Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the KJV in the Book of Mormon?

[_Jersey Girl]

How would you suggest using the colors blue and red to detail a lengthy dialogue/discussion? Would you combine those with black?

I disagree with what you've stated (I'm gonna cuss a little, so get your mod stun gun ready) about being "long winded". specifying a number of acceptable paragraphs, links though I do agree with your statement regarding "8 minute" paragraphs.

I am accustomed to a threaded view and know what it can do for discussions, especially those discussions that one considers topical debate. I am also accustomed to closely detailing a discussion in order to make communication and transmission of thought as clear and consistent as is possible. The building up of quotes is what I think of as "discussion".

This board (and I say this honestly) is used as a b***s*** session where people often don't care one way or the other what goes on, what is transmitted, what if anything is learned.

I personally have participated in lengthy discussions on the "other side" of JAK, where it was not uncommon for threads to continue over a period of days and weeks. Some people welcome the possibility of examining our own thoughts, positions and learning from each other. I have gotten more free online education from JAK over the years than I ever had a right to expect.

JAK isn't a bullshitter. He is someone who prefers to use his time engaging in thought and challenges others to do the same.

I fail to see how anyone can call his posts "convoluted" when he's attempting to squeeze a thought out of another poster on this linear format. It is frustrating, at best, to try to attempt to stay on point or maintain a train of thought with another poster when having to scroll through umpteen posts in order to even locate their last reply to us. When we try to use the quote feature, it doesn't pick up multiple lines of dialogue. When someone like JAK tries to pick up multiple lines of dialogue by using color coding, then there is criticism. He is trying (as others of us do) to maintain the integrity of a dialogue on a board where this isn't the norm. Were he to post only in the CF (which is where his level of discourse belongs) he would still run into the same issue.

Do we all need to reduce ourselves to b***s*** level in order to avoid criticism around here?

I likely have insulted folks here or the entire board. I honestly don't give a damn. I cannot express to you the compromises that even I (ignoramus that I am) have to make on this board in order to follow the linear format when a topic is of interest to me. In most cases, I simply give up. We make polls to get smilies but criticize a serious discussor for attempting to detail a dialogue. Hey, I got no problem with that.

JAK if you are reading here, look at how I used color and lines in my reply to marg on the "Christianity/Mormonism" thread initiated by GoodK. I took the first series of exchanges, reposted them in black (as we used to do Jersey Girl: marg:) and then added my new comments in blue. I drew a line between each series of exchanges in our posts and did the same throughout. See if that has the effect you want in your posts. What you could do with that, as you continue along, is blacken all previous responses and only use one color to denote the new responses. So instead of using multiple colors, you're only using black and blue. ;-)

Okay, I'm done for now. I've insulted the house and given you permission to black and blue us...how sick is that, eh?

:-D

Jersey Girl - I don't disagree with your main point. In fact, I'd like to see what JAK has to say. But after a couple of iterations, I'm personally unable to follow the conversation anymore. Using the quote box (and nesting quotes where applicable) goes a long way in "threading" a conversation so that people can follow the progression. JAK obviously goes to a lot of trouble to draft his response. Unfortunately, I find the substance gets lost in the lack of form. I suppose I wasn't terribly tactful in pointing that out initially - sorry about that.

skippy....Shades has stated on more than one occasion that he doesn't want us nesting the quote boxes. If there were a threaded view option on this board, what you would see is JAK's exchanges with charity fan out to the right while the remainder of the discussion moves in a fairly straight vertical line. With that option, JAK would be free to continue a line of dialogue with charity and ignore the many posts inbetween. Posters who weren't interested in that particular line of dialogue would simply move down the thread in the vertical line.

I find it odd/strange/weird that the community here will spend pages on say, Scratch's expose' type posts or taking Ray to task for some sort of thing and a few color coded posts by JAK draw criticism. Go figure.

[_JAK]

1) Using colors besides red, black and brown would be a good start. How about blue and red? Those stick out better than brown and red.

2) Here's another thought...use the quote feature. And don't build up 3 sets of quotes in red black and brown. Quote the relevant material, and then your response under it. It's not rocket science. For example:

The sky is green...

The sky is blue.

and so is the grass.

I agree. The grass is green.

----------------
3) And here's another...don't bold and italicize words every other word. When you do one word in a paragraph it means something. When you bold several words in every sentence it doesn't mean jack squat except that you got too much time on your hands.

4) Here's another thought...don't be long winded. It doesn't work for Bob McCue or anyone else for that matter. Make your point. Don't type 10 paragraphs when 3 will suffice. And don't type 3 paragraphs when 3 sentences will suffice. Less is more...especially in this day and age when attention spans are 8 minutes and under.

5) And don't use links in every single post! When a link is directly relevant then use one...but don't use 5 links when 1 is more than most people can bother to read.

6) Semper Fi.

How would you suggest using the colors blue and red to detail a lengthy dialogue/discussion? Would you combine those with black?

I disagree with what you've stated (I'm gonna cuss a little, so get your mod stun gun ready) about being "long winded". specifying a number of acceptable paragraphs, links though I do agree with your statement regarding "8 minute" paragraphs.

I am accustomed to a threaded view and know what it can do for discussions, especially those discussions that one considers topical debate. I am also accustomed to closely detailing a discussion in order to make communication and transmission of thought as clear and consistent as is possible. The building up of quotes is what I think of as "discussion".

This board (and I say this honestly) is used as a b***s*** session where people often don't care one way or the other what goes on, what is transmitted, what if anything is learned.

I personally have participated in lengthy discussions on the "other side" of JAK, where it was not uncommon for threads to continue over a period of days and weeks. Some people welcome the possibility of examining our own thoughts, positions and learning from each other. I have gotten more free online education from JAK over the years than I ever had a right to expect.

JAK isn't a bullshitter. He is someone who prefers to use his time engaging in thought and challenges others to do the same.

I fail to see how anyone can call his posts "convoluted" when he's attempting to squeeze a thought out of another poster on this linear format. It is frustrating, at best, to try to attempt to stay on point or maintain a train of thought with another poster when having to scroll through umpteen posts in order to even locate their last reply to us. When we try to use the quote feature, it doesn't pick up multiple lines of dialogue. When someone like JAK tries to pick up multiple lines of dialogue by using color coding, then there is criticism. He is trying (as others of us do) to maintain the integrity of a dialogue on a board where this isn't the norm. Were he to post only in the CF (which is where his level of discourse belongs) he would still run into the same issue.

Do we all need to reduce ourselves to b***s*** level in order to avoid criticism around here?

I likely have insulted folks here or the entire board. I honestly don't give a damn. I cannot express to you the compromises that even I (ignoramus that I am) have to make on this board in order to follow the linear format when a topic is of interest to me. In most cases, I simply give up. We make polls to get smilies but criticize a serious discussor for attempting to detail a dialogue. Hey, I got no problem with that.

JAK if you are reading here, look at how I used color and lines in my reply to marg on the "Christianity/Mormonism" thread initiated by GoodK. I took the first series of exchanges, reposted them in black (as we used to do Jersey Girl: marg:) and then added my new comments in blue. I drew a line between each series of exchanges in our posts and did the same throughout. See if that has the effect you want in your posts. What you could do with that, as you continue along, is blacken all previous responses and only use one color to denote the new responses. So instead of using multiple colors, you're only using black and blue. ;-)

Okay, I'm done for now. I've insulted the house and given you permission to black and blue us...how sick is that, eh?

:-D

Jersey Girl,

Having looked back to page 6 of this topic, I find this post of yours. So my response is a considerable distance from your accurate and insightful analysis of my effort to keep sequence of comments in tact.

Contrary to the above use of “JAK wrote,” I did not write as I am quoted here either about the sky or the grass. But the quotation makes it appear as if I did. It’s precisely why I chose to place the name of the person followed by what that person had said verbatim from a previous post.

As you rightly observed, it was my intent to clearly distinguish what each writer had said. Sometimes the word “Quote” appears without the name of the person who made the statement. When it appears many posts down from it’s original place, tracking becomes difficult.

And so, I use devices available to distinguish individuals. Generally, I attempted to address directly under what someone said my response to his/her statement. It was to maintain the sequence of the discussion clearly for anyone to see. I also used key words or phrases to facilitate easy access to a website rather than merely putting up the entire http address. Again, I did so to keep the integrity of the discussion as easy to follow as possible.

I apologize if it failed to keep focus on the issues under discussion. That was my intent. I very much appreciate that you understand that it was my intent and thank you for your post quoted here.

JAK

[_Jersey Girl]

1) Using colors besides red, black and brown would be a good start. How about blue and red? Those stick out better than brown and red.

2) Here's another thought...use the quote feature. And don't build up 3 sets of quotes in red black and brown. Quote the relevant material, and then your response under it. It's not rocket science. For example:

The sky is green...

The sky is blue.

and so is the grass.

I agree. The grass is green.

----------------
3) And here's another...don't bold and italicize words every other word. When you do one word in a paragraph it means something. When you bold several words in every sentence it doesn't mean jack squat except that you got too much time on your hands.

4) Here's another thought...don't be long winded. It doesn't work for Bob McCue or anyone else for that matter. Make your point. Don't type 10 paragraphs when 3 will suffice. And don't type 3 paragraphs when 3 sentences will suffice. Less is more...especially in this day and age when attention spans are 8 minutes and under.

5) And don't use links in every single post! When a link is directly relevant then use one...but don't use 5 links when 1 is more than most people can bother to read.

6) Semper Fi.

How would you suggest using the colors blue and red to detail a lengthy dialogue/discussion? Would you combine those with black?

I disagree with what you've stated (I'm gonna cuss a little, so get your mod stun gun ready) about being "long winded". specifying a number of acceptable paragraphs, links though I do agree with your statement regarding "8 minute" paragraphs.

I am accustomed to a threaded view and know what it can do for discussions, especially those discussions that one considers topical debate. I am also accustomed to closely detailing a discussion in order to make communication and transmission of thought as clear and consistent as is possible. The building up of quotes is what I think of as "discussion".

This board (and I say this honestly) is used as a b***s*** session where people often don't care one way or the other what goes on, what is transmitted, what if anything is learned.

I personally have participated in lengthy discussions on the "other side" of JAK, where it was not uncommon for threads to continue over a period of days and weeks. Some people welcome the possibility of examining our own thoughts, positions and learning from each other. I have gotten more free online education from JAK over the years than I ever had a right to expect.

JAK isn't a bullshitter. He is someone who prefers to use his time engaging in thought and challenges others to do the same.

I fail to see how anyone can call his posts "convoluted" when he's attempting to squeeze a thought out of another poster on this linear format. It is frustrating, at best, to try to attempt to stay on point or maintain a train of thought with another poster when having to scroll through umpteen posts in order to even locate their last reply to us. When we try to use the quote feature, it doesn't pick up multiple lines of dialogue. When someone like JAK tries to pick up multiple lines of dialogue by using color coding, then there is criticism. He is trying (as others of us do) to maintain the integrity of a dialogue on a board where this isn't the norm. Were he to post only in the CF (which is where his level of discourse belongs) he would still run into the same issue.

Do we all need to reduce ourselves to b***s*** level in order to avoid criticism around here?

I likely have insulted folks here or the entire board. I honestly don't give a damn. I cannot express to you the compromises that even I (ignoramus that I am) have to make on this board in order to follow the linear format when a topic is of interest to me. In most cases, I simply give up. We make polls to get smilies but criticize a serious discussor for attempting to detail a dialogue. Hey, I got no problem with that.

JAK if you are reading here, look at how I used color and lines in my reply to marg on the "Christianity/Mormonism" thread initiated by GoodK. I took the first series of exchanges, reposted them in black (as we used to do Jersey Girl: marg:) and then added my new comments in blue. I drew a line between each series of exchanges in our posts and did the same throughout. See if that has the effect you want in your posts. What you could do with that, as you continue along, is blacken all previous responses and only use one color to denote the new responses. So instead of using multiple colors, you're only using black and blue. ;-)

Okay, I'm done for now. I've insulted the house and given you permission to black and blue us...how sick is that, eh?

:-D

Jersey Girl,

Having looked back to page 6 of this topic, I find this post of yours. So my response is a considerable distance from your accurate and insightful analysis of my effort to keep sequence of comments in tact.

Contrary to the above use of “JAK wrote,” I did not write as I am quoted here either about the sky or the grass. But the quotation makes it appear as if I did. It’s precisely why I chose to place the name of the person followed by what that person had said verbatim from a previous post.

As you rightly observed, it was my intent to clearly distinguish what each writer had said. Sometimes the word “Quote” appears without the name of the person who made the statement. When it appears many posts down from it’s original place, tracking becomes difficult.

And so, I use devices available to distinguish individuals. Generally, I attempted to address directly under what someone said my response to his/her statement. It was to maintain the sequence of the discussion clearly for anyone to see. I also used key words or phrases to facilitate easy access to a website rather than merely putting up the entire http address. Again, I did so to keep the integrity of the discussion as easy to follow as possible.

I apologize if it failed to keep focus on the issues under discussion. That was my intent. I very much appreciate that you understand that it was my intent and thank you for your post quoted here.

JAK

A brief stroll down memory lane...you know me from my very first posts online. I recall my first impressions of your posting style; I thought you simply sought to overwhelm your adversary. I have been your adversary and on the receiving end of you more times and invested more hours in doing so than I could possibly count. When I allowed myself to be engaged by you at great length (this community has no idea!) you made me learn to think deeply about my own communication, my own assertions, my own consistency or inconsistency of thought. It is because of you that I learned to examine my thinking, strengthen my ability to convey and articulate my thoughts, and to identify those (rare;-) times when I don't make fluent sense.

I see now why you did it to me and I appreciate it. When people claim that I am becoming too demanding on a board, I connect it directly back to you.

Apologize to no one on this board! You raise the level of discourse on a forum such as this and some of us do like to think.

Jersey Girl

p.s. I also dislike the quote boxes when the poster isn't identified. I often have to scroll back several pages to try to figure out where and with whom the quote originated.

[_Jersey Girl]

Bond,

I still want to know what the relevance of the 20 bucks is to stipulating a threaded view? Is that how much a threaded view option costs?

[Anonymous]

When attempting to engage another poster, JAK will never cut down his posts. You can count on him to write lengthy detailed posts in order to make his transmission as precise as he can.

There's a fine line between precision and boring...

Yes, those of us who give a damn for discussion care to read the build up of quotes on this linear format. Skipping to the last line to read new material is what non-serious ding dongs do. JAK is not a non-serious ding dong. He is documenting the discussion for the reader and he's not using a build up of quote boxes. He's using color coding because this linear format is a huge pain in the ass to scroll back through especially when a thread builds up pages.

This ding dong says that building up the discussion over and over (and over and over...) is redundant. Again...give posters some credit. They aren't goldfish. Odds are they can remember a post they read 2 minutes ago, and can connect that response to their own response. Some people have attention spans longer than 36 seconds.

"All that quoting" is a damn discussion. Geez.

The first time it's a discussion. The second time it's overkill. By the third time it's redundant.

Good, then shoot the s*** and leave serious discussors to what they are also interested in doing. Solid gold money back guarantee on this assertion...if JAK were doing this to DCP there would be a standing ovation instead of the bitching and whining.

Yeah right. Most people would simply skip over his posts for being boring (like they usually do).

I've discussed the threaded view option with Shades previously. What is the relevance of donating 20 bucks?

This is how it works...

1) Someone donates money
2) Keene gets off his ass, uses said money to create the change that is wanted.

As evidence of this...I submit Polygamy Porter's donation of money in which he said "I want a better chat room". He sent money...and what the hell if we didn't have a better chat room! Cause....effect.

We aren't permitted to build up quote boxes on this board. Shades has stated so several times. This isn't the first time the issue of how to format posts has come up.

Actually your permitted to do about whatever you want on the board. All Shades can do is request that you cut down on the amount of quoted material. And if it gets really ridiculous (like more than 5 or 6 quote boxes) a moderator will delete some of the older material. Decent posters will comply with Shades request, and some will continue to be sticks in the mud...eternal gadflys who will question any and all requests and policies of the board administration.

[_Bond...James Bond]

Bond,

I still want to know what the relevance of the 20 bucks is to stipulating a threaded view? Is that how much a threaded view option costs?

I don't know how much the stuff would cost...I just pulled that number out of the air, thinking that it'd probably get you most of the way toward a threaded view.

[_Moniker]

Bond,

I still want to know what the relevance of the 20 bucks is to stipulating a threaded view? Is that how much a threaded view option costs?

I don't know how much the stuff would cost...I just pulled that number out of the air, thinking that it'd probably get you most of the way toward a threaded view.

I don't like threaded views! I must be the only one?

[_Bond...James Bond]

Bond,

I still want to know what the relevance of the 20 bucks is to stipulating a threaded view? Is that how much a threaded view option costs?

I don't know how much the stuff would cost...I just pulled that number out of the air, thinking that it'd probably get you most of the way toward a threaded view.

I don't like threaded views! I must be the only one?

I don't like one either. They have one at CARM and I can't stand it.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Bond,

I still want to know what the relevance of the 20 bucks is to stipulating a threaded view? Is that how much a threaded view option costs?

I don't know how much the stuff would cost...I just pulled that number out of the air, thinking that it'd probably get you most of the way toward a threaded view.

I don't like threaded views! I must be the only one?

I don't like one either. They have one at CARM and I can't stand it.

I hate them with a burning passion.

[_Runtu]

I hate them with a burning passion.

Threaded views or CARMS?

I dislike both passionately.