Gazelam wrote:I know that in Britain it went on with public magazines. With a forum as straightforward as this it isn't unlikely that someone at CHQ is looking in to see whats being discussed. Kind of like wetting ones finger to se where the doctrinal winds are blowing and what needs to be addressed.
Why not send out a questionaire to the membership to ask what's on their minds?
Jersey Girl
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
harmony wrote:Actually, I think someone at church headquarters does monitor these boards, and reports what people are saying to the leaders of the church. And I think some of the talks in general conference are a direct result of things that have been said here. I think Pres Hinckley's loyalty talk was an example of a talk that was a result of what is said on LDS boards. I'm sure there are others.
I find this unlikely. This board has only a few hundred users and less than a hundred steady posters with a browsing crowd of I'm guessing 200-300 people. If anyone has better data that'd be great. But realistically these boards probably don't register on their radar.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Gazelam wrote:Kind of like wetting ones finger to see where the doctrinal winds are blowing and what needs to be addressed.
I agree with Gaz, it is probably more like gathering of data that helps keep them informed of what is being said. Most likely members with training at NSA have helped put together an effective regimen for the monitoring and collection and analysis of data. This isn't for nefarious purposes, it is just the Zen of data collection. The dossiers are nothing more than a relational database on Scratch, Shades, et al. Just keeping track of birthdays, anniversaries, etc....
harmony wrote:Actually, I think someone at church headquarters does monitor these boards, and reports what people are saying to the leaders of the church. And I think some of the talks in general conference are a direct result of things that have been said here. I think Pres Hinckley's loyalty talk was an example of a talk that was a result of what is said on LDS boards. I'm sure there are others.
I find this unlikely. This board has only a few hundred users and less than a hundred steady posters with a browsing crowd of I'm guessing 200-300 people. If anyone has better data that'd be great. But realistically these boards probably don't register on their radar.
Excuse me. Certain people who post on the MAD board write about THIS board and other boards on FAIR. Are you now saying that FAIR isn't on the church radar?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote:Excuse me. Certain people who post on the MAD board write about THIS board and other boards on FAIR. Are you now saying that FAIR isn't on the church radar?
I don't think it is in any meaningful way. I doubt the Brethren are browsing it or giving it a second thought when policies are decided and talks are written. I don't think the SCMC is actively using this or MAD either. Surely there would have been at least one disciplinary council if they were. We don't hear of it and I suspect that if anyone on here faced a council where evidence from this (or any other) message board was used they would have reported it online.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Yes, we know for a fact that the church monitors this board. . . and many, many others.
Some online LDS article contained an interview with a BYU professor about the More Good Foundation. He let slip that "the church currently monitors about 1,500 anti-Mormon websites," and the More Good Foundation is therefore all about balancing out the numbers (or something similar).
Within a day of this bombshell hitting the fan, the article was hastily taken offline. I was one of the ones lucky enough to see it, but didn't have the foresight to save it, unfortunately.
So although this particular site isn't anti-Mormon, per se, I find it inconceivable that it wouldn't be among the 1,500.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
The Nehor wrote:I don't think it is in any meaningful way. I doubt the Brethren are browsing it or giving it a second thought when policies are decided and talks are written. I don't think the SCMC is actively using this or MAD either. Surely there would have been at least one disciplinary council if they were. We don't hear of it and I suspect that if anyone on here faced a council where evidence from this (or any other) message board was used they would have reported it online.
Why would there need to be a disciplinary council for an apostate?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote:Why would there need to be a disciplinary council for an apostate?
To make an example of him. It used to happen all the time. Nowadays, thanks to the Internet, the church gets bad PR when they do, so they have to be much more circumspect.
By the way, did you see my post directly above your last one?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
Dr. Shades wrote:Yes, we know for a fact that the church monitors this board. . . and many, many others.
Some online LDS article contained an interview with a BYU professor about the More Good Foundation. He let slip that "the church currently monitors about 1,500 anti-Mormon websites," and the More Good Foundation is therefore all about balancing out the numbers (or something similar).
Within a day of this bombshell hitting the fan, the article was hastily taken offline. I was one of the ones lucky enough to see it, but didn't have the foresight to save it, unfortunately.
So although this particular site isn't anti-Mormon, per se, I find it inconceivable that it wouldn't be among the 1,500.
But do they do any more with this information than fulfill their obligations from D&C 123? I know they collect copies of every anti-Mormon publication they can get a copy of.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Jersey Girl wrote:Why would there need to be a disciplinary council for an apostate?
To make an example of him. It used to happen all the time. Nowadays, thanks to the Internet, the church gets bad PR when they do, so they have to be much more circumspect.
By the way, did you see my post directly above your last one?
Yes, and that's exactly what I was hoping to see posted here. Thanks!
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb