Blixa wrote:I've long wished that I could find the kind of discussions of Mormon history I would like to participate in here.
I agree whole heartedly. I have been on these boards for about 5 years now. There has yet to be a board where people regularly have the kind of discussion of Mormonism that I am interested in.
John
What kind of discussion are you interested in, John Larsen?
Blixa wrote:I've long wished that I could find the kind of discussions of Mormon history I would like to participate in here.
I agree whole heartedly. I have been on these boards for about 5 years now. There has yet to be a board where people regularly have the kind of discussion of Mormonism that I am interested in.
John
What kind of discussion are you interested in, John Larsen?
I am no longer interested in the question as to whether the Church is true or not. I am still interested in the history and theology of Mormonism. I am interested in Mormonism the same way a classics professor is interested in Greek mythology: you will find very little discourse on whether it should be believed at face value.
There is too much ego on the forums. Of course, I have been guilty of this too.
Blixa wrote:I've long wished that I could find the kind of discussions of Mormon history I would like to participate in here.
I agree whole heartedly. I have been on these boards for about 5 years now. There has yet to be a board where people regularly have the kind of discussion of Mormonism that I am interested in.
John
What kind of discussion are you interested in, John Larsen?
I am no longer interested in the question as to whether the Church is true or not. I am still interested in the history and theology of Mormonism. I am interested in Mormonism the same way a classics professor is interested in Greek mythology: you will find very little discourse on whether it should be believed at face value.
There is too much ego on the forums. Of course, I have been guilty of this too.
John
It sounds like you, Blixa and Don would be happy engaging in discussion in the Celestial Forum. Don't wait for someone to deliver you a thread, John Larsen, begin one and enjoy.
I think one of the biggest problems is that alot of the posters aren't that knowledgeable (to the depth that Don, Blixa, you and others are), and thus we have to derail threads in favor of comic stuff and so forth. We're compensating for our lack of knowledge with filler basically. I know I do.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
This sort of discussion (of the type exemplified in the opening post) has been happening since the beginning of online message boards, and will continue to happen as long as online message boards exist. Every message board that consists of more than one participant will ipso facto be imperfect.
If I do say so myself, I have extensive experience with message board participation on various and sundry boards. Keene and Negative, my two technological and moderatorial mentors, have just as much experience as I do, if not much, much more. Combine the collective wisdom of three of us and, well, we know that of which we speak when it comes to BB moderation. Take note:
The more extensive and detailed the rules become, the more effort people make to find and exploit loopholes. It's just like moths to a flame, for some unfathomable reason. Witness the disgusting antics of MA&D's "Morningstar" via her "Boogers" and "Thumper" personas for a case-in-point. The fewer the rules, the more leeway moderators have to moderate by the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law.
The grand experiment of which you speak--respectful discussion only--has already been tried, back on the now-defunct ZLMB. Nothing could get done, since any moderatorial action was immediately challenged by the "dinged" participant. In short, no one could believe that one's own actions violated the rules in any way--it was only the other guy who broke the rules--so seemingly more time was spent discussing the rules and how/whether/why/when they applied than any actual discussion of Mormonism.
EVEN SO, the grand dream of mutual respect didn't stop an entire segment of the participants from making a mass exodus to another forum entirely. The lesson to be learned from ZLMB? No matter how hard you try, no matter how FAIR you are, you can't please everyone.
THEREFORE, we now know that message boards fare far, far better when moderators' efforts are geared around making one comfortable with one's own contributions, not when moderators' efforts are geared around making one comfortable with everyone else's contributions.
Last edited by Alexa [Bot] on Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
I think one of the biggest problems is that alot of the posters aren't that knowledgeable (to the depth that Don, Blixa, you and others are), and thus we have to derail threads in favor of comic stuff and so forth. We're compensating for our lack of knowledge with filler basically. I know I do.
Bond summed me up perfectly.
I think it would be morally right to lie about your religion to edit the article favorably. bcspace
PS: I should also say that if something is particularly interesting scholarly wise...the mods will usually be more than happy to sticky a thread in the Celestial so that it stays at the top for an extended period of time, and so that people who randomly click into the Celestial will see it first.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
I think one of the biggest problems is that alot of the posters aren't that knowledgeable (to the depth that Don, Blixa, you and others are), and thus we have to derail threads in favor of comic stuff and so forth. We're compensating for our lack of knowledge with filler basically. I know I do.
Bond summed me up perfectly.
I actually enjoy Bond and Your posts and others of your disposition. I'm just not clever enough to do the same.
I know it sounds like I am condemning the boards, I don't really want to do that. I think all of the boards, from MAD to RFM serve a niche and purpose. I am just saying that there is a part of the discourse that seems to be missing. I don't think this should replace what is already happening.
Bond...James Bond wrote:We're compensating for our lack of knowledge with filler basically. I know I do.
DO NOT EVER DO THAT!!! STOP DOING IT NOW!!
I did NOT establish this message board to attract "filler."
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
I think one of the biggest problems is that alot of the posters aren't that knowledgeable (to the depth that Don, Blixa, you and others are), and thus we have to derail threads in favor of comic stuff and so forth. We're compensating for our lack of knowledge with filler basically. I know I do.
Bond summed me up perfectly.
That's not the problem. The problem is the need to "correct" "anti-mormons," etc. Those are the derailments that prevent discussion in favor of point scoring and "fish shooting." It's pathetic, it's sad, it's anti-intellectual and it's a million light years from discussion, conversation, engagement and dialogue.
I'm not saying I have any answers or solutions. I'd just like to be able to talk about the myriad of property deals Jospeph Smith engaged in without having to counter accusations of lying, distortions, taking things out of context, and the whole litany of aplogetic blockages of history. Or be able to discuss doctrinal shifts and changes without some juvenile "a living prophet Trump's a dead one" latter-day tom foolery or disingenous poses that doctrines were ever really doctrines. Of course that sort of thing is itself a fascinating topic for discussion...
Last edited by Anonymous on Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."