Ack! Tarski Banned At MAD!

[_Jersey Girl]

I love their new mantra: "Mormon board for Mormons."

Hah. I saw that, too.

And with that, they officially forfeited their right to criticize RfM for being an "ex-Mormon board for ex-Mormons."

Ouch. That's gotta hurt.

[_cksalmon]

I love their new mantra: "Mormon board for Mormons."

Hah. I saw that, too.

And with that, they officially forfeited their right to criticize RfM for being an "ex-Mormon board for ex-Mormons."

Ouch. That's gotta hurt.

I sincerely doubt this will hurt, in any degree, the mod position of MADB mods, Jersey Girl.

This is far from the first time that MADB mods have announced that MADB is a Mormon board for Mormons.

I think MADB exists in a relative online vacuum (sort of like CARM).

There is no broader discursive narrative in play.

Chris

[_mms]

Tarski is a provocateur and pot stirrer, and nothing more. That is the only reason he has ever posted in forums such as this. They are aware of that there as all TBMs are here.

Mormondiscussions.com is the dumping ground for critics of the Church who will not endure civil, relevant, respectful debate or stay on topic once debate has began. Everyone knows the moderation policies at MAD, and they're really not that hard to follow.

What MAD does not want to become, is another Mormondiscussions.com, which, if people like Tarski, and Scratch, and Harmony, and many others who make there home here because they will not abide the simple rules there, is precisely what it would become.

Some of MAD's moderators are a joke. I speculate, but there is a high percentage chance that I am right (because I say so), when I say these few moderators are the scariest people in the church--power-hungry, self-righteous, self-important, insecure dweebs who are still trying to make up for the lack of power they had in elementary school, middle school, high school and now their everyday lives and occupations. They are the ones that, figuratively, raise their hands and cry "me me me" when a spot in the Bishopric or on the High Council opens, but they never get the call and they are not happy about it. I would bet the moderator in that thread has no avenue in his "real" life to get anyone to do anything--as a result, he sometimes gets a little too excited and trigger happy with his truly insignficant power on a message board "for Mormons". Really kind of pathetic and sad. Sure, as I said, I am specualting, but I bet it would be scary just how close I am to the truth on this.

[_Gadianton]

We have more posters than we know what to do with

Yeah, it's just that all those posters write and think like 5th graders. I'm not kidding, the average Mormon on MAD/FAIR is really kind of dumb. Some of the old-timers who I thought were idiots years ago that are still posting on MAD/FAIR actually look sort of bright compared to the new crop of apologists.

I have more junk in my garage than I know what to do with. But that's not a good thing.

[_asbestosman]

Some of the old-timers who I thought were idiots years ago that are still posting on MAD/FAIR actually look sort of bright compared to the new crop of apologists.

Maybe some of us just got smarter and so it makes the new guys look dumb by comparison.

[_Moniker]

Some of the old-timers who I thought were idiots years ago that are still posting on MAD/FAIR actually look sort of bright compared to the new crop of apologists.

Maybe some of us just got smarter and so it makes the new guys look dumb by comparison.

Asbestosman, you're no idiot. :)

[Dr. Sunstoned]

LOL, but I'm not a socialist. Are you just hallucinating? maybe to you requiring that people don't dump poison in the drinking water is socialism. I don't know. 99% of what you say is just flowery insults so its hard to tell.
And I only go with the majority of top scientists in whatever the field is unless I am an expert with massive counterevidence.
I am not on the fringe, I am not a socialist, and you may continue to wish that your minority becomes a majority. If it does, then that's where I will be---(with the evidence as always).

Virtually every statement you've ever made on a political subject has been well to the left of center in its general assumptions and interpretation of a given issue. This makes you a leftist, of one kind or another, and Leftism is Socialism, of one kind of another, and Socialism, like pornography, may, be, at least on the periphery, difficult to define, but we know it when we see it.

Further, from the perspective of many in the international left (not the least of which is Gorbachev himself), the environmental movement, and the Democratic Party, AGW has always been little more than a pretext.

And further, all your doing by stating over and over again that you go with "the majority of top scientists" is making ever clearer that you have no living idea of the devastating evidence and arguments that have been brought to bear against this idea by an ever growing number of "top scientists" who seem to know something that you do not: there is no empirical evidence (and this is the evidence that counts) that AGW is occurring, and there never was. The GCMs cannot predict future climate, and they never have.

[Guest]

I just got suspended as well.

Someone started a thread about one of the conference talks, and everyone was just going on and on about how wonderful it was. I had a funny image of church members in the 1800's sitting around after conference talking about how great those talks were, and then apologists 140 years later totally downgrading those same 19th century talks to the level of "personal opinion" when some teaching contradicts current thinking, with the convoluted definitions of what is "official doctrine" compared to "personal opinion".

So I thought it would be interesting to see if those same modern LDS could so clearly distinguish between the "doctrine" or "personal opinion" in talks given just hours ago, without the decades of scrutiny to help them out. But it looks like modern Church members aren't any better than our forebears at such a task (and they aren't even interested in talking about it).

Oddly, my remark was 100% sincere, with no cynicism intended, but some seemed to interpret it that way. It would have been helpful if they just could have said the talk was 100% doctrinal, or that they couldn't tell the difference.

Dear Cinepro: To be suspended Over There is a badge of honor. Typically, it means your points were too good to refute otherwise. By the way, your posts are so consistently thoughtful, perceptive and elegantly phrased that I'm glad to see you posting Over Here, too.

In the meantime, I'll have to log on Over There and see if I can find your post. Isn't it wonderful that you get suspended, but your post lives on? What was the thread name, by the way?

James Clifford Miller

[_Bond...James Bond]

Leftism is Socialism

Oh my God! I'd love to hear you say this in any political science class, because any professor worth their salt would rip you apart. Of course you wouldn't take the message because you'd say that the Prof. is a Leftist, and thus is wrong.

[_moksha]

Leftism is Socialism

Oh my God! I'd love to hear you say this in any political science class, because any professor worth their salt would rip you apart. Of course you wouldn't take the message because you'd say that the Prof. is a Leftist, and thus is wrong.

You forget that Loran is posting from his bomb shelter, complete with survival supplies - in case you Ruski-like leftists get too out of control, he can simply close the hatch and seal himself in till the militia arrives. What need does he have of those Kremlin loving poly-sci profs?