Yahoo Bot wrote:I don't understand this gobbledygook from Scott. Is he saying that Twede, using a sock puppet, exposed himself?
He is not saying it. But it was discovered at LDS.net when they did a IP check. And picked up by FAIR.
Yahoo Bot wrote:I don't understand this gobbledygook from Scott. Is he saying that Twede, using a sock puppet, exposed himself?
Pahoran wrote:Everybody Wang Chung wrote:
What else was Judas Iscariot, in the end, but a snitch?
Thank you for asking.
I'll tell you: he was a traitor. One who pretended to believe but actually did not. A saint in name only who cosied up to the Church's enemies. Like you. And Twede.
Pahoran wrote:Everybody Wang Chung wrote:One of the first Christian "stop snitching codes" was established at the Synod of Elvira:
"A Christian who denounces someone who is then ostracized or put to death may not commune even as death approaches. If the case was less severe, he or she may commune in less than five years. If the informer was a catechumen (someone who was investigating Christianity) , he or she may be baptized after five years."
Not in the Bible, hence irrelevant to your claims.
Pahoran wrote:Ostracism in the ancient world was a legal sanction imposed by the secular authorities. Scott did not "denounce" your fellow-apostate to any secular authorities, so this irrelevant prooftext is doubly irrelevant.
Incidentally, Kishkumen knows that perfectly well; but we could all grow old waiting for him to inform you of a relevant fact that undermines your case; his partisan loyalties won't let him.
Pahoran wrote:Everybody Wang Chung wrote:Also, 1 Corinthians 6:1-7,
Says nothing about "snitching." It talks about lawsuits in the secular courts.
Pahoran wrote:Didn't you say you wished you could hold a Disciplinary Council for Scott Gordon? What hermeneutic of this passage supports your wishful thinking while condemning Scott's honesty?
Kishkumen wrote:...
So, this seems to be what this account is indicating:
David Twede orchestrated his own disciplinary hearing and its coverage in order to make the LDS Church and Mitt Romney look bad at a time when he could get maximum attention focused on himself.
If true, that is completely despicable behavior.
...
You know, I can understand people being upset with the LDS Church and deciding it is not for them. I do not so much get why it is people engage in this kind of internal subversion.
...
Chap wrote:I'd say that one likely motive for people doing such things (assuming they have been done, which remains to be determined) might be a wish to redress the balance of power between a single dissident individual, and the huge organization with which they are dealing, an organization whose past record does not suggest it is likely to play softball with people who it sees as likely to get in its corporate way.
In deciding to discipline Twede at the time it did, the CoJCoLDS exercized its Free Agency. They acted under no constraint, but made a decision that was clearly very naïve. They could have acted more prudently and waited until after the election, but did not. That demonstrates something about the organization, I think.
Kishkumen wrote:Chap wrote:I'd say that one likely motive for people doing such things (assuming they have been done, which remains to be determined) might be a wish to redress the balance of power between a single dissident individual, and the huge organization with which they are dealing, an organization whose past record does not suggest it is likely to play softball with people who it sees as likely to get in its corporate way.
In deciding to discipline Twede at the time it did, the CoJCoLDS exercized its Free Agency. They acted under no constraint, but made a decision that was clearly very naïve. They could have acted more prudently and waited until after the election, but did not. That demonstrates something about the organization, I think.
OK, granted that his is an effective way to manufacture attention and give the Church a small black eye, but, supposing this narrative is factually accurate, I personally have little sympathy for what Twede has done.
It seems like Twede is coming from a position of one who pretty much believes none of the faith claims of Mormonism, but that he is going to take it upon himself to punk the whole Church in order to....
What?
Show that the LDS disciplinary process has problems?
Bring attention to his website?
Grab his fifteen seconds of notoriety?
Prevent Mitt Romney from getting a few votes?
Well, he doesn't tell us, and he can't, because if he did the jig would be up, and he would lose all of the attention he apparently manufactured for himself.
And I have to say that he was incredibly shortsighted in his approach.
David Twede wrote:No, these are silly accusations. But the information there is interesting. Either a family member outed me or they're making excuses.
why me wrote:Yahoo Bot wrote:I don't understand this gobbledygook from Scott. Is he saying that Twede, using a sock puppet, exposed himself?
He is not saying it. But it was discovered at LDS.net when they did a IP check. And picked up by FAIR.
Rollo Tomasi wrote:I'm no IT wizard, so this "IP check" stuff is over my head,
Rollo Tomasi wrote:but I deduce from all this that the evidence strongly suggests that Twede set himself up to be outed and disciplined. Why do that? For some press? I know Twede has suggested that perhaps a family member outed him, so it should be easy for Twede to figure out the identify of the person using Twede's own computer, right?
Chap wrote:Not really. If several people use the computer Twede posts from, it would not necessarily be easy to determine which user was signing on to a website, unless each family member had their own log-on identity and the computer could not be used unless the user logged in. Few families impose such controls.
Rollo Tomasi wrote:Chap wrote:Not really. If several people use the computer Twede posts from, it would not necessarily be easy to determine which user was signing on to a website, unless each family member had their own log-on identity and the computer could not be used unless the user logged in. Few families impose such controls.
But Twede would still know it was someone in his family who was the snitch, correct?