Response to DCP before it is removed

[_MsJack]

Apparently. I have been banned from the forum. I wonder what kind of convoluted justification they'll come up with this time. Obviously I broke no rule

I noticed last night that one of the members of MDDB is breaking their own forum rules by utilizing a quote from me in his signature line without my permission. Furthermore, the quote comes from a private message exchange that we had in July of 2010. It's my response to him after he had called me a liar (that I was perpetrating an "intentional falsehood" were his words). His signature suggests that it is "demonstrating the kind of civility [MsJack] finds appropriate for online discussions," when in fact what it demonstrates is the kind of civility which I find appropriate towards men who have just sent me private messages calling me a liar.

I hit my "report" button and asked the moderators to please comply by their own rules and remove the offending quote. Within minutes, they responded by perma-banning my account. The illicit quote remains in the signature line.

Just in case we needed more evidence that MDDB is a terrible, terrible place to post. This place honors the sanctity of private messages, and no one is disciplined just for utilizing their "report" button on a poster who is clearly in violation of the forum rules.

(I'm leaving out the name of the poster in question because I'm aware that he doesn't like having his real name mentioned on this forum, and it is under his real name on that forum that he is violating the rules. If he doesn't remove the quote from his signature by tonight, that will change.)

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

Apparently. I have been banned from the forum. I wonder what kind of convoluted justification they'll come up with this time. Obviously I broke no rule

I noticed last night that one of the members of MDDB is breaking their own forum rules by utilizing a quote from me in his signature line without my permission. Furthermore, the quote comes from a private message exchange that we had in July of 2010. It's my response to him after he had called me a liar (that I was perpetrating an "intentional falsehood" were his words). His signature suggests that it is "demonstrating the kind of civility [MsJack] finds appropriate for online discussions," when in fact what it demonstrates is the kind of civility which I find appropriate towards men who have just sent me private messages calling me a liar.

I hit my "report" button and asked the moderators to please comply by their own rules and remove the offending quote. Within minutes, they responded by perma-banning my account. The illicit quote remains in the signature line.

Just in case we needed more evidence that MDDB is a terrible, terrible place to post. This place honors the sanctity of private messages, and no one is disciplined just for utilizing their "report" button on a poster who is clearly in violation of the forum rules.

(I'm leaving out the name of the poster in question because I'm aware that he doesn't like having his real name mentioned on this forum, and it is under his real name on that forum that he is violating the rules. If he doesn't remove the quote from his signature by tonight, that will change.)

You should have know better. That particular oviphile is a moderator over there.

[Guest]

You should have know better. That particular oviphile is a moderator over there.

I've heard this claim before, but what evidence is there of that?

In any case, I wanted to do the right thing and give MDDB and the poster in question the chance to correct the problem before I escalate things. I was effectively banned from the forum sometime last year while I wasn't even participating there (I began receiving a notice in my reply field saying that my posts had to be approved by a moderator before they would appear. I attempted to make a very mild post once and it never appeared), so I had little to lose.

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

You should have know better. That particular oviphile is a moderator over there.

I've heard this claim before, but what evidence is there of that?

When they rebranded and relaunched I recall (fuzzily) him bragging about it in order to berate an opponent. I will search for it if you like. It does explain why he is never even warned.

[_Kishkumen]

I hit my "report" button and asked the moderators to please comply by their own rules and remove the offending quote. Within minutes, they responded by perma-banning my account. The illicit quote remains in the signature line.

I guess I am lost here. What is it that you have done recently that would even make you a target?

As much as these people claim the high ground and call us scum, their actions speak in deafeningly loud warning sirens.

I wish some responsible adult from the LDS Church would take notice.

Maybe the time has come not to allow one person, juliann, control a discussion board for LDS apologetics any longer.

Heaven knows that board is terribly mishandled.

[_Kishkumen]

When they rebranded and relaunched I recall (fuzzily) him bragging about it in order to berate an opponent. I will search for it if you like. It does explain why he is never even warned.

Well at least there is some explanation of the madness. It is still madness.

[Guest]

I guess I am lost here. What is it that you have done recently that would even make you a target?

Absolutely nothing. I wasn't even posting on the forum last year when they disciplined my account and began putting my posts in moderator queue permanently. And I haven't gotten involved in this latest revival of the Kevin-McGregor-JPHolding saga, either. Dan apologized to JP for publishing his real name in 2010 and removed it from the online version of the review, and he and I have buried the hatchet on the issue as much as we are ever going to (I removed my blog post on him and McGregor last year), so I consider the matter closed.

I guess I could be upset that there's never been an apology for the absolutely terrible review of Holding's book, but meh. Maybe in 8 more years . . .

I always assumed that somebody there was irritated with something I said over here and applied the ban accordingly, but who knows.

[_Kishkumen]

I guess I could be upset that there's never been an apology for the absolutely terrible review of Holding's book, but meh. Maybe in 8 more years . . .

I always assumed that somebody there was irritated with something I said over here and applied the ban accordingly, but who knows.

I've said it before, but I'll say it again. Those folks definitely need an intervention by someone who is grounded in reality.

They behave like petulant four-year-olds who haven't learned to share their toys yet.

[_Kevin Graham]

Hey Jack, I'm sorry you wandered into Dan's war path. I know you did nothing to deserve this kind of treatment, but it is really all for the best if you think about it. I mean how many years of this have we witnessed? Those clowns at MAD are so subservient to Dan and his ilk, it amazes me that they have the audacity to come forth on occasion, pretending to be interested in genuine feedback from critics of FAIR (yes FAIR and MAD are essentially run by the same characters).

You know after they invited me back I thought for a second that someone at FAIR decided to invoke change in the way they dealt with former members. After all, they invited me back and they essentially kicked Schryver and Droopy off the board when they couldn't address my refutations on the Book of Abraham issue nearly a year ago. It was starting to look like ZLMB again, but then when Dan had his meltdown yesterday, it is clear FAIR went into defcon 2 mode and started shutting down threads and banning their members. All for what? It was like shutting down all airports after the planes hit the World Trade Center. I was cautiously optimistic that FAIR/MAD was going through some kind of reform and preparing itself for a more tolerant, liberal 21st century. But then I woke up, and realized this transition will probably have to take place in another decade or so.

Was my post really that upsetting to Dan?

Perhaps so. But you know what, I don't care because Dan has a long history of these kit pieces and his denial about it all is just insulting too many folks who know better. This guy has been milking the tithe payer for a six figure income for years, all the while he sits around and posts thousands upon thousands of hate-filled quips and writes up hit pieces or assigns those duties to some other spit-fire apologist.

Dan has done a lot of damage to many lives and when informed of this, he scoffs. He has tried to harm reputations of others like Ritner, Quinn, etc, and all for what? To secure his buddies some short-lived sense of credibility in academia?

Ray mentioned the Middle-Eastern Texts Initiative, which is supposed to be Dan's claim to fame, but looking at the publications one begins to question what role Dan plays in these works. It appears as though BYU is dishing out tithe payer money so that other scholars, presumably those who understand Arabic better than Dan, are the ones doing the translations. It is unclear what it is Dan is doing with this project, if anything at all.

http://meti.BYU.edu/eastern_published.php

Either way, Dan will always be known for what he really is: an apologist.

And a horrible one at that.

[_MsJack]

Hi Kevin ~ Truth be told, I haven't been paying a great deal of attention to this latest conflict between you and Dan. Dan and I obviously don't get along well and little good comes from me engaging him no matter how civil I am, so I've generally tried to avoid him and threads about him. I did engage him once or twice in the last year when I felt that his arguments were really in the wrong and I knew the subject matter well, but that was it.

I clicked on your thread out of boredom, did an ego search for my name (I figured my name would come up if the Holding incident was coming up), and that's when I noticed one of the commentators there is using a quote from me in his signature that came from a private exchange.

Like I said earlier, my posting privileges at MDDB were effectively removed last year while I wasn't even posting on the forum, so this isn't a new loss for me; I simply didn't have a "banned" label under my name, nor did I have to delete my cookies to read the forum. If it demonstrates anything, it's how petty the moderating team at MDDB is, that they would discipline me further instead of correcting a clear rule violation. I really do think it is hands down the worst religious discussion forum on the Internet. To my knowledge, not even CARM bans people who aren't posting there.

My main disappointment with the ban stems from being unable to offer a response there when my name comes up and I am attacked---which has happened there in the past, and I'm certain will happen again in the future. I was never a particularly active poster, but I do prefer to offer response to criticism in the forum where criticism has been broadcast.

As for your own participation there, you lasted much longer than I thought you would, but I think we all knew that this was how it would eventually end. There are just too many Mormon apologists who cannot handle a level playing field. The game has to be stacked in their favor via censorship or they will take their ball and go home (or, as is the case in this incident, take their ball and kick all the players they don't like off the playing field).