Basta!

[_TAK]

Dr. Peterson has...made many valuable contributions.

CFR

[_antishock8]

I hope the point is not overlooked that Dr. Peterson has drawn readers to this site and has made many valuable contributions. When even one voice is silenced (provided they were not breaking all the rules) are we not all diminished?

Who silenced Mr.Peterson's voice?

[_Some Schmo]

Hmph... didn't realize he was gone.

I have to admit... I am completely and wholeheartedly indifferent.

But I also think he'll come back. Anyone who announces they're leaving eventually comes back. Why announce it if you're serious about leaving? It's not suicide... it's a suicidal gesture.

[_moksha]

I hope the point is not overlooked that Dr. Peterson has drawn readers to this site and has made many valuable contributions. When even one voice is silenced (provided they were not breaking all the rules) are we not all diminished?

Who silenced Mr.Peterson's voice?

Many of you have picked on him unmercifully. If you prick a man often enough, will he not eventually hemorrhage? By making Dr. Peterson feel unloved and unwelcome, we are hurting Shades' board. The ongoing dialogue between Mr. Scratch and Dr. Peterson was a MD staple. Thrust, parry, counter thrust are the elements of a good Scratchian-Petersonian conversation, but ohhh nooo now that will not continue because of needless picking.

.

[_Jersey Girl]

Many of you have picked on him unmercifully. If you prick a man often enough, will he not eventually hemorrhage? By making Dr. Peterson feel unloved and unwelcome, we are hurting Shades' board. The ongoing dialogue between Mr. Scratch and Dr. Peterson was a MD staple. Thrust, parry, counter thrust are the elements of a good Scratchian-Petersonian conversation, but ohhh nooo now that will not continue because of needless picking.

.

Mok,

I see this similiarly to what you've stated above, but have another take on it. I'm not sure as I see it as picking on Daniel, I see it as a series of ongoing and totally worthless and disingenous encounters/exchanges ad nauseum.

Having said that, I also see something else going on, but I don't know if others would agree. There is an element of ostracization going on here. The same types of people (ex-LDS) who would criticize Mormons who engage in the shunning of ex-LDS resort to the same tactics on this board. It's not so much that one side or the other is "right", it looks more like a game to smear.

I don't think it matters if the smears are valid or not. In many cases, we have no way of knowing what the truth really is about a situation or poster. I think more to the point, people become disinterested in the attempts to smear.

If you examine some of the threads involving Scratch/Daniel, you will see that only perhaps 4-5 posters give it attention. Some years ago, we used to call people who engaged in such a way, "gang bangers". It always seemed to me that the sole intent was to screw with someone because they didn't like them, didn't like their affiliation or because they felt threatened by them in some way, until the person left the board and then there was a claim of victory because the "coward" or "unintelligent" person couldn't cut it. Interesting dynamic, that's for sure.

There are other examples where I see the dynamics as a reflection of LDS cultural nuances, but I don't think they're applicable to this current situation.

[_Nightingale]

...we are hurting Shades' board. The ongoing dialogue between Mr. Scratch and Dr. Peterson was a MD staple. Thrust, parry, counter thrust are the elements of a good Scratchian-Petersonian conversation, but ohhh nooo now that will not continue because of needless picking.

I made a similar observation when DCP first started posting here. I remember it clearly as I was new to this board then too and I was so surprised that he would participate here that at first I didn't believe it was really him.

I had difficulty following the plot. This board was set up, as I understand it, to be a place where people from all sides of every aisle would be welcome to participate, a supposedly unique place that allowed room for discussion between those with various viewpoints in a different way than any other Mormon-related board on the Internet. I had seen several invitations from Shades to DCP to join in. Then when he did show up he got pounced on, over and over and over. I don't really see how that would encourage more participation by other active Mormons or even apologists who may have thicker skins than the average member or how DCP would not eventually just get tired of it and leave - even if sometimes he does return - but the ongoing pattern would more likely than not continue to be participate and withdraw, rest and return, participate and withdraw. That's fine if that's what people want but not everyone does, even Shades, it seems, as he obviously, you'd think, wants as many people as possible and not all of them ex-members with nobody to engage.

This is not a criticism of the board or Shades or the posters. I'm just trying to explain my observations on this. Just saying that from where I'm sitting it looked like Shades invited DCP, he came, and it's been one long boxing match since, with some blows well below the belt (not saying that is always one-sided).

So it's very understandable that most active Mormons would not see this as any kind of objective or friendly place to discuss anything, which from the get-go defeats one of the stated purposes of this board.

I agree that it can very easily hurt the board in the way that Shades' goal would seem to be to get more participants but the prevalent style and tone do not welcome the very ones people seem to want to see come on in.

I finally did begin to see that there is a lot of game-playing, on both sides, and also that DCP himself said he wasn't interested in participating in lengthy and substantive discussion here (read the book!) so I don't labour under the illusion that if only people would be more polite we could get a good debate going!

I do understand that some people have had run-ins with DCP and other Mormon apologists and it's futile for me to ask why can't we all just get along, and nor is that the purpose of the board or the way things work in a volatile environment, which any Mormon-related discussion board likely is at some times, given the subject matter and the strong feelings on both sides. I know now that the antipathy has a long history and for some there will never be a meeting of the minds or even any desire for that to occur.

I do understand those who feel so strongly about some elements or beliefs or practices or behaviours or pieces of history in Mormonism or their own experiences with it that they will turn a decidedly jaundiced eye on anyone who steps up to defend any of it. In that case, a well known apologist would undoubtedly become a lightning rod. I believe DCP has recognized that for many ex-members he is that rod and he must enjoy it at least a little as he continues to stand out there in the stormy weather.

I have strong feelings about some elements of Mormonism myself and about some of the personal negative experiences I had while a member (convert). Partly due to not being BIC and due to my peacemaking personality, perhaps, and other factors mixed in, I usually separate that out from how I feel about or interact with specific Mormons, even apologists. Maybe that explains to some extent how I choose to engage in the discussions - or not. I don't think being exmo automatically requires one to have certain mandated or automatic reactions to the Mormon Church or its people or its apologists. I don't think it's necessary to dislike another board participant because they don't have the same feelings or reactions as we do. We've all come down our own road and somewhere along it have been touched by Mormonism, sometimes positively and sometimes not. That's a big part of what we're here to discuss, according to my understanding.

I don't automatically dislike a Mormon for their beliefs or an apologist for their apologia because I can separate them as a person out from their heritage and belief system. They are only responsible for their own actions and not for those of any other Mormon or their church. That's why I don't personally favour kicking a lightning rod. I try to direct my anger, disgust, dislike or whatever reaction directly at the cause of it, as I see it. I understand that others react differently.

We're each unique with a variety of life experiences and connections to the Mormon Church. Vive la difference!

But yeah, as far as this board, I was intrigued by the original premise and still think the potential is certainly there to achieve it (people from all sides coming together in discussion of our differences). I just think that it doesn't serve that purpose if we actually try to drive people away or make things so unappealing that they don't stick around.

It does seem that there are strong undercurrents, on both sides, that I am not fully aware of and so things happen that I don't understand. It's kind of like coming in on the middle of a conversation and so you miss the important bits and nobody brings you up to speed. Hey, that's pretty much how I felt as a convert in the church! Some things just make you go huh when you're missing the background.

I'm not saying everybody needs to play nice with DCP and he would likely really hate that and it wouldn't be interesting. But things like insulting someone's family members or personal attacks that are totally not related at all to the subject at hand aren't likely to increase the board's population or keep current posters around. I was not thrilled when one poster here out of the blue called me a demeaning name, for no reason I could ever discern. If I got 1000th of the negative and personal reaction that DCP and some other Mormons do here I would definitely move on. You might not miss me but in a small group even a few can make a big difference, either coming or going.

I'm not saying I don't like sparks. Some of the repartee is very witty and entertaining. I just don't like the nasty stuff.

My 00.02 Cdn cents...

[_solomarineris]

...we are hurting Shades' board. The ongoing dialogue between Mr. Scratch and Dr. Peterson was a MD staple. Thrust, parry, counter thrust are the elements of a good Scratchian-Petersonian conversation, but ohhh nooo now that will not continue because of needless picking.

I made a similar observation when DCP first started posting here. I remember it clearly as I was new to this board then too and I was so surprised that he would participate here that at first I didn't believe it was really him.

I had difficulty following the plot. This board was set up, as I understand it, to be a place where people from all sides of every aisle would be welcome to participate, a supposedly unique place that allowed room for discussion between those with various viewpoints in a different way than any other Mormon-related board on the Internet. I had seen several invitations from Shades to DCP to join in. Then when he did show up he got pounced on, over and over and over. I don't really see how that would encourage more participation by other active Mormons or even apologists who may have thicker skins than the average member or how DCP would not eventually just get tired of it and leave - even if sometimes he does return - but the ongoing pattern would more likely than not continue to be participate and withdraw, rest and return, participate and withdraw. That's fine if that's what people want but not everyone does, even Shades, it seems, as he obviously, you'd think, wants as many people as possible and not all of them ex-members with nobody to engage.

This is not a criticism of the board or Shades or the posters. I'm just trying to explain my observations on this. Just saying that from where I'm sitting it looked like Shades invited DCP, he came, and it's been one long boxing match since, with some blows well below the belt (not saying that is always one-sided).

So it's very understandable that most active Mormons would not see this as any kind of objective or friendly place to discuss anything, which from the get-go defeats one of the stated purposes of this board.

I agree that it can very easily hurt the board in the way that Shades' goal would seem to be to get more participants but the prevalent style and tone do not welcome the very ones people seem to want to see come on in.

I finally did begin to see that there is a lot of game-playing, on both sides, and also that DCP himself said he wasn't interested in participating in lengthy and substantive discussion here (read the book!) so I don't labour under the illusion that if only people would be more polite we could get a good debate going!

I do understand that some people have had run-ins with DCP and other Mormon apologists and it's futile for me to ask why can't we all just get along, and nor is that the purpose of the board or the way things work in a volatile environment, which any Mormon-related discussion board likely is at some times, given the subject matter and the strong feelings on both sides. I know now that the antipathy has a long history and for some there will never be a meeting of the minds or even any desire for that to occur.

I do understand those who feel so strongly about some elements or beliefs or practices or behaviours or pieces of history in Mormonism or their own experiences with it that they will turn a decidedly jaundiced eye on anyone who steps up to defend any of it. In that case, a well known apologist would undoubtedly become a lightning rod. I believe DCP has recognized that for many ex-members he is that rod and he must enjoy it at least a little as he continues to stand out there in the stormy weather.

I have strong feelings about some elements of Mormonism myself and about some of the personal negative experiences I had while a member (convert). Partly due to not being BIC and due to my peacemaking personality, perhaps, and other factors mixed in, I usually separate that out from how I feel about or interact with specific Mormons, even apologists. Maybe that explains to some extent how I choose to engage in the discussions - or not. I don't think being exmo automatically requires one to have certain mandated or automatic reactions to the Mormon Church or its people or its apologists. I don't think it's necessary to dislike another board participant because they don't have the same feelings or reactions as we do. We've all come down our own road and somewhere along it have been touched by Mormonism, sometimes positively and sometimes not. That's a big part of what we're here to discuss, according to my understanding.

I don't automatically dislike a Mormon for their beliefs or an apologist for their apologia because I can separate them as a person out from their heritage and belief system. They are only responsible for their own actions and not for those of any other Mormon or their church. That's why I don't personally favour kicking a lightning rod. I try to direct my anger, disgust, dislike or whatever reaction directly at the cause of it, as I see it. I understand that others react differently.

We're each unique with a variety of life experiences and connections to the Mormon Church. Vive la difference!

But yeah, as far as this board, I was intrigued by the original premise and still think the potential is certainly there to achieve it (people from all sides coming together in discussion of our differences). I just think that it doesn't serve that purpose if we actually try to drive people away or make things so unappealing that they don't stick around.

It does seem that there are strong undercurrents, on both sides, that I am not fully aware of and so things happen that I don't understand. It's kind of like coming in on the middle of a conversation and so you miss the important bits and nobody brings you up to speed. Hey, that's pretty much how I felt as a convert in the church! Some things just make you go huh when you're missing the background.

I'm not saying everybody needs to play nice with DCP and he would likely really hate that and it wouldn't be interesting. But things like insulting someone's family members or personal attacks that are totally not related at all to the subject at hand aren't likely to increase the board's population or keep current posters around. I was not thrilled when one poster here out of the blue called me a demeaning name, for no reason I could ever discern. If I got 1000th of the negative and personal reaction that DCP and some other Mormons do here I would definitely move on. You might not miss me but in a small group even a few can make a big difference, either coming or going.

I'm not saying I don't like sparks. Some of the repartee is very witty and entertaining. I just don't like the nasty stuff.

My 00.02 Cdn cents...

Jeezus, Nightingale.....
Don't you ever think your My 00.02 Cdn cents... is little bit long?
Ain't no way I can read your wonderful essay....
Try cutting it a notch short.
You might get better results.

What the heck is Basta anyway?
That is a German saying "Damit basta!"
It's over, done......

[_antishock8]

Mr. Peterson was invited to participate on the Celestial forum plenty of times. He himself said he was only here to "push buttons", and to "observe anti-Mormon behavior". In addition, he was very vicious with his "clever" put downs by tweaking handles, calling people stupid, and using ad homs/red herrings.

The Golden Rule always applies. Treat people the way you want to be treated. If he didn't want to be abused, then perhaps he shouldn't have been so abusive. I don't miss him because he never really added anything to any conversaton except typical mind-games. Red Herrings, Ad Homs, Appeals to Authority, etc... Grows tiresome. He's really not that smart a guy. He's just smart enough to be employed doing what he does which is to destroy people like Michael Quinn and "review" published works. A freakin' monkey can do that.

Oh, and by the way, knowing Arabic ain't that great of an achievement. He's hardly proficient in the language, and his reviews of Islamic literature are amateurish at best. Sorry if that man is the best Mormonism has to offer in the realm of academia. *gegh*

[_Nightingale]

Jeezus, Nightingale.....
Don't you ever think your My 00.02 Cdn cents... is little bit long?
Ain't no way I can read your wonderful essay....
Try cutting it a notch short.
You might get better results.

What the heck is Basta anyway?
That is a German saying "Damit basta!"
It's over, done......

You know, solo, in years of posting on several boards I have rarely come even close to losing my temper with any poster of any persuasion about anything.

You could be the exception.

You are so very welcome to do yourself a huge favour and just quit reading my posts as they seem to irk you so badly.

People are welcome to read or not read, skim or not skim. Who says because I wrote it you must even open it? Use the scroll bar. Or my preference would be that you just skip. In fact, put me on ignore. I'd love that.

It is irritating, mystifying and a total downer that in all the years, wherever you post, you have so very rarely ever, ever, ever, written an post that is actually positive. That posting record, to me, reveals a much worse and much more undesirable personal characteristic about you than my mile long posts do about me.

Hint for your future reading pleasure: Skip my posts. And for your information, you now officially annoy me.

And why are you asking me what basta means? I thought you were the really rich, really powerful, really smart guy who speaks 107 languages?

A quick Google search will give you the exact meaning that DCP intended to convey, if you can't grasp it from the context.

Note to anti: Hey, I was actually going to make the comment that anybody who is bright enough to learn Arabic must have a few functioning brain cells but I see even that achievement doesn't impress you. What about the editing skills, especially in a foreign language? I do some editing in my work and in some personal projects and it takes a lot of skill and that's just doing it in my own tongue, English. I would be completely stymied if I had to try it even in French, which is one of my country's official languages that I have seen and heard all my life. So trying it in any other more complicated or difficult language is not in my plans.

I know that none of these skills, degrees, talents or abilities can necessarily make one a good person or one worthy of respect. That comes from a totally different space. But neither do I see them as fodder for ridicule. I applaud intellect and the drive to learn. Why mock or ridicule someone's honest accomplishments? That's a rhetorical question. I just don't operate that way but I know that others do and feel they have good reason for it. Obviously, we are going to disagree.

I saw something DCP did in his posting life once that I really did not like at all (on MADB and, in fact, I even reported my discomfort about it to the mods there when I was young and foolish and didn't know all that much about him or their board or how the mods work or who they are; needless to say, they ignored me or at least allowed it to stand). That does have an effect on how you view someone, no doubt.

Then again, not too long ago when I became aware of a friend's family crisis and I knew that DCP was perhaps uniquely placed to assist I contacted him. He responded rapidly, without hesitation, willing to help non-/ex-members, and provided timely, useful information and an offer to contact people in the area who could help. I somehow doubt that he did that to score any brownie points anywhere because who would ever even know? (Except for me now blabbing it here). If I were Ms. Scratchinator or Mr. Conspiracy I might actually believe that it was an evil plot that he cooked up, first by causing the urgent situation, next by hypnotizing me long distance to PM to ask for his help and then by having contacts in the relevant area that he could call and command to do his bidding. But I am almost certain it didn't go down like that. Unexpected urgent situation arises, I PM a potential helper (DCP) and receive a timely reply with an offer to help. Not much time to cook anything up or massage events to manipulate me, a literal board-nobody, and what - hope that one day I might spill the beans and somebody somewhere might see that he is not 100% evil through and through? Uh, don't think so. He would seem to be not all good, not all bad. Somewhat like the rest of humanity.

Note to solo - Do not read this post. It's too long for you.

[_GoodK]

It's too long for you.

That's what he said.