What the MADmods Don't Know

[_Jersey Girl]

I'd like to draw out one more point here that I think others have also touched on.

An internet board community such as this is comprised of posters and lurkers. We don't know who is out there reading our comments and it's only smart not to disclose personal information. A long time ago on another board, there was a random poster who never really participated in the discussions, what he did was write pornographic statements to me (one of very few female posters on the board). Should my personal information be out there for someone like that to access? Availing oneself of anonymity is no indicator of lack of courage, it's an indication that people are choosing safety.

crock, when you walk down a city street do you go around with your name, address and phone number pinned to your jacket?

Jersey Girl

[_harmony]

And, yes, those who defend the church should show the courage of their convictions and use their real name.

That's not courage. That's stupidity.

[_Runtu]

And, yes, those who defend the church should show the courage of their convictions and use their real name.

That's not courage. That's stupidity.

Yes. I learned that the hard way.

[_Seven]

After the flood of hate filled threatening posts made by RayA (for which blood will be on his hands when fanatical TBMs commit acts of violence against us!!!!!), I think protecting our identities is the safest choice.

I have never seen on RFM or MDB anything close to the recent hate mission RayA is on. (to give us a taste of our own medicine he says! LOL) I have seen some political boards that could compare to his level of hate speech. Maybe his intent is to contaminate all the threads to an outer darkness level, in some effort to prove the board can't be run with the current moderation standards and overall mission of the board. In any case, it's difficult to find reason for crazy behavior.

[_Mister Scratch]

Well, crock,

It's a pretty safe bet you're not going to reply to my question so I'll just continue on without you. What about those defending the church? Should they demonstrate the courage of their convictions by posting with their real name?

Why should I give you my full name on this board? So you can google me up and post information about me? (It's been done, by the way) or so you can knock on my front door and disturb my relative peace?

There are TBM's and non-LDS on this board, on ZLMB and MAD who know my full name and have my contact information. Some of them have met me face to face and not one of them has ever asked me to post any of that publicly on a board. If it's alright with them, I don't see why I should entertain your notions of disclosing information publicly on a message board.

This from the poster who regularly changes his screen name.

Give me a break, okay?

Jersey Girl

I answered your question; the use of one's name is a natural brake on the unreasonable. One's reputation is at stake. That is why your name should be known. No more and no less.

"Reputation" according to whom? Let's face it, what would be totally acceptable and normal in a more secular context takes on a wholly different flavor in an LDS framework. After all, if you are not dealing with things LDS, you don't really need to worry about Church security, the SCMC, or God knows who else coming to your residence and harassing you, or making phone calls to you at unusual hours, or tailing you to various places and taking pictures, etc., etc., etc.

And, yes, those who defend the church should show the courage of their convictions and use their real name.

You spout off about how hypocrisy is the worst of all sins. You need to do a mirror post on the MADboard, otherwise you are a hypocrite. I will be anxiously waiting to see if you are willing to adhere to your own standards.

[_Seven]

[

quote="rcrocket"]Hey, I'm all for humor.

But Kevin and you and others are guilty of rank cowardice, and those who also claim in their posts to be active temple recommend holders but whom also condemn living persons and the church are guilty of rank hypocrisy as well.

I hear the refrain -- it is for safety that we post anonymously. It is for safety that bank robbers wear masks, that rapists don't state their names and that anthrax letter-writers don't sign their names. I'm sure the Unibomber felt safe.

You, and I mean you, tread on sacred and sensitive ground. This is not a forum about photography. On the sacred point. you posters fear retribution from Church bishops if your name becomes knownyour reputation is on the line? [Please don't come back to me with the free speech issue; I don't gainsay the right to post anonymously at all. I criticize the morality and moral fibre of those White House. But, why shouldn't your posts be tempered with the notion that o do so. Just as I believe the government should not legislate against adultery or abortion, I stlll have no respect for those who commit the deeds.]

When I first began posting on LDS discussion boards as an active member with a temple recommend, I spoke openly about all of my feelings and struggles with church doctrine and my disillussionment with the church leaders. I used my real name on the boards, gave way to much personal information than I should have and regretted it later. I never had one worry if a bishop discovered me, or reported me. I actually told him the website I was posting on. He could have easily found me. My reputation wasn't an issue because I was honest and upfront with my leaders about all of my feelings and heartbreak after learning the church had white washed many parts of history. I also let them know I didn't know if the church was true and had disgusted feelings at the behavior of Joseph Smith and other leaders with polygamy. I know others who have confessed very similar feelings to their bishop. He was still encouraging me to take a new calling and never took away my temple recommend. He encouraged me to attend the temple! He was hoping that in continuing my church service and worship, that I would overcome my struggle. He knew my heart and intentions were good and understood how difficult these issues are. My bishop also let me know there are many others who have struggled to understand the history of polygamy that he had worked with.

Posting anon. on the internet has nothing to do with what you accuse active temple recommend holders of. You have a very narrow view of what Bishops and SPs allow their members to believe and still remain active participating members of the church. Your comparisons of posters here to the unibomber, rapists, etc. are reprehensible. TBM posters do not use their real names for the same reasons critics don't.

[_Ray A]

After the flood of hate filled threatening posts made by RayA (for which blood will be on his hands when fanatical TBMs commit acts of violence against us!!!!!), I think protecting our identities is the safest choice.

I have never seen on RFM or MDB anything close to the recent hate mission RayA is on. (to give us a taste of our own medicine he says! LOL) I have seen some political boards that could compare to his level of hate speech. Maybe his intent is to contaminate all the threads to an outer darkness level, in some effort to prove the board can't be run with the current moderation standards and overall mission of the board. In any case, it's difficult to find reason for crazy behavior.

Have you complained about the level of hate on RFM? Or is this "acceptable venting"? Did you complain about this (the bolding is mine, since this may not have "sunk in" to you):

"The man is a barracuda! . . . He is a mean spirited person of the highest order. I have no sympathy for this poor excuse for a human being at all! Blech!!!" (Lucyfer, on the RFM board, 26 December 2006, regarding Daniel Peterson)

"DCP likes to spend his time degenerating others. . . . All DCP is doing is hiding behind the curtain . . . all the while turning gears and flipping switches to make sure that he isn't exposed for the bigoted fraud he is." (from the ironically titled Mormon Discussions Board, 4 February 2007)

”I'm not excusing his pompous diatribes or attacks on ex-Mormons or his twisting of church history and bizarre Kantian relativist leanings, but still, I feel sorry for him.” (Kimberly Ann [on the "Recovery" board, 26 December 2006], regarding Daniel Peterson)

Why all the attention and focus on Prof. Daniel Peterson [on the 'Recovery' board]?"
Mr Daniel Peterson issued a challenge to a poster here. DP has ran off
That's why.
DP is a blowhard moral coward, in my opinion, as he called for a debate and when the call was answered, DP ran away like a craven cur.
You do not need to say sorry to DCP. He . . . is a bad, wicked man. One day the Devil will claim him for his own . . .
(Matt, "Recovery" board [7 March 2006])

I don't know if you've noticed, Agassiz, but you're approaching Dan Peterson in popularity ratings on here. And comments like this are why. . .
Look around you. Jesse Jackson's a joke. Jimmy Swaggart's a joke. The Pope's a joke. The Mormon prophet, who claims to be a Christian, is a joke. Albert Mohler, Jr.'s a joke. Even Mother Teresa was a joke, cozying up to all those inhuman dictators, and letting people die so she could "work out her penance", rather than using the millions she had donated to her to erect a modern health care facility. THEY'RE ALL A JOKE.
-- Tal Bachman (RfM, 10 August 2006)

"Prof. P is a coward and a few other things I could name, but I will not stoop to his level." (from the ironically-named Mormon Discussions Board, 3 February 2007)

Daniel Graham may have done some brilliant stuff - but that's entirely irrelevant to this issue, isn't it? He could be Martin Heidegger himself (in fact, judging by the fascination with anti-realism BS Mormon apologists seem to have, he probably loves the guy).
-Tal Bachman (RFM, 12 June 2006)

The smell around Daniel Peterson and his ilk at FARMS are symptoms of an ideological system in distress as much as the smell of decaying flesh is of a dead body. They are Derridian postmodern fog machines whose purpose is to make the terrain around the borders of Mormonism so hard to find and to appear so baffling and unattractive that the faithful who wander in that direction will turn back in dismay.
Don’t hold your breath (though it is hard to resist doing this) while waiting for Peterson or FARMS to clarify anything. But even smelly fog shows can be enjoyed at a distance. Peterson and his FARMSy friends put out some spectacularly pungent fog.
(Bob McCue, on the “Recovery” board, 13 March 2006)

in my opinion, no honest, rationally-thinking person can read FARMS' and FAIRS' apologetics and remain a TBM. To maintain belief, one has to be as dishonest and/or unhinged as the apologists themselves are. (Randy J., “Recovery” Board, 22 November 2006)

“the scamsters game that . . . began with Joseph and continues to Daniel Peterson” (Luman Walters, RFM, 31 August 2006)

For Mormonism, there is safety only in stupour. Not in hard, brave thought.
-- Tal Bachman, RFM (13 June 2006)

Peterson is an idiot and a hack. . . . The man is not really a man he's a snake. -brian-the-christ (RfM, 10 January 2006)

"I truly believe that DCP is intellectually corrupt. He was a *MAJOR* catalyst for my wife and I to study our way out of the church. He relies on bloviating with large words in an attempt to obfuscate the subject matter at hand and when called on it he takes his ball and runs home."
(BornUnderPeaches, 28 June 2006, "Recovery" Board)

I don't have much to say about DP & Co.
The fact that they're intellectual charlatans pales beside their lack of fundamental human decency. --”et in Utah ego”(RFM board, 25 September 2005)

Daniel Peterson, "a lowballing trashtalker who deals in smear tactics" ("Mister Scratch," on the Dr. Shades board)

Mormonism is really a break off Islam They don't think Jesus is the god , they cover up their women and give them no rights, They hate all other religons and you must convert to their religion or go to hell. They get violent tempers when you question their beliefs. They want to take over the earth. The two groups have too much in common. -fromplanet13, "Recovery" board, 31 October 2006

I remain a huge fan of Daniel Peterson's. I can't think of anyone else over there, with perhaps the exception of Midgley, who so consistently makes the church, and Mormon belief, look idiotic.
(Tal Bachman, on the "Recovery" board, 13 March 2006)

DCP is alive and ticking. Slippery Joe and Briggy are long gone, and so it's not quite the same to pick on them. There's something that is more satisfying---in a nebulous but reaffirming sort of way---about calling Peterson a lard ass and a douche bag, as opposed to talking trash about Polygamy Joe.
-- “Mister Scratch,” The “Recovery” Board (7 March 2006)

"Daniel Peterson is not a second rate hack academic. He doesn't rate. In the slightest. Without BYU I wonder what he would be doing? Flipping burgers? No, he would be training people to flip burgers at a burger flipping academy, somewhere..." (Matt, "Recovery from Mormonism" board, 12 January 2007)

This man has the biggest persecution complex I have ever seen. He can't write anything without mentioning his detractors. He is pathetically insecure. His writings are all self-serving and do nothing to illuminate the so-called "subject". His ONLY purpose for EVER writing ANYTHING is to assuage his own fragile ego.
Peterson without an enemy is like natural gas without the stinky additive to warn people of its presence. He's invisible, colorless, tasteless and heavier (waaaaaay heavier) than air. The only way anyone even knows he's around is because of the "stink" that he makes sure surrounds him at all times because he knows he's nothing without it!
Put THAT in your tagline mr. Peterson
("Undetectable Odor," on the so-called "Recovery" board, 30 January 2007)

That both DP and Nibley are nothing more than merely average scholars needs to be pointed out more often. That neither of them can fairly be called "intellectual" should be obvious, but isn't (which is more an indictment of american education than it is testament to any great powers of imposture in either of them).
I'm not sure that DP even makes much of a claim to intellectual status. While he sometimes vaguely alludes to his "other" scholarly life, what he produces for the LDS apologetics market is usually just a loose pastiche of quotations which provide the jumping off point for petty ad hominem attacks. The true objects of his "criticism" are individual persons, not ideas or arguments.
Nibley, on the other hand, at least possesses the trappings of an "intellectual," if only on the level of caricature. He reads like an anti-intellectual stereotype of a "professor:" convoluted verbiage, "big words," and allusions to classical literature dropped in every other sentence.
-- “et in Utah ego” (“Recovery” board, 29 October 2005)

“Maybe I have issues of my own that make me take pity on the most despicable of people, but I really do feel for Mr. Peterson.” -- Kimberly Ann, "Recovery" board, 26 December 2006

Peterson still seems bewildered and hurt when people observe that he focuses so often on everything but what is really at issue, in his poor, mad scribblings. . . . If we had any doubt the church was a fraud, that it actually has guys like DCP "defending" it should confirm it beyond any doubt. (Tal Bachman, RFM, 8 June 2006)

IMHO [Peterson] has sociopathic/borderline psychopathic tendencies. Guys like him give me the willies because they don't have any ethical/moral compass to guide what they do in life. He has no boundaries on who is fair game in his nasty attacks against everyone who might disagree with him. Objective reasoning does NOT exist in his world.
--”Rebel Scholar” (RFM Board, 26 September 2005)

I would like them to speak and publish as much as possible, because their stuff strikes everyone but totally gone Mormons as bloody daft. I don't know of any way to better illustrate to people that there is something profoundly screwed-up with Joseph's church than to show them Mormon apologetic writing. That's one big fat difference between me and them: They'd shut all of us up forever if they could, whereas I'd put Dan Peterson and Gee and the other dudes over there on TV as much as possible, especially with sharp interviewers. To most people, they sound like madmen. (Tal Bachman, RFM, 31 March 2006)

"But once you publish in FARMS your tainted for life. Let's face it. . . . And only the weak-minded find the FARMS rag to have any value."
Tom Kimball, of Signature Books, on RfM (11 May 2005)

“One great thing about Bro. Peterson is that even when he may have a point, he seems congenitally unable to express it in anything like a sane, convincing way.” (Tal Bachman, RFM, 22 December 2006)

Most of these attacks come from anonymous gutless cowards and backstabbers who claim they are "recovering from Mormonism".

[_Blixa]

That list again.

I've got some questions:

Aren't most of these examples of people NOT posting anonymously (Tal Bachman, Bob McCue, Kimberly Ann, Tom Kimball, Randy J., Matt)? Also there are screen names there of people who've made clear their real identities in one way or another.

Am I to assume that the quotes without bolded parts are ok?

And finally, do all these quotes seem similar to you? It strikes me there is a range of response here: from personal attack to other levels of criticism.

[_Ray A]

That list again.

I've got some questions:

Aren't most of these examples of people NOT posting anonymously (Tal Bachman, Bob McCue, Kimberly Ann, Tom Kimball, Randy J., Matt)? Also there are screen names there of people who've made clear their real identities in one way or another.

Am I to assume that the quotes without bolded parts are ok?

And finally, do all these quotes seem similar to you? It strikes me there is a range of response here: from personal attack to other levels of criticism.

The majority of the posters are anonymous. Are you justifying this? It seems so. I am drawing up a list of more quotes. When you read them, I would like to see your justification.

[_skippy the dead]

That list again.

Yeah, that list is pretty lame. I don't know why it keeps being brought up as an example of exmo "atrocities". Give it a rest, and find something new to support your position, if you can. The bile spewing from your keyboard lately is far worse than anything on that list.