The Tanners had the right to run their board as they chose

Post by **_Runtu** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:17 pm

chonguey wrote:Wow. I was responsible for two "gotcha" sigs in a single thread. I feel honored. :)

That's a first for me. I just liked the image of "abhorrent fungus."

Post by **_The Dude** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:21 pm

Runtu wrote:I just liked the image of "abhorrent fungus."

Right. Don't mistake us for truffles or shiitake. Or a magical psilocibin cubensis.

Post by **_Runtu** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:22 pm

The Dude wrote:
Runtu wrote:I just liked the image of "abhorrent fungus."

Right. Don't mistake us for truffles or shiitake. Or a magical psilocibin cubensis.

I had my first truffle the other day. Lovely stuff. And shiitakes are marvelous as well.

Abhorrent fungus is the stuff that grows in showers and between toes, I would guess. This place is full of it. :)

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:23 pm

What is up with MAD today? It seems like now that the whole Ritner/Gee drama has subsided, some of the stalwart members over there need to stir it up again (yes, I'm talking to you Ray and Juliann). Is there really nothing to talk about over there anymore other than the evil and angry (seethingly so, no less!), Satanic and/or satan-influenced ex-mos?

And for the record, I would suggest that there should be a basic standard of behavior for all posters, regardless of religious affiliations (or lack thereof). But I also agree that the moderators at MAD have the right to moderate as they see fit, and they have made no secret of their biases or intent to apply different standards. The end result will eventually be a gaping echo chambers where the remaining posters can all vigorously agree that they are good and everyone else is bad, insulting everyone else in absentia.

I also liked how Chaos came in, and with bold red, declared that there would be no more derailments (presumably the discussion of the word "Mormon"?), only to be followed by juliann's response to the Mormon thing. Oddly, it was not deleted, and she was not suspended.

Post by **_beastie** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:23 pm

"This is a Mormon board and I am a Mormon, if I am angry this would be the place to come, would it not? "
Juliann Reynolds, speaking of her MAD board.

I am SO confused. Tell me again why it is fine and dandy for an angry Mormon to go to MAD to express that anger, but when an angry exmormon goes to RFM to express that anger, it becomes a sign of some psychiatric disturbance? (not to mention Satanic influence)

Post by **_chonguey** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:27 pm

The irony of it all. Now selek is on his soap box about how to have a nice civilized conversation without sneering or insulting.

Man, that thread keeps getting better and better.

Post by **_Jason Bourne** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:32 pm

Intrigueing.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:44 pm

skippy the dead wrote:I also liked how Chaos came in, and with bold red, declared that there would be no more derailments (presumably the discussion of the word "Mormon"?), only to be followed by juliann's response to the Mormon thing. Oddly, it was not deleted, and she was not suspended.

That of course is because she either is Chaos (or some of the other Mods) or is able to tug at the heartstrings of said sockpuppet operator. She recently said she wasn't a moderator anymore.....let me just say I'm dubious as to the truthfulness of that statement.

Post by **_beastie** » Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:01 pm

We understand this very well. We have discussed the "angry Mormon" phenomenon before. Besides, it is pretty much self-explanatory. A person who is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and feels the need to express anger at those who are no longer members. And who is ANGRY at the the exmormons.

To answer your OP, juliann, I think they see themselves as victims. Most instances where an individual leaves the Church, there is disruption in families. If the person sees him/herself as having caused the disruption, heartache, etc. then they have guilt about it. If, on the other hand, they are merely victims, then nothing is their fault.

And where else would angry Mormons go, of course?

Post by **_Analytics** » Tue Jun 19, 2007 2:36 am

Sorry in advance for the cliché....

...but it keeps getting better. Stringing together Juliann's last two posts, on the same thread...

So let's stop the kumbaya stuff and get back to the topic which is this board and the sense of entitlement the angry countermos have acquired to the point they think they can dictate what we should and shouldn't say....

Of course it is healthy...but that is completely irrelevant to the topic. First because you know that there is no reciprocity and second...the topic isn't the Mormons. It is the angry countermos. Now if they want to start up the kumbaya that would be great. I am sure they would get a really positive reaction by those on this board.

Meanwhile, the Mormons are going to talk about whatever is meaningful to them on this board. And it bugs the angry countermos to no end that we have that right here. Why is it always about them?

I don't think she was addressing that question to herself.