A Meltdown of Epic Proportions

[_Some Schmo]

I have to say I can now appreciate more how certain people feel they are being "talked about" behind their backs. I think I can understand the grievances. In reality Liz's board gave no protection from criticism. I'm not a PC (politically correct) man, and I've put forward the suggestion that Liz should open up her board for the full view of the Internet. Of course risks are involved, but those risks come with freedom of speech.

In my view, it's a damn good board, but I now feel that the "invite only" policy can raise real, and not unjustified, resentments. If I was in the position of the "uninvited", I think I'd be pissed off too, because I don't like being "favoured" above others. I was a "pundit" on FAIR, once upon a time, a long time ago, and I only got that status because I defended Mormonism. Not on any brain-worthy or academic credentials merit. But I've never really felt comfortable with some kind of "superior" status. So yes, this is a kind of "repent" post for me. Those criticised on The Cafeteria should have full rights to respond to the criticisms. It's only fair.

This is the Ray I like (not that I suspect he gives a crap one way or another how I feel about him). Now I just think you were posting really pissed (angry, not drunk).

As far as opening liz's board goes... meh, I don't care if it is or not (I've only seen a couple people over there that I like reading; don't care about NOM's, specifically; can't see myself ever going there even if it were opened), but I certainly understand why others do if people around here are going to be topical there. I don't know, liz... you may want to rethink your position on the board's privacy. People here do have a legitimate beef. It's either open it up or restrict your people from mentioning non-members of the board.

PS: You people can bash me all you want. Homercles cares not for beans.

[_sock puppet]

Why not, RockSlider, join RayA's call for thecafeteria to be opened up to public inspection? Why limit it to who from here that RayA recalls has been trashed there?

Earlier today when Liz was asking the board rather to open it up. I made this post:

"Of course, the right thing to do here is for the individual or individuals who have ever made whole threads, or large portions of them available to MDD posters to privately get with liz and fix this up. I don’t think an occasional mention of the goings on here is wrong, but someone is obviously going way beyond this.

You have been invited here for a reason, you have exhibited qualities from your posting history that is desirable for a board like this to try and achieve its stated goals. Do you really have no ethical or moral problem with violating the trust of those on this board?

Maybe it’s my desires for the board that has caused a lot of the problem. My hopes were for a place to share a bit more of ourselves with each other. That involves various levels of revealing information about ourselves where we need to trust the other participates with whatever level that we may reveal of ourselves.

For example, I post under an anonymous name because of the real dangers that posting on the internet subject’s one to. And yet early on while under attack of my cowardice in posting, I freely posted my name to establish some trust, that I am willing to stand behind what I say here, that my name here is as good as my name in real life, other than I need/want the protection.

Or while challenged to show how I might have any qualifications to make some statement, I share some very personal information about my past.
Yes, I was a fool to expose myself here, however, that does not make it right for you to endanger my in real life information here for whatever your purposes may be.

I believe that Liz’s ethics as a moderator is something that is important to her. I believe that Liz is the kind that would actually forgive you. I know that Liz deserves to hear from you, either to resign, explain, or apologize.
She in turn could then give us some indication of the relative safety of privacy on this board."


The board would be useless for my desires, and has in real life information about me I was willing to share with that group, not the world.

Really?

You snuck into the "cool" club. You assumed the "cool" posters could be trusted because they were--what, "cool"? Then within weeks you pulled your pants down, showed your privates and now you would be pissed if it turns out the "cool" club's secrecy might need to be busted because it has been morally abused by--who, the "cool" posters?

I'm sorry, RockSlider, but I haven't seen those kind of poor social judgment calls by many over junior high age.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Sock,

There goes me remaining silent and not wanting to get involved in this thread. Thanks :)

Ceeboo,

It wasn't those of us here that created a secret board to flame throw at Dr Scratch.

Understood (And for what it's worth, I had understood that long before this post to me)

Just keep that in mind as you assess your two groups of friends.

While I will not "asses" any of my friends, I will offer the following opinion concerning the information that has evolved from this thread.

It seems clear to me that the information in this thread (alone, and without the need to gather any other support) places the "Cafeteria" firmly cemented on the "wrong-side."

What do you do now? (Own it and open it up for all to see)
People who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.

Just my opinion.

Unfortunate? (You bet)

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Darth J]

What about Darth J, sock? Is Darth J also a cockroach?

I like to think of myself more as a diseased rat.

[_Dr. Shades]

I have never, at any time, shut down any person who has sought to defend Mormonism. Nor have I ever come close.

Well, maybe not. But you've created possibly the most biased anti-Mormon message board on the Internet.

Really? In that case, allow me to introduce you to a little place called Recovery From Mormonism. If you think this board is distasteful, you'll probably have a brain aneurysm after about 30 seconds there. From an LDS perspective, this board is sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns compared to that place.

Perhaps it's just all "chance". A random happening. You know, s*** happens.

Perhaps. Believing Mormons are allowed to register here, and they're not censored when they post here. If they aren't defeating critics, bringing their friends, and otherwise actively turning this board into a pro-Mormon one, then they have no one to blame but themselves.

I hope you sleep well at night.

I do. It's not like I've trampled on anyone's freedom of speech. It's not like I've silenced anyone who had different religious beliefs than I do. It's not like I've violated my own rules. So why shouldn't I sleep well at night?

I wouldn't want to be in your shoes.

I don't want to be in my shoes either, so that makes two of us.

You've had ample warnings.

Warnings about what? Warnings from whom?

You created this board to screw Momons.

I did? Wow, that's news to me. I'm clearly doing an extremely poor job of it, since I give Mormons far, far more freedom and latitude than even the Mormon Dialogue & Discussion board gives them. If that counts as being "screwed," then I'd hate to see what not being screwed looks like.

Now, be honest.

That's about as honest as I can possibly be. I don't know what else I can give you.

Oh, it's going your way, too!! Coincidence!!

"My way" is to have a board wherein people can freely discuss Mormonism without having to tiptoe around capricious moderators. Even you have told me, in the past, that I've succeeded admirably in that regard.

But enough about me. Clearly you're dissatisfied with this board and the way I run it. Therefore, why not give you a FAIR hearing? Please tell me. . .

• What I should do to make this board more to your liking, and
• how I can preserve freedom of speech in the process.

Thanks in advance for your input on this matter.

[_Drifting]

Dr Shades,

From what I have seen, Internet Mormon's do not seem to want to accept this:

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

This board, to me, is the epitome of the principle of free discussion about Mormonism. Something sadly lacking within the Church institution itself.

[_Kishkumen]

You know what I remember Trevor for? In the midst of his battles with being revealed in his article … ironically, I had a really nasty signature line bashing Will, and he asked me to change it, suggesting that treating each other as humans was preferred.

Yea, I'm afraid you are right, one Treavor was too many around here.

Unbelievable. I don't know how the man sleeps at night.

[_RockSlider]

Unbelievable. I don't know how the man sleeps at night.

Well, as it appears sock puppet is correct about the utter failure of the friend's board and my total naïveté in my actions. Hell, me going ballistic, traitors coming out of the wood works, Dan busy shoring up his innocence among the friends and now Ray's come to Jesus moment, heck he doesn't need a new friends board, he's had MD all along! Liz might as well open it up or shut it down.

So Kish, now that we have all that straightened out, apparently I'm totally naïve about Trevor as well. Might I ask why you say this about him? I don't remember much about his exchanges beyond the article/will mess, in which he seemed to me to stay level headed.

[_Some Schmo]

Unbelievable. I don't know how the man sleeps at night.

Well, as it appears sock puppet is correct about the utter failure of the friend's board and my total naïveté in my actions. Hell, me going ballistic, traitors coming out of the wood works, Dan busy shoring up his innocence among the friends and now Ray's come to Jesus moment, heck he doesn't need a new friends board, he's had MD all along! Liz might as well open it up or shut it down.

So Kish, now that we have all that straightened out, apparently I'm totally naïve about Trevor as well. Might I ask why you say this about him? I don't remember much about his exchanges beyond the article/will mess, in which he seemed to me to stay level headed.

Kish is very close to Trevor. If you insult Trevor, it's like you're insulting Kish.

And quite frankly, neither of them deserve it.

[_Kishkumen]

Well, as it appears sock puppet is correct about the utter failure of the friend's board and my total naïveté in my actions. Hell, me going ballistic, traitors coming out of the wood works, Dan busy shoring up his innocence among the friends and now Ray's come to Jesus moment, heck he doesn't need a new friends board, he's had MD all along! Liz might as well open it up or shut it down.

It is amazing what may happen during one's research sabbatical. Otherwise, I can't really comment. I find that I am no longer very interested in anything that Daniel Peterson does on message boards, nor am I much interested in anything connected to those doings. Certainly not more than casually, and obviously the Jaredites take priority in my life when it comes to really figuring out the details involved in anything.

So Kish, now that we have all that straightened out, apparently I'm totally naïve about Trevor as well. Might I ask why you say this about him? I don't remember much about his exchanges beyond the article/will mess, in which he seemed to me to stay level headed.

Oh, I was simply making a tongue in cheek comment about the kind of sociopathic monster it would take to call for humanity in dealing with the likes of Brother Schryver. If Trevor could ever figure himself out, he might not be such a bad chap.