I'm not demanding respect; just asking for social civility

[_Mister Scratch]

The main criticism of the fittingly named MADboard is that the moderating practices are unfair, and that the board essentially functions as a kind of "hiding place" for LDS who know that their arguments won't hold up elsewhere.

Yes, it is a nice 'hiding place'. We all quite often can be found in our caves hiding from the RFM critic. To tell you the truth, I haven't yet seen anyone prove the Book of Mormon a forgery and since most critics if not all critics seem to relish in presentism when dealing with Mormon past cultural practices and lifestyles, well, as you know there is no reason for MAD people to hide. In fact, as you can see there are some made people here engaging with the MDb. How to explain your logic in such a scenario?

Yes, Why Me, *some* people are posting here, but....

Likewise, if RFM and certain Postmo sites would allow lds people to post, to engage the hypocricy that they (the RFMers' and the Postmoers') exhibit on such sites, I can assure you that we would be there. The fact that they ban us is a point that you need to consider in terms of who is hiding from whom.

You claim that you "can assure you that we would be there." Oh, really? All of you are welcome here, and yet how many have showed up? I think that your claim is idle puffery and chest pounding of the variety that is de rigueur on the fittingly named MADboard. Further, a site such as RfM makes no claims whatsoever to being a "debate" board, which stands in stark contrast to MAD.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that posters on MBs such as RfM are "hiding" from TBMs. I would not argue with you on that point at all.

[_why me]

You claim that you "can assure you that we would be there." Oh, really? All of you are welcome here, and yet how many have showed up? I think that your claim is idle puffery and chest pounding of the variety that is de rigueur on the fittingly named MADboard. Further, a site such as RfM makes no claims whatsoever to being a "debate" board, which stands in stark contrast to MAD.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that posters on MBs such as RfM are "hiding" from TBMs. I would not argue with you on that point at all.

I was referring to lds posters hanging out on critic boards without being run off by a hostile mob. You see, Scratch, on critic boards there is a hiding going on. And yes, on RFM, the posters are hiding. I am not even talking about debate but I am talking about dialog. Many of those posters have illusions about the lds church that a lds person can discuss from a different angle, if they were allowed to post on such boards. Likewise for other critic boards where banning, of the positive about the lds church, is the rule.

It is not socalled TBMs in hiding but countermos who have dug a hole deep and round.

[_Runtu]

I was referring to lds posters hanging out on critic boards without being run off by a hostile mob. You see, Scratch, on critic boards there is a hiding going on. And yes, on RFM, the posters are hiding. I am not even talking about debate but I am talking about dialog. Many of those posters have illusions about the lds church that a lds person can discuss from a different angle, if they were allowed to post on such boards. Likewise for other critic boards where banning, of the positive about the lds church, is the rule.

It is not socalled TBMs in hiding but countermos who have dug a hole deep and round.

Again, why me, you apparently don't understand the purpose of RfM. "Countermos" are posting in a lot of places, including MADB (unless, of course, they're rude people like me). I post on RfM occasionally, and I post here. Does that constitute a deep and round hole?

Why on earth would you even want to bring debate to RfM? That would be like insisting that the tobacco lobby be represented on a forum dedicated to quitting smoking.

[_Mister Scratch]

You claim that you "can assure you that we would be there." Oh, really? All of you are welcome here, and yet how many have showed up? I think that your claim is idle puffery and chest pounding of the variety that is de rigueur on the fittingly named MADboard. Further, a site such as RfM makes no claims whatsoever to being a "debate" board, which stands in stark contrast to MAD.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that posters on MBs such as RfM are "hiding" from TBMs. I would not argue with you on that point at all.

I was referring to lds posters hanging out on critic boards without being run off by a hostile mob. You see, Scratch, on critic boards there is a hiding going on. And yes, on RFM, the posters are hiding. I am not even talking about debate but I am talking about dialog. Many of those posters have illusions about the lds church that a lds person can discuss from a different angle, if they were allowed to post on such boards. Likewise for other critic boards where banning, of the positive about the lds church, is the rule.

It is not socalled TBMs in hiding but countermos who have dug a hole deep and round.

Where are the "countermos" hiding, Why Me? Or did you mean to say, "exmos"? There is a difference, after all.

[_beastie]

Why Me,

Care to explain why believers abandoned ZLMB? In case you didn't read other posts about it, ZLMB was started by a believer who, along with other believers, were disgusted with the biased moderation at the Tanner's old board, and started ZLMB with the deliberate intent to provide neutral, unbiased moderation. Specific rules were shared and the moderating team was comprised of believers and nonbelievers.

Believers couldn't hack the environment. Various reasons have been given in the past, but most of them have a "cause/effect" reversal. For example, it moves slowly (only happened after believers began to abandon it), topics of substance were fewer (only happened after the exodus), slow moderator response (again, after the exodus), etc.

One possible answer that some have given is that believers prefer more conversations with other theists, rather than agnostic/atheists, which constituted a bulk of the critics at Z. I understand LDS prefer to discuss issues with people who share a belief in the Bible so they can use arguments such as "prophets in the Bible did bad stuff, too", or "prophets in the Bible didn't prophesy accurately, too". To flee the entire board is preference for the openly biased moderation of FAIR/MAD is its own form of "hiding".

I've stated this many times, but I never get bored of repeating it: the irony is that the believers who fled ZLMB for FAIR ended up creating the mirror image of the board they judged so harshly in the first place: the Tanner's openly biased board.

Life is so much better than fiction.

[_Who Knows]

It is not socalled TBMs in hiding but countermos who have dug a hole deep and round.

Have you heard of the nauvoo board?

[_moksha]

Of course, the alternative is to go to another board and cluck self-righteously about how awful this place is.

And here I thought that was the primary function of this board in relation to MA&D. I doubt there is any comparison in proportion of threads and posts here that are "cluckingly" devoted to MA&D, as there are there devoted to this board. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I suspect they would devote much more time to us if they were only allowed to do so. Here is a real life example: Do you not thing the folks in the former Soviet Union would have liked discussing the Radio Free Europe broadcasts openly? Of course they would, if only they had been allowed the opportunity.

[_Jersey Girl]

(Moderator Note) Alter Idem and any others who are concerned about language:

Dr. Shades and I do our best to comb the threads in the Terrestrial and Celestial Forums. However, if you notice what you believe to be a language violation, please PM one of us, and we will have a look at it.

As a rule, "F*** and "Sh** are not allowed in the Terrestrial forum. However, at times, when someone is passionate about a topic, it is easy for one of these words to slip into the post for dramatic effect. In those cases, Shades and I normally opt to simply edit the language rather than deleting the entire post or splitting the topic.

Liz,

You don't need to comb the threads, just use the search feature. I tried that last night and there were a few "f" words lingering here in the Terrestrial but everything else is in the Telestial so far as I could tell. So, you guys are doing a pretty good job of keeping things "clean" around here.

Bi,
Jersey Girl
;-)

[_Jersey Girl]

Can I ask a question here? I looked over the thread and I see two places where Brian used variations of the word "f***" and one "Goddamn".

Doesn't the "Goddamn" bother you?

Jersey Girl

"Da*m" doesn't bother me but yes, "G**" used as a profanity does. To be honest though, when I got to the first "F"bomb he dropped, I didn't read much else he wrote. I'm not sure just what is allowed in Terrestrial but I was pretty sure the F word was not, therefore that was what I commented on.

Well, you would have had to wade through the "Goddamn" to get to the first "F word". Just curious. Thanks.

Jersey Girl

You say you are just curious, but I have to wonder if you are suggesting I'm oversensitive to hearing the F word while I couldn't care less about someone taking God's name in vain? Contrary to what some may believe, I do live in the real word. I hear G** as a profanity all the time, It's used on a regular basis and seems nobody cares(except a few of us)--If I'd taken note of it, I would not have commented because I assumed it was allowed. And Dr. Shades has confirmed twice that my assumption was correct. He also confirmed through his recent comment that if I'd complained about the G**da** it would have been ignored because that is, as I assumed, allowed.

Holy Cats,

You have no need to be so defensive with me. It is just as I said, I was curious about why you mentioned one and not the other.

Jersey Girl

[_wenglund]

Of course, the alternative is to go to another board and cluck self-righteously about how awful this place is.

And here I thought that was the primary function of this board in relation to MA&D. I doubt there is any comparison in proportion of threads and posts here that are "cluckingly" devoted to MA&D, as there are there devoted to this board. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I suspect they would devote much more time to us if they were only allowed to do so. Here is a real life example: Do you not thing the folks in the former Soviet Union would have liked discussing the Radio Free Europe broadcasts openly? Of course they would, if only they had been allowed the opportunity.

That is certainly one self-complimentary way of explaining the disparity.

However, I tend to think it has more to do with the lack of significant personalities and meaningful and enlightening conversation over here. I mean, I would think it would get quite boring after a while for MA&D participants to keep saying: "Gee...look what those guys as MD are saying about us!"

And, if they were all that interested in the participants and topics here, I would think they would engage them here rather than through the MA&D board. But they don't--and I think that is, in part, because there are participants here that they find repelling (perhjaps myself included), and would just as soon not associate with, and may even be glad to be away from, let alone talk about them over there, or at least not too often.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-