Comments on FAIR/MAD

[_Blixa]

The "Bloggernacle," on the other hand, now there's some Internet Mormons!).

"Bloggernancle"?

The compendium of Mormon blogs that call themselves such (i.e. By Common Consent, Times & Seasons, etc....)

[_Runtu]

Runtu

I'm convinced that most of what we see on these boards has more to do with personality and the notion of winning or losing than it does with the validity of Mormonism.

You know, I tend to agree with you Runtu, but what exactly is there to "win" or "lose". That's what I don't understand.

Exactly my point. Some people seem to treat this as some kind of personal competition, as if there were something to win or lose. Pretty pointless, in my opinion.

[_Mercury]

who's cooler than DCP?

Ain't nobody cooler.

But (sorry), it's not contagious.

And if it were contagious we'd all end up like this:

Krispy Kreme and Mormon Apologetics are a danerous combination.

Unfair and uncalled for, Merc. Attack his argument, not his donuts.

Waaa! Waaaa!

Dannyboy is playing along. He seems to be not as much of a wet blanket as SOME on this board.

[_Scottie]

You know what else irritates me to know end on MAD, is the rigidity of Godwin's Law. You know, sometimes mentioning Hitler, or Warren Jeffs or Oral Robers or whoever else is on the list is very much a valid part of the discussion. But any mention of it will get the thread locked.

A) Why can't we discuss these people? Especially on a religious board.
B) Why do they need to lock the whole thread? Why can't they just delete that post?

[_Bond...James Bond]

A) Why can't we discuss these people? Especially on a religious board.

You can, on Mormon discussions board.....land of the free and home of the depraved.

Watch......Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler>>>>>Hitler Hitler Hitler!!!!

[_Scottie]

A) Why can't we discuss these people? Especially on a religious board.

You can, on Mormon discussions board.....land of the free and home of the depraved.

Watch......Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler Hitler>>>>>Hitler Hitler Hitler!!!!

* GASPING IN HORROR!!! *

Sorry, I have a little PTSD from MAD still....

[_moksha]

It took me a long time to figure out that some people will just jump on anything I say, not because I said something wrong or evil or critical, but just because I'm me and I'm on the critics' "side." Witness Juliann's recent attack on moksha for agreeing with a statement she made.

Does this warrant a new addition to Murphy's Laws of the Perversity of the Universe or what? Do you think perhaps she was wearing a black leather teddy when she wrote those words of attack?

[_barrelomonkeys]

It took me a long time to figure out that some people will just jump on anything I say, not because I said something wrong or evil or critical, but just because I'm me and I'm on the critics' "side." Witness Juliann's recent attack on moksha for agreeing with a statement she made.

Does this warrant a new addition to Murphy's Laws of the Perversity of the Universe or what? Do you think perhaps she was wearing a black leather teddy when she wrote those words of attack?

I just blacked out for a moment.

[_barrelomonkeys]

You know what else irritates me to know end on MAD, is the rigidity of Godwin's Law. You know, sometimes mentioning Hitler, or Warren Jeffs or Oral Robers or whoever else is on the list is very much a valid part of the discussion. But any mention of it will get the thread locked.

A) Why can't we discuss these people? Especially on a religious board.
B) Why do they need to lock the whole thread? Why can't they just delete that post?

There was a time it seemed every single thread I posted on was locked. There was also 2 threads of mine that were locked and I'm not entirely sure why? Other people that posted threads in the wrong forum simply had their threads moved to the appropriate forum. Not mine. Just locked! It was rather disheartening.

[_Pokatator]

At least here you can attack back without fear of the mod's suspending you.

Which doesn't make for very substantive or very interesting conversation, actually.

Do you really find Scratch One and Scratch Two's interminable admit-that-you-ran-a-campaign-to-smear-Mike-Quinn threads gripping, beyond the first seventy pages or so?

Dr. Bishop Peterson:

You are being totally unFAIR to yourself here, you owned just as much responsibility to the derailment of that thread as #1 and #2 as you choose to call them. The original thread was about the Origins of FAIR. You chose not to address the OP out of your supposed lack interest in reading 28 pages of you and your friends embrassing yourselves to no end. You would rather go for 28 pages in a go around with #1 and #2 rather than defend yourself and your friends, Why because that interested you? No, because it allowed you to avoid answering anything about the OP.

What kind of campaign are you are you running here? Did you just now suddenly gain an interest in the "Comments on FAIR/MAD" thread but still have no interest in the "Origins of FAIR" thread?

Pokatator