The MAD Board Has Clearly Jumped The Shark

[_RockSlider]

Tell me about Kevin Christensen

eta: I ask this because it would seem Kevin and Robert are the only academic/intellectuals left there. I used to try and follow/respect Robert but there is just something that I cannot put my finger on and explain that puts me off about him now.

As for Kevin, he has always been respectful in responses to me and seems a kind and gentle man in his correspondences on mddb. For some reason I was surprised to find both of these men heavy into ... is postmoderism the right word?

[_ldsfaqs]

You all shouldn't confuse Mormons generally wanting to live their lives, instead of always engaging with online apologetics, as the "death to apologetics" in contrast to anti-Mormons which spend their lives doing so, because hate and bigotry is what they are.

Every LDS board after a while have very few Mormons on it anymore, from Pacumeni's, MADB, that one used to be pretty good sized general LDS one forget it's name (only went there a few times). Most LDS realize you can only kick against the pricks for so long, get's boring after a while and people have lives and more constructive things to do. Me I've mostly switched to politics, since I'm still home bound. Pretty much bored with LDS stuff....

[_moksha]

(yes our Stemelbow-he has really gone from a wishy washy defender to a wishy washy critic)

I came to realize on another board that Stemelbow is a nice guy. What he says is well thought out. I don't think he is a defender or critic as much as he is a seeker of truth. That might put him at odds with hardcore apologetics.

Another poster I much admire is Cinepro. He uses charm to stick a pin in a lot of the "we are the chosen" hubris that sometimes occurs. He helps keep them on an even keel.

Runtu and Consiglieri add sanity to the proceedings. Posters like Blue Dreams and Garden Girl have added warmth. Even Julianne has been a valiant defender of women's rights in a place where the concept is not a popular one.

It was wrong for that board to ever become a bully pulpit against those who viewed things differently. If that is abating then more power to the process!


[by the way, what the heck is going on with Shades' spell corrector and "Juilann"?]

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Moksha!

I came to realize on another board that Stemelbow is a nice guy.

I have had a similar experience and I have come to the same conclusion about Stem. He really is a nice guy and he seems to be a very good husband and father too.

What he says is well thought out. I don't think he is a defender or critic as much as he is a seeker of truth. That might put him at odds with hardcore apologetics.

Although it has been quite a while since I have read anything from him, it seemed to me that he might have been on his journey out of the LDS church - but, to be fair, that was only my perception (from the bleachers) and I could be dead wrong.

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Runtu]

The moderates like ALarson, Rockpond, Canard, Stemelbow (yes our Stemelbow-he has really gone from a wishy washy defender to a wishy washy critic), HappyJackWagon, DBMormon, BlueDreams, Nevo and a few more have really taken control. Throw in a few who have their foot out the door Tacenda, , Jeanne, JulieM, and a few more, then add in those who have completely left like JKWilliams, JohnnyCake, Salgare, Consiglieri, etc; and you account for more than half the posts going on.

I see a lot less moderators interference then in previous years, though they are using the "limited" punishment for those who are really vocal against the church like Consig and Salgare. Surprisingly, JKWilliams is allowed to post as much as he wants but that probably is due to how nice he is more than anything.

They still are much more lenient with those aggressive posters who seem to be defending some version of the church than they are with those they view as critics.

It's been interesting participating over there again. There does seem to be more of a balance between critics and defenders these days, which is kind of surprising. But yes, not half as surprising as my apparently unfettered posting privileges. I don't understand that at all. :)

I'm not going to comment on anyone in particular, as I decided not to do that a long time ago. I don't have anything against those who defend the church, as I used to do the same thing. I'm sure they honestly believe what they say--well, at least most of them. The ones I don't get are those who will not concede even the most minor of points. For them, every grain of sand is a hill worth dying on. Even if I really believed the church could do no wrong, I'd understand that defending everything makes you look extremely partisan, not reasonable, and seriously weakens your position.

But they do it anyway Go figure.

[Guest]

It's been interesting participating over there again. There does seem to be more of a balance between critics and defenders these days, which is kind of surprising. But yes, not half as surprising as my apparently unfettered posting privileges. I don't understand that at all. :)

I'm not going to comment on anyone in particular, as I decided not to do that a long time ago. I don't have anything against those who defend the church, as I used to do the same thing. I'm sure they honestly believe what they say--well, at least most of them. The ones I don't get are those who will not concede even the most minor of points. For them, every grain of sand is a hill worth dying on. Even if I really believed the church could do no wrong, I'd understand that defending everything makes you look extremely partisan, not reasonable, and seriously weakens your position.

But they do it anyway Go figure.

I enjoy reading your posts over there, you introduce a lot of realism in a very humane way.

I think that realism is the opposite of what you defined in your post as 'defending everything'; for some reason it seems to leave one or two posters (well, just one) utterly crazed. I give you credit for endlessly keeping your cool and staying on topic in the face of their relentless onslaughts.

[_Tator]

Most LDS realize you can only kick against the pricks for so long, get's boring after a while and people have lives and more constructive things to do.

I see it differently. The LDS posters have no evidence to support their position. They usually get their rearends handed to them. The church is back peddling on issues that many posters have tried in vain to defend. As an example, I used to tell bcspace for a long time that he was on the edge and if he kept at it he would be out of the church. He is gone and I don't know if he is out of the church but his issues are gone. The church positions that have been taken lately and the essays have taken bcspace's pet issues and arguments away. Mormons really have no good arguments and are bored and most never go online. The best the church can do is cultivate a bunker mentally and keep the members they have and keep their heads in the sand.

Me I've mostly switched to politics, since I'm still home bound. Pretty much bored with LDS stuff....

For the most part everything Mormon is boring and you have made a good move. You are really terrible at defending LDS stuff and your politics are at least as bad. At least you are getting a lot of exercise.....typing.

[_Doctor Scratch]

It's not hard to see a parallel here with the Trump campaign. Observers have noted that the support for Trump seems, in part, to be connected to the increasing diversity in the U.S.: people are angry and lashing out over the fact that "white majority" seems to be "dwindling" in certain ways.

Things in Mormonism have been changing, too: the attitudes towards LGBTQ; pressure to give the priesthood to women; views on the Book of Mormon as non-historical. Recall that John Dehlin is/was one of the Mopologists biggest enemies, and his consistent call was for a "big tent" Mormonism that would accommodate a diversity of beliefs. This is one of the main reason that the Mopologists hated him. Heck, it even explains why they hated Meldrum. Meldrum probably agrees with them on 95% of Church doctrine (he even agrees that the Book of Mormon is "historical"), and yet they went after him viciously for daring to deviate from their hyper-specific and unsustainable views on Book of Mormon history.

Like Trump, the classic-FARMS Mopologists were/are entertainers to no small degree. And their supporters looked to them to provide the sort of bloodsport that reassured them that the status quo would remain intact.

[_Runtu]

I enjoy reading your posts over there, you introduce a lot of realism in a very humane way.

I think that realism is the opposite of what you defined in your post as 'defending everything'; for some reason it seems to leave one or two posters (well, just one) utterly crazed. I give you credit for endlessly keeping your cool and staying on topic in the face of their relentless onslaughts.

Thanks. I wouldn't say there's a relentless onslaught, just one poster who tries pretty hard to provoke me. I have lost my composure sometimes, but I usually take a break if I can't be civil.

[_Lemmie]

I enjoy reading your posts over there, you introduce a lot of realism in a very humane way.

I think that realism is the opposite of what you defined in your post as 'defending everything'; for some reason it seems to leave one or two posters (well, just one) utterly crazed. I give you credit for endlessly keeping your cool and staying on topic in the face of their relentless onslaughts.

Thanks. I wouldn't say there's a relentless onslaught, just one poster who tries pretty hard to provoke me. I have lost my composure sometimes, but I usually take a break if I can't be civil.

Like I said, realism, humanely done. Look how kindly you ratcheted down my hyperbole! You have a skill, brother, a SKILL.

(by the way, looking forward to another chapter of The Incidental Prophet on your blog; is ch 7 in the works, if you don't mind my asking?)