. And what would your "bag of poop" be, Wade?

Maybe, though, there are some people out there who are hurting and grieving, who may yearn to be closer to their families, who wish to have a helping hand in rise up from the dust of pain and misery, who only want what is best for all, and who desire functional ways to love and be loved, to value and be valued, and to respect and be respected, enough so that they won't find the least pretense to distrust, and are willing to do what ever they need to to achieve those more lofty and mutually productive goals. If so, I will be pleased to be of service to them at my proposed web site.

Look, Wade: I just think you should be very careful with all of this. You wouldn't want to be deceptive about what your site claims to be or do.

[_wenglund]

Just out of curiosity, is there any unbeliever or former member participating here who genuinely wishes to heal and/or repair relations with believing members, and who is willing to abide my Guiding Principles?

I thought I would present the offer first to my board buddiers here prior to setting up my proposed board.

Besides, I think it would be good practice, and may even give cause to hope for my intended enterprise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Just out of curiosity, is there any unbeliever or former member participating here who genuinely wishes to heal and/or repair relations with believing members, and who is willing to abide my Guiding Principles?

I thought I would present the offer first to my board buddiers here prior to setting up my proposed board.

Besides, I think it would be good practice, and may even give cause to hope for my intended enterprise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Count me out. My relationships are okay. I don't have any problem with your Guiding Principles, as far as they go, though. You didn't respond when I suggested before that you concentrate on believing Mormons who genuinely wish to heal and/or repair relations with unbelieving members, and as I said before, many Mormons would benefit by your Guiding Principles. That would be better practice for you, in that if you gained some credibility with your fellow believers you might gain some credibility with us.

[_wenglund]

Count me out. My relationships are okay. I don't have any problem with your Guiding Principles, as far as they go, though. You didn't respond when I suggested before that you concentrate on believing Mormons who genuinely wish to heal and/or repair relations with unbelieving members, and as I said before, many Mormons would benefit by your Guiding Principles. That would be better practice for you, in that if you gained some credibility with your fellow believers you might gain some credibility with us.

I apologize for not responding to your suggestion. I had read it, thought about it, and formulated a reply, but apparently neglected to post it.

While I think both sides would benefit from the interventions, the reason that I chose to concentrate on former members and unbelieving members, is because, unlike believing members, they currently, and for some time now, have web sites devoted to the challenges faced by loss of faith (none of the sites, in my view, take a functional and healthy approach to meeting the challenges, though). And, over the years that I have been discussing Mormonism on the internet I have encountered many who have faced, or were facing, those challenges. Whereas, on the otherhand, I don't recall but maybe one or two instances of where believing saints have, in cyberspace, raised issue with how to deal with the challenge of family and friends losing faith. So, it is simply a matter of pragmatism in concentrating on an existing audience rather than attempting to create a new one. I am merely offering an alternitive to meet the more evident and accessible, current need.

Besides, I had hoped to gain access to believers and their challenges through addressing the challenges of former members--the reverse from what you suggested.

As intimated previously, however, I doubt that there are many former member (angry or grieving or otherwise) who would be open to my interventions (you being a case in point), regardless if someone else that they may trust was to implement them. I suspect the same may be true, to a lesser degree, of believers. So, it is not as though I am expecting a great rush anytime soon from either side. I just thought I would toss out the offer just in case.

Thanks for letting me know, -Wade Englund-

[_harmony]

Count me out. My relationships are okay. I don't have any problem with your Guiding Principles, as far as they go, though. You didn't respond when I suggested before that you concentrate on believing Mormons who genuinely wish to heal and/or repair relations with unbelieving members, and as I said before, many Mormons would benefit by your Guiding Principles. That would be better practice for you, in that if you gained some credibility with your fellow believers you might gain some credibility with us.

I apologize for not responding to your suggestion. I had read it, thought about it, and formulated a reply, but apparently neglected to post it.

While I think both sides would benefit from the interventions, the reason that I chose to concentrate on former members and unbelieving members, is because, unlike believing members, they currently, and for some time now, have web sites devoted to the challenges faced by loss of faith (none of the sites, in my view, take a functional and healthy approach to meeting the challenges, though). And, over the years that I have been discussing Mormonism on the internet I have encountered many who have faced, or were facing, those challenges. Whereas, on the otherhand, I don't recall but maybe one or two instances of where believing saints have, in cyberspace, raised issue with how to deal with the challenge of family and friends losing faith. So, it is simply a matter of pragmatism in concentrating on an existing audience rather than attempting to create a new one. I am merely offering an alternitive to meet the more evident and accessible, current need.

Besides, I had hoped to gain access to believers and their challenges through addressing the challenges of former members--the reverse from what you suggested.

As intimated previously, however, I doubt that there are many former member (angry or grieving or otherwise) who would be open to my interventions (you being a case in point), regardless if someone else that they may trust was to implement them. I suspect the same may be true, to a lesser degree, of believers. So, it is not as though I am expecting a great rush anytime soon from either side. I just thought I would toss out the offer just in case.

Thanks for letting me know, -Wade Englund-

As long as you see the problem coming from only one side, your idea is doomed to failure. But then, you already know that.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Count me out. My relationships are okay. I don't have any problem with your Guiding Principles, as far as they go, though. You didn't respond when I suggested before that you concentrate on believing Mormons who genuinely wish to heal and/or repair relations with unbelieving members, and as I said before, many Mormons would benefit by your Guiding Principles. That would be better practice for you, in that if you gained some credibility with your fellow believers you might gain some credibility with us.

I apologize for not responding to your suggestion. I had read it, thought about it, and formulated a reply, but apparently neglected to post it.

While I think both sides would benefit from the interventions, the reason that I chose to concentrate on former members and unbelieving members, is because, unlike believing members, they currently, and for some time now, have web sites devoted to the challenges faced by loss of faith (none of the sites, in my view, take a functional and healthy approach to meeting the challenges, though). And, over the years that I have been discussing Mormonism on the internet I have encountered many who have faced, or were facing, those challenges. Whereas, on the otherhand, I don't recall but maybe one or two instances of where believing saints have, in cyberspace, raised issue with how to deal with the challenge of family and friends losing faith. So, it is simply a matter of pragmatism in concentrating on an existing audience rather than attempting to create a new one. I am merely offering an alternitive to meet the more evident and accessible, current need.

Besides, I had hoped to gain access to believers and their challenges through addressing the challenges of former members--the reverse from what you suggested.

As intimated previously, however, I doubt that there are many former member (angry or grieving or otherwise) who would be open to my interventions (you being a case in point), regardless if someone else that they may trust was to implement them. I suspect the same may be true, to a lesser degree, of believers. So, it is not as though I am expecting a great rush anytime soon from either side. I just thought I would toss out the offer just in case.

Thanks for letting me know, -Wade Englund-

Sure, ex-mormons have sites where they gripe and carry on, but have you ever once seen one of them say, "oh, gee, if only a TBM would offer some counseling to us, that's what we really need?" I honestly can't imagine how you get the idea that an ex-Mormon would choose your particular services over the many available if he did in fact require counseling. If I were you, though, I wouldn't attach the meaning to this refusal that you seem to be attaching, i.e., another failure of ex-mormons to know what's good for them.

On the other hand, believing Mormons are supported by what they read and hear in church every week to the effect that leaving the church is wrong and so ex-mormons are wrong. They are much less likely to recognize their own failure to deal with their emotions on the subject because they believe that they are, by default, in the right, but if you were on my side of the fence you'd see how angry and defensive they are and your Guiding Principles, elementary as they are, might help them get onto a higher path, at least as a beginning. Mormonism is quite bereft of good sound emotional understanding and Mormons need it. If you think you have something to offer in that regard, offer it to your fellow TBMs. As a rule, I believe that ex-Mormons have broadened their horizons to an extent where they don't so much need your assistance because 1) it is highly suspect of having an agenda and 2) ex-mormons, at least those who have had enough time to process, aren't in the naïve state they were as Mormons and wouldn't likely have much to learn from you.

I really tried to make that sound a little less blunt, but don't really know how.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Another note. I re-reviewed your Guiding Principles and have this comment, as a psychiatrist wanna-be myself: The basis for for implementing those principles would seem to me to be a sound understanding of personal emotions in order to make the wisest choices regarding them.

If you don't mind, humor me by defining the following (and I know you really love defining so this should be fun for you):

Anger
Boredom
Jealousy
Guilt