A brief look back and then some commentary
Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 6:49 pm
What is it about you chumps (I mean that in an endearing way) that get TBMs all worked up? I hate to name names but I'm gonna so I can clarify a bit. Pa pa was around here when I first arrived and man did he fly off the handle. I felt so badly. I remember pa pa when he posted on a evangelical site with me. He seemed so nice then. Certainly people provoked him quite a bit. He pretty much fell prey, as they say--not that he was completely innocent by any means.
Others, including myself, have gotten a bit ruffled by some of the instigatin that goes on here. I see Will consistently refers to the place as the Great and Spacious Trailer Park. Not a bad name if ya think about it. I first came here googling. I arrived seeing that someone, unbeknownst to me, quoted my words from a post I made over at MDD, out of context, to mock and deride. I was like, "What's this about?" I commented and started posting not really taking much here very seriously at all because of that. It threw me off to think there were people reading along at MDD in order to find posts by LDS that could be seen as something to laugh about here. It was all just weird to me. Ol' DJ, who I haven't seen much lately, got after me relentlessly, it seemed, for not taking the comments here seriously. He seemed to get all worked up and never seemed to let it go, even the smallest of points. I didn't get that. He was among the first of the posters I remember encoutering here. One of the first points I recall that he attempted to make was his complaint that some LDS have said “he can leave the church but can’t leave it alone”. He said its best to respond by saying, “well oh yeah, the Church can’t leave everyone alone” (for some reason, which he wouldn’t explain, he highlighted the word everyone for emphasis). I was like, “huh? How do you imagine the Church, which isn’t even known by many people in the world, can’t leave everyone alone”. He went on for pages not really explaining himself. His partners and buddies (whom he deemed his followers) here got after me for challenging him on that, to me, silly point. I really don’t think he ever got over that, seeing as nearly every subsequent post he offered in response to me most often was marked by personal attacks, or efforts to turn the discussion to stem. When challenged at that point, he would say something like, “you aren’t worth my efforts” or something like that. Huh? As you can see, it was very hard to take too much seriously based off these initial encounters.
After a while I realized not every poster here is trolling around the internet hoping to find something to bring here and get someone to join with him/her to mock and deride LDS folks. There can be some serious matters to discuss. There can be some good conversations had. They remain pretty rare though. Some of the best, in my mind, have been those in which people just jovially talk about life without any animosity--things that pertain to family and friends and how best to approach certain situations. I enjoy thinking on that, because afterall in my life one of my main focuses is on those that I love and interact with regularly.
Anyway, with that all said, I also realize Will seems to get your guys’ goats as much if not more than you get LDS’. To be frank, I’m not up on Will’s style, which style, in and of itself, I don’t see as a big deal, but I do have problems with some of the things he has said. Pretty much anything that pertains to ladies seems to be pathetic. In this, I don’t see much problem with some of the character assassination attempts on Will. I think for the most part, his current posts seem much better than some of those that have been quoted to prove him a bad person. And something does ring true when he says this place seems to heat up when he’s around. The activity does seem to increase. That doesn’t seem like a good commentary overall. Inflaming Will, driving wedges, polarizing the issues seems to be a product of what goes on here. Will seems to enjoy helping to drive those wedges deeper as well. I suppose from a critical perspective if there is a black and white, if there is a good and bad side in all this, then cool. I know that can work from a faith perspective too. I personally can’t take things so black and white. So “let’s mock LDS posters, whom we know nothing about, because they are LDS”. If Schryver represents the bad in LDS or apologetics, which I’m not decided upon as yet, this place, in general, seems to represent the exact opposite, which also I don’t see, necessarily, as all that bad. I guess, if nothing else, I’m happy I see the irony in that.
Others, including myself, have gotten a bit ruffled by some of the instigatin that goes on here. I see Will consistently refers to the place as the Great and Spacious Trailer Park. Not a bad name if ya think about it. I first came here googling. I arrived seeing that someone, unbeknownst to me, quoted my words from a post I made over at MDD, out of context, to mock and deride. I was like, "What's this about?" I commented and started posting not really taking much here very seriously at all because of that. It threw me off to think there were people reading along at MDD in order to find posts by LDS that could be seen as something to laugh about here. It was all just weird to me. Ol' DJ, who I haven't seen much lately, got after me relentlessly, it seemed, for not taking the comments here seriously. He seemed to get all worked up and never seemed to let it go, even the smallest of points. I didn't get that. He was among the first of the posters I remember encoutering here. One of the first points I recall that he attempted to make was his complaint that some LDS have said “he can leave the church but can’t leave it alone”. He said its best to respond by saying, “well oh yeah, the Church can’t leave everyone alone” (for some reason, which he wouldn’t explain, he highlighted the word everyone for emphasis). I was like, “huh? How do you imagine the Church, which isn’t even known by many people in the world, can’t leave everyone alone”. He went on for pages not really explaining himself. His partners and buddies (whom he deemed his followers) here got after me for challenging him on that, to me, silly point. I really don’t think he ever got over that, seeing as nearly every subsequent post he offered in response to me most often was marked by personal attacks, or efforts to turn the discussion to stem. When challenged at that point, he would say something like, “you aren’t worth my efforts” or something like that. Huh? As you can see, it was very hard to take too much seriously based off these initial encounters.
After a while I realized not every poster here is trolling around the internet hoping to find something to bring here and get someone to join with him/her to mock and deride LDS folks. There can be some serious matters to discuss. There can be some good conversations had. They remain pretty rare though. Some of the best, in my mind, have been those in which people just jovially talk about life without any animosity--things that pertain to family and friends and how best to approach certain situations. I enjoy thinking on that, because afterall in my life one of my main focuses is on those that I love and interact with regularly.
Anyway, with that all said, I also realize Will seems to get your guys’ goats as much if not more than you get LDS’. To be frank, I’m not up on Will’s style, which style, in and of itself, I don’t see as a big deal, but I do have problems with some of the things he has said. Pretty much anything that pertains to ladies seems to be pathetic. In this, I don’t see much problem with some of the character assassination attempts on Will. I think for the most part, his current posts seem much better than some of those that have been quoted to prove him a bad person. And something does ring true when he says this place seems to heat up when he’s around. The activity does seem to increase. That doesn’t seem like a good commentary overall. Inflaming Will, driving wedges, polarizing the issues seems to be a product of what goes on here. Will seems to enjoy helping to drive those wedges deeper as well. I suppose from a critical perspective if there is a black and white, if there is a good and bad side in all this, then cool. I know that can work from a faith perspective too. I personally can’t take things so black and white. So “let’s mock LDS posters, whom we know nothing about, because they are LDS”. If Schryver represents the bad in LDS or apologetics, which I’m not decided upon as yet, this place, in general, seems to represent the exact opposite, which also I don’t see, necessarily, as all that bad. I guess, if nothing else, I’m happy I see the irony in that.