Christmas Housecleaning at MADB

Post by **_the road to hana** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:21 am

Julie's getting ready for some serious sweeping. Bomb-throwers, beware.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:26 am

Wondering if ole Bond is screwed....

(Currently watching Schindler's List...so will probably assume the worst)

Post by **_The Nehor** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:35 am

Bond...James Bond wrote:Wondering if ole Bond is screwed....

(Currently watching Schindler's List...so will probably assume the worst)

Sneak into Juliann's lair and blow up her computer system, rescue a girl, and flee before the explosion takes out her fortress of evil. That's what Bond was born to do.

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:56 am

I wonder who they consider the "good" exmormons.

It often seems to me that the only "critics" they want are ones who are able to be persuaded by apologists' replies (with the exception of high-name critics they don't dare boot off).

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:59 am

This in particular was revealing:

No, it is not equal. Antis coming to annoy and attack are not equivalent to the Mormons who are forced to defend themselves day in and day out. Mormons are allowed to react and they will often react in kind. This is merely an excuse to allow the attacks and no one buys it anymore (except the attackers). That is why there is a rule (or used to be) that it matters who starts it on this board.

On another topic, it is obvious that the bomb throwers are going to flood the polling. Votes without an identifying post are irrelevant. I voted to get rid of the pot stirrers.

So LDS apologists set up a board and "invite" critics, so to speak. When critics show up and do what critics do, then they "start it" and believers are allowed to respond "in kind". All this is just another way of saying that LDS are allowed to engage in the very same behavior for which they ban believers, because, by definition, the critic "started it".

Juliann tried to use this reasoning on Z, and it didn't work. I guess that's why she set up her own board. It's just too bad to see others who used to have more sense than Juliann follow her lead.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:05 am

You just have to hope that if this goes through that they ban the right number of people to have a cool name:

Christmas Quintet
Holiday Nine
The December Eleven

No matter what happens, smile, life is beautiful.

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:08 am

LOL, that's funny, Nehor. I like The December Eleven, personally.

by the way, the other thing I like about Juliann's comments is that she created a poll but the poll isn't going to count because the pot-stirrers will skew it. So they're just going to do what they always intended to do. heh

I don't know the posters over there well enough anymore to lay bets... anyone else want to bet? We already know Severian was number one....hey, how about they ban seven and we call the Severian's Seven?

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:13 am

beastie wrote:LOL, that's funny, Nehor. I like The December Eleven, personally.

by the way, the other thing I like about Juliann's comments is that she created a poll but the poll isn't going to count because the pot-stirrers will skew it. So they're just going to do what they always intended to do. heh

I don't know the posters over there well enough anymore to lay bets... anyone else want to bet? We already know Severian was number one....hey, how about they ban seven and we call the Severian's Seven?

The poll could be 1 to 100 with the one for banishment being Juliann's and (son of a gun!) it'd probably weight more than the rest.

She's making a list...

Post by **_mms** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:27 am

Juliann has called me all kinds of names today for saying that waiting until 1978 to lift the priesthood ban was wrong. Hilariously, Juliann of all people said that so called "bomb throwers" take advantage of "believing" Mormons because the "believing" Mormons are an "exceptionally nice lot." I responded that I wondered if she was icnluding herself, Selek and Pahoran in that "exceptionally nice lot." Hmmmm. I think Juliann intends to include as "bomb throwers" anyone who makes her uncomfortable. Whatever.

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:29 am

mms wrote:Hilariously, Juliann of all people said that so called "bomb throwers" take advantage of "believing" Mormons because the "believing" Mormons are an "exceptionally nice lot." I responded that I wondered if she was icnluding herself, Selek and Pahoran in that "exceptionally nice lot." Hmmmm. I think Juliann intends to include as "bomb throwers" anyone who makes her uncomfortable. Whatever.

Somebody (NOT ME JULES!) was thinking the exact same thing.