Yet another FAIR/MADB thread

[_Blixa]

I think that it was a good idea to bring this thread here, too, wade. I'd like to add to it with my own experiences, but probably don't have time to until later this week...

[_wenglund]

I think that it was a good idea to bring this thread here, too, wade. I'd like to add to it with my own experiences, but probably don't have time to until later this week...

I look forward to it.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Jersey Girl]

wade

It may also please some here to learn that they have been named there among those that MADB participants have been impressed with. Please see the thread titled: "Who Has Impressed You".

That thread was very uplifting and positive until the mod stepped on Severian's toes. Why do you think they did that? I'm not seeing the rationale there.

Jersey Girl

[_wenglund]

wade

It may also please some here to learn that they have been named there among those that MADB participants have been impressed with. Please see the thread titled: "Who Has Impressed You".

That thread was very uplifting and positive until the mod stepped on Severian's toes. Why do you think they did that? I'm not seeing the rationale there. Jersey Girl

I have no idea nor do I have much interest in speculating about such things (I prefer instead to focus on the uplifting and positive aspects of the thread). Sorry.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_dartagnan]

I'm just looking forward to the day when MAD allows threads that compliment other forums such as this one.

The fact that this forum will on occasson compliment MAD, yet the opposite is never true over there, speaks volumes in itself about how reasonable and balanced the people here can be, while at the same time how closeminded they generally are over there.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Wade,

I'm glad for whatever forum helps folks come to terms with their disbelief.

It is not an easy time for most former believers and whatever they can find that helps is a great thing!

There are certainly fabulous folks on the FAIR/MAD board, (as there are on all the boards I have visited). I have come to know many of them and truly enjoy their insights, ideas, thoughts, and personalities!

:-)

~dancer~

[_Some Schmo]

No, that is not what I am saying.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Then what is your definition of "reasonable and well behaved?" Will you find a mean person credible as long as he/she is reasonable and well behaved?

[_Yoda]

Then what is your definition of "reasonable and well behaved?" Will you find a mean person credible as long as he/she is reasonable and well behaved?

People who are mean or rude can certainly have credible information and have a lot of knowledge regarding a particular subject matter, whether it's the LDS Church or something else.

But do I want to waste my time in engaging them? No, not really.

I think that was the point that Wade was trying to make.

We spend our time here voluntarily. It's suppose to be fun.

Also, as I'm sure you know...in the business world, how you treat people is just as important, sometimes more important, than knowledge.

When I was teaching for ECPI, a technical college here in Greensboro, they were facing cutbacks in their IT department. The IT Manager was extremely knowledgable, but he was very abrasive, and didn't treat people with the kind of respect they deserved. His assistant, Jack, was not as knowledgable about computers, but would dilligently research the answers, and was much nicer to deal with. When the main campus decided to make cuts, they let the IT Manager go, and promoted Jack to his position.

My convoluted point...(and I think Wade's point as well) is that even though you may have extensive knowledge about an area, if you are consistently abrasive to people, no one is going to want to listen to you.

I think it's important to be able to "agree to disagree".

[_Some Schmo]

Then what is your definition of "reasonable and well behaved?" Will you find a mean person credible as long as he/she is reasonable and well behaved?

People who are mean or rude can certainly have credible information and have a lot of knowledge regarding a particular subject matter, whether it's the LDS Church or something else.

But do I want to waste my time in engaging them? No, not really.

I think that was the point that Wade was trying to make.

We spend our time here voluntarily. It's suppose to be fun.

Also, as I'm sure you know...in the business world, how you treat people is just as important, sometimes more important, than knowledge.

When I was teaching for ECPI, a technical college here in Greensboro, they were facing cutbacks in their IT department. The IT Manager was extremely knowledgable, but he was very abrasive, and didn't treat people with the kind of respect they deserved. His assistant, Jack, was not as knowledgable about computers, but would dilligently research the answers, and was much nicer to deal with. When the main campus decided to make cuts, they let the IT Manager go, and promoted Jack to his position.

My convoluted point...(and I think Wade's point as well) is that even though you may have extensive knowledge about an area, if you are consistently abrasive to people, no one is going to want to listen to you.

I think it's important to be able to "agree to disagree".

Yes, it's important to be able to agree to disagree. I also agree that you're likely to make greater headway with people if you're nice to them.

What I'm balking at is making an assessment of someone's credibility based on the accessibility of their delivery. That's just silly.

EDIT: For instance, Bush comes off as a somewhat nice guy. Does he seem credible to you?

[_Yoda]

Yes, it's important to be able to agree to disagree. I also agree that you're likely to make greater headway with people if you're nice to them.

What I'm balking at is making an assessment of someone's credibility based on the accessibility of their delivery. That's just silly.

True---However, I can guarantee you that if someone were to tell me something...even if I knew they were an expert on a subject....If they had been a jackass to me, I would double-check the facts before believing them.

In my mind, this person has been rude, and he/she does not deserve my respect at face value--right or wrong. Now, after re-checking sources, I would probably begrudgingly say, "Yes, this person knew what the hell they were talking about."

But...that's probably just my stubborn streak coming out. LOL

EDIT: For instance, Bush comes off as a somewhat nice guy. Does he seem credible to you?

This is a subject for a whole other thread. LOL

I think that Bush has acted with the best intentions based on the information that he has had available. Do I agree with the war? No...but now that we're there, we have to make the best of a bad situation and support the troops, or we're going to have another Vietnam situation.