DiscussMormonism.com

There is a thread at MA&D entitled "Madb as part of a decovnersion narrative"--it is near the top right now. Juliann started it and she states within the thread (a few posts down) that the doubting members that come there usually don't stick around. Would one of you kindly go over and post that "mms" (I) would have been happy to stick around (a doubting active member) and would like to contribute to this particular thread, but cannot because I was suspended for the most innocuous disagreement with DCP. Indeed, they should not get away with claiming we do not stick around while they prohibit us from posting.

Appreciate it.

mms

Why would anyone want to post at that site with the censorship that goes there. That board reeks with fascist minds.

thestyleguy wrote:Why would anyone want to post at that site with the censorship that goes there. That board reeks with fascist minds.

Yeah, what is up with that Severian anyway?

mms wrote:There is a thread at MA&D entitled "Madb as part of a decovnersion narrative"--it is near the top right now. Juliann started it and she states within the thread (a few posts down) that the doubting members that come there usually don't stick around. Would one of you kindly go over and post that "mms" (I) would have been happy to stick around (a doubting active member) and would like to contribute to this particular thread, but cannot because I was suspended for the most innocuous disagreement with DCP. Indeed, they should not get away with claiming we do not stick around while they prohibit us from posting.

Appreciate it.

mms

Unfortunately, any such post would likely result in the suspension or banning of anyone who did it. That's the way they roll over there.

skippy the dead wrote:

mms wrote:There is a thread at MA&D entitled "Madb as part of a decovnersion narrative"--it is near the top right now. Juliann started it and she states within the thread (a few posts down) that the doubting members that come there usually don't stick around. Would one of you kindly go over and post that "mms" (I) would have been happy to stick around (a doubting active member) and would like to contribute to this particular thread, but cannot because I was suspended for the most innocuous disagreement with DCP. Indeed, they should not get away with claiming we do not stick around while they prohibit us from posting.

Appreciate it.

mms

Unfortunately, any such post would likely result in the suspension or banning of anyone who did it. That's the way they roll over there.

I'm on it!

EDIT: Or not. Apparently I WAS banned for my post last night. Sweeeet.

mms,

In my two years I've been suspended twice, both times involving Peterson and his cronie, Bill Hamblin. I once asked if Peterson had read a book he was trashing (The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins); the other time I called Hamblin a jerk, or maybe a "huge jerk" and that got me suspended.

Juliann and many other stalwarts think you are a troll. That is a hopeless situation for you. You need a new start.

I suggest you sit out the period of your suspension and think about what you want to do on MAD. Then come back with a new account, a new name and an avatar you like (that always helps!), and strictly avoid Peterson, Hamblin, and maybe Juliann. Oh, I guess David Bokovoy and anything Kevin Graham related... If that still interest you and meets your interests at MAD. Tell the mods you want a fresh start and I think they may cut you some slack.

I just went over there and read through the thread. I have a hard time believing there is any TBM as angry and mean as Julian. She keeps ranting on an on about angry exmos and trolls like they are some kind of organized group with the sole purpose of screwing up her beloved MAD board.

sunstoned wrote:I just went over there and read through the thread. I have a hard time believing there is any TBM as angry and mean as Julian. She keeps ranting on an on about angry exmos and trolls like they are some kind of organized group with the sole purpose of screwing up her beloved MAD board.

Wait a minute. You mean she's not right? Of course that's the sole purpose of any group of ex'mos!

I'm so glad you brought this thread to our attention, because it is providing many possible sig lines, although I don't believe I can give up hammer and his hat just yet.

I'll start with my old favorite, Hammer:

I think it is because they smell a rat. Seriously I feel there are more troll 'lamentors' and 'questioners' than LDS who are really wanting to know.

It comes from the feel of the posts. They dwell on negative, never mentioning that they had any spiritual confirmations-- same mo of exmos and antis. This why I jump on some.

No doubt!!! There are probably very few LDS who are really wanting to know!!!

And shame on those supposed doubters for not bearing their testimonies in their posts!

it occurs to me noted that a recent doubter who was given the bum's rush:

Yes, she was also counseled that perhaps a different board would be more conducive to her situation.

. . . so apparently the MODS also agree that this is not the best place for doubting members.

to which Juliann responded:

Hello? Anybody home? Since when has this ever been billed as the place to build a testimony or even give testimonies?

OMG! Ya gotta love Juliann!!

Well, I absolutely agree with her on this one. MAD is definitely not the place to build testimony.

Deborah:

A doubting member should find better sources of information than discussion boards.

There you go!! Instant justification for assuming any so-called doubting member is really a TROLL. Real doubting members would never go to a discussion board to get information to help them deal with troubling issues.

I guess they would bring it up in Sunday School. :O

Cal:

A truly doubting member may not have all that hard of a time from what I've seen. Depends a great deal from what I've seen on their overall tone and attitude. Generally it seems to me that those who stick to the topic and don't add a lot of personal negative commentary do rather well.

Also those who seem to have a lot of fear about consequences tend to have more emotional posts and they often don't handle the board experience too well.

Is this the "no real scotsman" argument going on here? A truly doubting member won't add personal negative commentary - even if they've been attacked by the MADdites who feel justified assuming he/she is a troll and treating them as such.

Yet she admits that fear of consequences - the consequences of doubting - may cause more emotional posts.

Clue to cal: emotional posts can lead to personal negative commentary.

I don't read a lot of MAD anymore - when did they decide to stop referring to themselves as MAD and start using MADB?

And did they make a formal announcement, like the church did when it no longer wanted to be called "Mormon"?

Gee, I wonder why they decided MAD was not the best anacronym for the board?

(actually, as we all know here, it is a PERFECT anacronym for that board)

not to join right into the Dialogue & Discussion folder.


why me suggested on that thread:

Doubting members should go over to the ldsforums discussion or go to the fellowship section of the board. Doubting members should not post their doubts on the LDS Dialogue and Discussion threads. That would be suicidal.

Perhaps doubting members can immediately take their issues to the above areas after being instructed by the moderators. A doubting member does not need an active debate but more caring posts.

Momus agreed:

I like this and will add that not just the mods instruct them but every member of the board instruct them that they can get more help at http://www.ldsforums.com if they are sincere in working things out and getting a more complete picture of things.

Momus

It sounds like a move to discourage doubting members from actively participating in the Dialogue & Discussion folder.

I'm sure, from an LDS perspective, it's a wise one.

But why me wants to take it even further (further than the mods actually will, I'd think). He continues:

In other words when a doubting poster comes on, his or her post should be moved to the ldsforums or fellowship thread.

What seems off to be me is the suggestion that doubting LDS shouldn't be exposed to the free-ish interchange of ideas between apologists and critics. Or, in other words, they shouldn't be exposed to "anti" material--even in the context of an LDS-owned and LDS-run apologetics website with stiff moderation policies.

I wonder if doubters will feel like they're being brushed off.

CKS