Calling Thayne, Can I Help With NOM?

[_Mayan Elephant]

I think the naughty word issue at NOM is so overblown. Very overblown. Naughty words are just **** words for Chrissakes.

The issue at NOM with the naughty words was an excuse for the mods to lord and tweak things. The ideas that the mods didn't like we're significantly more irking to the mods than the words.

I am really not understanding what is unclear here. I don't. The heavy handed and heavy populated mod board at nom really couldn't figure out a way to make damn, crap, hell and some other George Carlin words disappear? That's the dumbest excuse for what was going on over there.

The real details are that the mods were discussing who and what to ban. They were disagreeing. They were wrapped around the axles over little words and syllables, allegedly, while hosting a private censor forum that they could not stop talking about publicly.

Seriously alas. We have had some good discussions and seen things on the same level sometimes. But yikes on this one. I am really not getting why anyone would make excuses for that moderation or want to redo it.

I respect what cwald and others have said about self moderating in "their playground with their rules." But I would add, “F” that. “F” that. Yep. Naughty word.

It wasn't Thayne's playground originally and it wasn't his yes-mens' playground and they changed the rules a LOT. So no. Other ideas should have been welcome and not subject to a moderator vote for banning.

[_candygal]

This thread has validated my thoughts. I fully recognize that a middle way doesn't exist, but a place is needed where people can tread lightly while they figure out who they are while they critically examine their Mormon beliefs and navigate around the remnants of shattered belief. We've all been there with various results and created exceptional content in the form of our own documented experiences, advice, opinions, and stories. That's what makes these forums so valuable. That's why I'm in support of a new board. We should have an announcement soon.

A future project I would love to do would be a film documentary where we capture the real life stories of those who have left and focus on the heartache, life changes, and challenges from giving up the faith. There would be so many different angles to document. From the people who fully adjusted and transitioned to normal, all the way to the heroin junkie living in the gutter under the shadows of the temple. Cwald, your story would make a great plot line in such a documentary.

Oh..real life stories just speak for themselves. This would be so good!!

[_Amore]

Just curious..how did the middle way see the policy on the gays/children??

I don't have an answer. There is no middle way, and I think this latest policy is a gut punch to anyone who fought and tried to make a middle way work for themselves and family. I don't know how ANYONE can justify or do mental gymnastics to rationalize this kind of atrocious behavior.

I don't see it that way, and someone in my family is affected by it. For a long time, the church has refused to baptize children of polygamy families. But there was no problem back then - nobody brought it up. So, that's an indication that people bringing this up - resigning over it etc. - are not really concerned about children as much as trying to look like someone who is NOT a "hater/homophobe" etc. It's another form of cult-mentality: "Believe as we do, or you're out! Believe as we do, or else we'll shun you and call you all kinds of names." Resigning for this illogical reason - and because everyone's doing it, is considered a "badge of honor" - reminds me of the cult. Who, of these, really cares about baptism anyway? Isn't it just a silly ritual seemingly required by a tyrannical grandpa in the sky?

2 people in my family and several friends have homosexual preferences - and I can tell you that they all have had negative experiences - either with abuse or sexual abuse. Sadly, it's coming so that they cannot get help for that - but must pretend that they were "born that way" when biologically we know that's not true. And before you start calling me names, I can tell you that I truly care about them - I've reached out to them when others haven't. How I treat someone doesn't depend on their preferences - what matters is they're kind to me - and we can relate. That's it - if they're poor, rich, black, white, religious, non-religious, have homosexual preferences or not - it doesn't matter to me. I care about people. I care about truth and it annoys me when people are too afraid to state FACTS - especially when people are hurt by them. It seems that when it comes to the Mormon religion, many get this - but when it comes to their new group's ideologies - and when they see others who object to homosexuality get harassed, they shut up and pretend to go along with behavior that proves to be harmful.

Statistically, according to nation-wide health reports gathered by the US CDC, homosexuality proves to be associated with high rates of STDs, AIDS/HIV and mental illness. Even the obvious - trying to shove a man's part into another man's anus (or any anus for that matter) is known to cause anal fissures, anal cancer and colon rupture. Tell me, this is GOOD? This is healthy? People who pretend this is healthy remind me of people who pretend smoking is healthy. They care more about what people think than standing up for what is healthy. How many people suffer and DIE because of such ignorance?

Is it really so hard to acknowledge and state facts - about EVERYTHING - not just the "other" enemy group? I don't see how people can go along with bull crap that hurts others. Care about people, and that doesn't mean you pretend that harmful behavior is healthy.

[_Red Ryder]

From NOM 2.0 to anal fissures in under 300 posts!

God I love the internet.

[_alas]

I think the naughty word issue at NOM is so overblown. Very overblown. Naughty words are just *ucking words for Chrissakes.

The issue at NOM with the naughty words was an excuse for the mods to lord and tweak things. The ideas that the mods didn't like we're significantly more irking to the mods than the words.

I am really not understanding what is unclear here. I don't. The heavy handed and heavy populated mod board at nom really couldn't figure out a way to make damn, ****, hell and some other George Carlin words disappear? That's the dumbest excuse for what was going on over there.

The real details are that the mods were discussing who and what to ban. They were disagreeing. They were wrapped around the axles over little words and syllables, allegedly, while hosting a private censor forum that they could not stop talking about publicly.

Seriously alas. We have had some good discussions and seen things on the same level sometimes. But yikes on this one. I am really not getting why anyone would make excuses for that moderation or want to redo it.

I respect what cwald and others have said about self moderating in "their playground with their rules." But I would add, **** that. **** that. Yep. Naughty word.

It wasn't Thayne's playground originally and it wasn't his yes-mens' playground and they changed the rules a LOT. So no. Other ideas should have been welcome and not subject to a moderator vote for banning.

Mayan, I have to call you on this. The whole time I moderated, there was never one discussion about banning someone for ideas. The moderation rules were never made stricter. That was a misunderstanding that one moderator created. You were not on the moderation board and I was, so I think I have a better idea of what really went on than you do. You mostly got your information from the disgruntled. Once they went onto another board complaining about NOM, that was something Thayne didn't tolerate and they got banned.

I am finished with this part of the discussion. I refuse to be drawn into anymore dissecting what happened to the old NOM. It should be enough for you for me to say that the moderators did not always agree about various things that were moderated.

And you should trust others when they say that the last year, there were no heavy handed moderation issues. It was me, fh451, and Jeffret dropped in and out as did River. The moderator that you sound like you are taking issue with was gone.

Whether or not any of the old mods are repeat mods on the new board is not up to you and it isn't up to me, but is up to those who are setting it up. And for me, I am going to trust them to set up *their* board the way *they* want it. And if I don't like it I can go somewhere else.

[_Tator]

From NOM 2.0 to anal fissures in under 300 posts!

God I love the internet.

Yep it's a thing of beauty except for the anal fissures.

[_Hagoth]

I just deleted the post I was about to send. Can we please not make this thread about who gets to decide about who gets to be gay?

[_RockSlider]

don't be a dick.

but then you could not post .... hehe


it would rule me out as well

[_RockSlider]

I just deleted the post I was about to send. Can we please not make this thread about who gets to decide about who gets to be gay?

"If you're happy and you know it clap your hands"

[_Mayan Elephant]

Once they went onto another board complaining about NOM, that was something Thayne didn't tolerate and they got banned.

yep. my point exactly.

i am trying to picture the mods banning someone here, for complaining about the board elsewhere. just imagine what complaining on the actual nom board was met with. cracks me up to think of the petulant insecurity in that level of moderation. i am not saying that about you specifically, alas. i am not. but i am damn sure saying it about thayne and the process of going along with that crap. it just cracks me up out loud laughing to imagine the process of banning someone for bitching about nom on another board. where the hell else are they supposed to speak?

there was a lot to complain about with nom. obviously. and that has come to fruition. thayne's tolerances were erratic. and that is not from the disgruntled, that is from the gruntled too.

i don't have anything invested in a new nom community. sure, i am interested and love the place for what it was. though, in all likelihood, i will just walk away from a bad fit. we have that in common.