wenglund wrote:...It is certainly not the approach he and others have taken here or on the linked website--which is all that I intended to speak to.
This is certainly a false statement. I'm not sure you even understand the situation, or what our mission is, or even what the best way to go about solving this problem is. I think I am in a far better position to make that call. Like I said to Ray, this thread is only an announcement for the website, and the website - still in its infancy - is only the beginning.
Thanks for your interest, by the way. All I can say is, stay tuned.
Well..I simply offered some well-intended and proven suggestions. You are certainly free to turn a deaf ear, falsely ascribe to me alterior motives, and defensively dismiss my well-intended suggestions, and think you have things all under control.
I just hope you aren't niave enough to assume that a few thousand pageviews of your website is reason to feel confident that your desired outcome is relatively assured.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Last edited by Gadianton on Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:22 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
GoodK wrote:4. Write this all up in a reasoned and dispassionate report, and present it to the appropriate authorities--i.e. those who have legal and administrative oversight responsibilities as well as those who are in a position to affect change.
Why would I expect the state legislature in Utah - which is 90% LDS - to be motivated to "affect change" at this place. Like I've said before, there are more effective methods of shutting this place down, and that is the direction I am going to take it.
I understand your sentiments about Utah, Eric; believe me, I do! However, I would still strongly suggest that you contact Utah DCS (Department of Child Services). If you tell them what is going on there, believe me, they will do a random inspection. That will be the fastest way to get the wheels in motion for a shut down.
LifeOnaPlate wrote:Indeed, if your goal is to shut the place down there are better ways to go about it as well.
Publicity is by far the best way to go about it. By far.
This place is not state sponsored, it will close its doors if it can't sell its product.
It depends on the nature of the publicity. Keep in mind that if 98% of the UBR clientele are LDS (i.e. those to whom the product is being sold), then if your publicity is rightly target to LDS, and if your publicity makes sweeping accusations against the Church (as appears to be the case with your website), that may well have the opposite effect from what you may desire. Just a word to the wise.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
This is absurd. You can't be serious. People in jail don't have the opportunity for such things either, do they?
I'm as serious as those in official capacities who will question you likewise. Responding with dismissive/flippant remarks and rhetorical questions, isn't an answer.
You need to have answers.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Let's see, niether Wade nor LoP have a vested interest in seeing the place shut down. Both of them are in full "damage control" mode, and would hate for anything to hapen to tarnish the LDS church's questionable name. But both of them know full well how to, and are willing to give GoodK advice on closing down the Racnch --- they know what will work and what won't, and have no problem guiding him down the necessary path to ruin the Ranch.
This is naïve for two reasons. First, because Wade and LoP really are upset at GoodK for being "anti-Mormon" and just would like for him to shut up. They have no interest in his success.
Second, because both of these guys have likely convinced themself of the falsehood apologists often relate, that anti- material only strengthens the church and negative press is counterproductive. Of course, just a couple days ago LoP was saying that even the insinuation of foul play is so effective that people still get a "dark feeling" about the accused even after facts have proved his case.
I think GoodK is on the right track. He's smart, he's doing his homework, he knows when to be charming, but he's still raw. I think this will be effective for his audience, even LDS. Well, there are those LDS who are so TBM that they'll never believe it above a righteous brother's opinion, but those can't be won anyway. I highly doubt that a campaign like this professionalized too much would be any more or even as effective.
I also think it's funny, that these two critics of GoodK, think the Farms Review is one of the greatest, nobelest, and most scholarly venues around even given the hatchet jobs and smear campains of some of its contributors. And these apologists are reacting with anger and vindictive words towards people who really haven't hurt them at all. GoodK had 3 years of his life ruined by the folks he's reviewing, he's justifiably a little hot under the collar.
It's doubly funny to see Wade's advice given that his criticisms apply more to his own projects than GoodK. GoodK has an actual network of people he's working with, a real book underway, real video footage, and a real plan. Wade's hat like 10 websites, organizations of a single person, that really are nothing but angry personal attacks on people that bug him with 0% hope of ever accomplishing anything.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
Gad, still brilliantly feigning acute congenital Scartcholepsy, makes yet another hilariously irrelevant attempt to drag the FARMS Review into this:
Gadianton wrote:I also think it's funny, that these two critics of GoodK, think the Farms Review is one of the greatest, nobelest, and most scholarly venues around even given the hatchet jobs and smear campains of some of its contributors.
He's got the Scartch schtick down. Absolutely no question about it.
I assume Loap, Wade and Peterson would prefer Wade's suggestions because it could so easily be shelved and buried once it got to the right wrong-headed Mormon representative. By whatever means necessary...
Loap, Dan, Wade,
You give the Mormons that are actually followers of Christ a bad rap when they get lumped in with you. There are good LDS people. TBMs too.
GoodK,
I think you're on the right track. Not all Mormons have tunnel vision. There are some mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and friends, that when they are informed will hunt these perps down and bring them to justice. Whatever it takes.
The really sad note is that there are great programs that teach parents to be more effective in successfully raising their children - if they would just look beyond the church, it's damned impotent social services and disfunctional bishops (like Peterson).
I am convinced that most problems with children are due to poor parenting skills. Once the child begins to act up, some people blame their behavior on satan's influence instead of the parent's ineffectiveness to parent. If you have money, leadership (power), you can cover your embarrassing deficit by sending your kid to Mormons that will ultimately make you look good again.
I assume Loap, Wade and Peterson would prefer Wade's suggestions because it could so easily be shelved and buried once it got to the right wrong-headed Mormon representative. By whatever means necessary...
Loap, Dan, Wade,
You give the Mormons that are actually followers of Christ a bad rap when they get lumped in with you. There are good LDS people. TBMs too.
Let me get this straight: I'm the one who's supposedly trying to make me an issue on this thread?
Have I said even one word in defense of this place that GoodK is purporting to expose?