John Dehlin Stake President update 8/23/14

[Guest]

Can I start new threads using their real names, if I never connect their names to their aliases? If folks can do that with me (or DCP, or LM, or whomever), then why can't I do that with them? Again...seems fair.

The in real life rules around here have evolved over time, historically with the minute details/enforcements of some being solely in Shade's discretion.

Typically if a member has not revealed their in real life name with their various online characters on this board (having done so other internet venues does not count/matter) then using their in real life names on this board is forbidden.

You, having freely associated your in real life name with the mormonstories toon leaves you open to people using either and associating the two. Now, there are several examples of people who have openly associated their in real life and later requested protection from that mistake and to be treated in the future as if they had never make the association thus providing permission of use.

These more complex cases fall heavily into the Shade's discretion realm.


My guess, you will not be able to use their in real life names here even if you are careful to avoid any association with their MDB toons.

As for putting out a formal request (which it seems you already have) that the mormonstories toon be given the rights of a Toon that has not revealed in real life, look to Shades for this "restoration" type status.

A shadow puppet (allowed/encouraged here) might also find uses.

[_Sanctorian]

Super great thread guys/gals. I'm going to award some points.

Mormonstories wins against Mayan because I don't think Mayan proved why he has a legitimate beef. Plus 1 mormonstories.

Equality wins against mormonstories because mormonstories lumped equality into a battle I don't think is really there. So plus 1 equality.

Rosebud is the wild card in all this and will likely determine who wins. She claims to have some interesting stuff against mormonstories. It almost has the flavor of affair type material, but I don't think she really has anything. In fact, since I'm a gambling man, I think she got attached to mormonstories and thought they had something. Maybe flirting. Who knows? But mormonstories didn't see things the same way or read into the innuendos and rosebud got some hurt feelings. I'm a gambling man and that's what I'm putting my money on.

For the record, I do not think mormonstories had an affair. I'm not accusing anyone of anything. This is simply what I do on this board. Make wild assumptions that have no basis in fact.

[_Equality]

I don't care if people know my real name. The only reason I don't want it used here is so that Google does not associate it for people who search for my real name. Currently, that search would yield my professional web page. I would like that to remain the case. I don't want potential clients searching my name on Google and being directed to this silly board. I suspect mormonstories knew that when he posted my real name. In other words (for those who have trouble seeing anything negative in the behavior of their beloved Saint Mormonstories), he acted with the intent to interfere with my profession. There was no "value added" to posting my real name. It added nothing to the discussion. It was completely irrelevant and tangential. It was a bully tactic designed only to get me to stand down and stop criticizing him (see page five for a discussion of people who typically employ such tactics). Now he is demanding that no one use his real name here. The difference, of course, is that he calls himself a "public figure" (see his Facebook page). None of the people he named in this thread do the same. The distinction ought to be obvious to any rational person.

If Barack Obama started posting here as "President" and acknowledged who he was would the same rule about not referring to him as "Obama" or "Barack" or "Mr. President" apply? Would we have to only refer to him in threads as "President"? And if President decided to reveal the real names of three pseudonymous non-public-figure posters here because he didn't like the way they questioned or criticized him, could he reasonably complain about unfairness if those posters referred to him as "BHO" or "Obama"?

[_suniluni2]

People will chill if you chill. What's wrong with just doing a podcast and working?

Wasn't ms doing just that until you and others started dragging his name through the mud seemingly out of the f'in blue? The OP was about his situation with his SP, which as others have pointed out, does not look like it will end well. Or maybe it will, I don't know. But then some have to bring up this ancient history that sticks in their craws.

[_Bazooka]

People will chill if you chill. What's wrong with just doing a podcast and working?

Wasn't ms doing just that until you and others started dragging his name through the mud seemingly out of the f'in blue? The OP was about his situation with his SP, which as others have pointed out, does not look like it will end well. Or maybe it will, I don't know. But then some have to bring up this ancient history that sticks in their craws.

Why aren't they allowed to do that?

[_suniluni2]

I didn't say they're not allowed to do it. All I'm saying is I hardly see ms around here; then there's a post about him and rose bitches and moans about him, then says "we'll chill if you chill". If you don't see the inconsistency in that then don't worry about it.

[_Bazooka]

I didn't say they're not allowed to do it. All I'm saying is I hardly see ms around here; then there's a post about him and rose bitches and moans about him, then says "we'll chill if you chill". If you don't see the inconsistency in that then don't worry about it.

Of course I see the inconsistency.
But mormonstories deliberately puts himself out there in the public domain, so he shouldn't whine because some old stuff gets raked up and thrown at him. That's the price you pay for seeking public attention and celebrity.

[_suniluni2]

I didn't say they're not allowed to do it. All I'm saying is I hardly see ms around here; then there's a post about him and rose bitches and moans about him, then says "we'll chill if you chill". If you don't see the inconsistency in that then don't worry about it.

Of course I see the inconsistency.
But mormonstories deliberately puts himself out there in the public domain, so he shouldn't whine because some old stuff gets raked up and thrown at him. That's the price you pay for seeking public attention and celebrity.

I think I see where you're coming from, but why is that the "price" he pays? Just because he puts himself out there, he has to defend himself against all this old stuff anytime a discussion comes up? Maybe it's fair if the issues haven't been addressed by ms at some point in time. I just don't recall substantive allegations against ms, rose just seems to complain and threaten to publicize evidence to support those complaints. Let's hear the evidence already. Otherwise, just chill as she says.

[_Dr. Shades]

Since they don't use their real names on this board, I respectfully request that you use their chosen screen names, and not anything else, when referring to them on this board. That's an even better way to avoid connecting their aliases to their real names, methinks.

Thank you.

So to be consistent, from now on can you forbid them from using my real name?

Normally I'd assume that that's an actual request and not just a hypothetical question about what I can and can't do, but your last post I will quote here has me somewhat confused. (See below)

Can I start new threads using their real names, if I never connect their names to their aliases?

Not if they forbid it (which they have).

If folks can do that with me (or DCP, or LM, or whomever), then why can't I do that with them? Again...seems fair.

Up until now, we've been making exceptions in the cases of public figures. I think the best litmus test for "public figure" is if a story about him or her has appeared in an article published by a recognized news agency, either online or in print. In this specific case, talking about the MormonStories podcasts, conferences, etc. without mentioning the name of their founder, which he himself has used in public, is a little like talking about the Second Gulf War but never using the name "George W. Bush."

But to get closer to the spirit of the law, however, such threads should only be started when talking about public figures, and not when talking to public figures.

EVEN SO, you're a registered user here, so you have more rights than normal. Specifically, if you wish for the above policy to be overturned in your case, then I'll be happy to oblige. Just say the word.

But, the following post is why I'm a little confused about your wishes:

would you like us to address you as mormonstories or by your proper name? i am fine either way.

Either way is fine.

So, are we to consider that post to still be in effect, or are we to consider you to have overturned it?

Just let me know and that's what we'll go with.

[_Spanner]

Crickey bloody dick!