The Evolution of the Juliann Board

[_Sethbag]

There's a reason why there's so little that's faith-promoting, and that's because the faith is actually false, and ought not to be promoted. Sort of by definition there are going to be serious problems with the apologetics for anything that's simply not true, and the LDS apologetics fit that bill to a tee.

[_Polygamy Porter]

It also seems likely that the more she brings it up, the fewer people will want to participate there. I was already losing interest, but this has somewhat accelerated the process. I'd prefer a board with even-handed moderation to one with no moderation, but MDB will do in a pinch I suppose. I wonder if other people will find their way over here as well. Some more really solid LDS posters would help.

Actually, MormonDiscussions is a moderated forum.

It's just not a babysat forum.

Therein lies the difference.

Hail yeah! Just look at some of my posts in the lower kingdom!

My most recent post about a certain hat, will cause exmo's to ROTFL!

[_Runtu]

I hope for this as well. It's very difficult to keep a forum free from attacks and nastiness, though, particularly when moderation is limited. Perhaps it would be good to make greater use of the celestial forum. I think the Vogel/Spalding thread there has been a good example of the kind of dialogue that can take place here.

That's exactly what I was going to suggest. I am guilty in that I never, or rarely, check the CK (with the exception of the vogel thread) and never go to the "lower kingdom" at all. It just seems all the action happens here, in the middle. If some of us deliberately take our "action" to the CK, perhaps more believers will feel comfortable posting.

In this spirit, I posted something about Joseph Smith's attitude toward text and scripture in the CK forum. Hope you enjoy it.

[_moksha]

Well, I appreciate the vote of confidence. I really had hoped to mend some fences over there. It's not going so well so far.

You are doing wonderfully. Don't get discouraged and don't worry about accusations of stupidity, that comes from a purely partisan outlook - much like what is said about this board over at MAD.

[_harmony]

Well, I appreciate the vote of confidence. I really had hoped to mend some fences over there. It's not going so well so far.

You are doing wonderfully. Don't get discouraged and don't worry about accusations of stupidity, that comes from a purely partisan outlook - much like what is said about this board over at MAD.

I guess I view this whole thing differently, but I see no reason to cater to the MAD board at all. Why try to mend fences or build bridges there? They're the ones who tore up the fences and bridges in the first place. They're the ones who maintain the chasms, who think they are in a position to judge anyone who thinks differently than they do as lacking. They have deliberately closed access to their board, limiting the participation of the public. I find that shameful, for anyone who ever professed to claim the name of Jesus Christ as their own.

Christ didn't tell us to shut ourselves off from everyone who disagrees with us, to turn our back on people, to put our hands over our ears and eyes and mouth. He tells us to be in the world, but not of the world. He tells us to help people, even if that means getting our hands dirty and our jeans torn. He tells us that we are responsible for our brothers, 7 times 7, until the ends of the earth. Closing access is not Christian, and is not Mormon, at least, not Mormon as our canon tells us we should be Mormon. MAD does not represent the church well. It is a canker sore on the lip of the church, caused by a virus that while not fatal, is ugly and painful to see. The members there have a canker on their souls as well, and repentence will be both long and painful.

Here, everyone is invited to participate. It's blatantly notable that few members of the LDS church participate here, in a forum where the moderation is not biased in their favor (it's not biased in anyone's favor). To me, the admonition isn't to stand only in holy places, as if the holy places were exclusive; to me, that means to make every place I stand a holy place.

[_Mr. Coffee]

You are doing wonderfully. Don't get discouraged and don't worry about accusations of stupidity, that comes from a purely partisan outlook - much like what is said about this board over at MAD.

Moksa, how exactly can my opinion of MA&D be considered partisan when I have no interest in the topic that seems to have certain members of this site and that site at each others throats? My opinion is that of a disinterested third party. I honestly couldn't care about issue of LDS appologetics, I'm not a Mormon and I'm not an ex-Mormon either. I truely couldn't care less if Joe Smith really did talk to god or if he was a fraud. I really don't care about the veracity of the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, or any of the other books of Mormon scripture. I'm about as non-partisan on that issue as it gets.

The stupidly irrational arguements I've read on MA&D, combined with the grossly biased administration are what I'm talking about. While I've read some highly irrational and "weapons-grade stupid" arguments here, this site does have one of the most impartial admin staffs I've ever seen on a forum. Here, when I see weapon-grade stupid andI give the offending idiot a verbal curbstomping, I don't have to worry about getting banned or censored for taking the 'wrong" side of an argument. On MA&D I'd last about five posts before Julian or some other dingus would ban me for having the temerity to point out the flaws, fallacies, and gaping logical disconnects in peoples argument. MA&D reeks of intellectual cowardace.

And if there's on thing I can't tolerate above all others, it's a coward.


In my world, cowardace would be rewarded by the local Commissar putting a bullet in the offending wussy's head in the name of Supreme Commandante Coffee.

[_barrelomonkeys]

I honestly couldn't care about issue of LDS appologetics, I'm not a Mormon and I'm not an ex-Mormon either.

Don't snap.

Why are you here?

[_Mr. Coffee]

Why are you here?

I looked at my "Mape of ye Olde Intarnets" and saw a section on the far edges labeled "Here there be arguments"...


Also, if you look at my post history, you'll notice something really odd... I've participated in threads not based on "Mo/Ex-Mo" but on a "Theist/Atheist" postion or just stuck to politics with the occasional deigression into oddball off-topic rants/comments. Believe it or not, but you can do very well on what is supposed to be a religious discussion board without ever having to 1. actually discuss religion, and 2. take a side for or against a given religion.