Monetize ponderize

[Guest]

"in-group" would be emic, not etic. MENSA indeed.

Oh? I was using the term as an adjective reference linguistics. I'm sorry you're jealous of my MENSA-level genius. Try not to be petty. Are we going to start comparing who can draw a cartoon Spideran better next?

Anyway. Why are you falling on your sword for Mr. Durrant? It's odd.

- Doc

[_Lemmie]

It's not just you. It's an obvious marketing ploy which was deliberately planned and executed.

And then immediately changed and then changed again and then abandoned and then directly and openly addressed the next day to the media? I'm glad you're not a judge or a police officer.

Mak is in the 'in-group' thus blinding him to Durrant's binary etic rhetoric. But what do I know? I'm just an 'out-group' MENSA-level genius.

- Doc

"in-group" would be emic, not etic. MENSA indeed.

Oh please, did you not just lecture readers about how the theory of in-groups and out-groups? If you can believe an out-grouper's memory changes when he goes from being an in-grouper to an out-grouper, then surely you recognize an affinity for in-group members' stories. I certainly recognize the homogeneity effect that makes you see all of us as the same. And no, I am not presuming to lecture you on your dissertation topic, I know that offends you mightily.

[_maklelan]

Oh? I was using the term as an adjective reference linguistics. I'm sorry you're jealous of my MENSA-level genius. Try not to be petty. Are we going to start comparing who can draw a cartoon Spideran better next?

Anyway. Why are falling on your sword for Mr. Durrant? It's odd.

- Doc

Not falling on any sword in any sense whatsoever. I'm just pointing out that this appears, by all accounts, to have just been an honest and naïve oversight. It's the misguided attempts to turn it into something sinister and underhanded that are odd, but as I said before, I have to stop being surprised that people here unilaterally assume the worst motivations for Mormons. It so obviously serves the fundamental power and values structure, and I wouldn't want anyone to sacrifice that to honesty or objectivity.

[_consiglieri]

I believe it is nothing more sinister than taking advantage of church position to monetize merchandise.

The facts do show that much at the very least, do they not?

[_maklelan]

Oh please, did you not just lecture readers about how the theory of in-groups and out-groups?

Yes, I did. And attributing sinister motives to everything that Mormon leadership does wrong is a perfect example of how out-group antagonism structures its relationship.

If you can believe an out-grouper's memory changes when he goes from being an in-grouper to an out-grouper, then surely you recognize an affinity for in-group members' stories.

I can. I also heavily criticized Elder Durrant's son and insisted that Elder Durrant knew about it beforehand. As much as your rhetoric needs me to be some fawning sycophant, that's just not how I work. I'm quite critical of LDS leadership. More than you will ever know. So save your assumptions.

I certainly recognize the homogeneity effect that makes you see all of us as the same.

The giveaway is the fact that so many of you trip over yourselves trying to rush to appeal to the same tired old stereotypes about corrupt motivations with every silly thing LDS leadership does. I know you're all different people with different histories and perspectives and values and prejudies, but the shared stereotyping is just blinding.

And no, I am not presuming to lecture you on your dissertation topic, I know that offends you mightily.

You should take a step back and take account of all the stuff that offends you guys mightily. You might be less cavalier with your silly patronizing.

[_maklelan]

I believe it is nothing more sinister than taking advantage of church position to monetize merchandise.

The facts do show that much at the very least, do they not?

On whose part?

[_sock puppet]

I haven't decided anything is a fact yet . . . except the facts.

And the facts point toward an unsavory conclusion.

A conclusion not set in stone in my mind, but jelling quickly.

Has anybody pointed out the new ponderize tweet-page?

https://Twitter.com/Ponderize_

Or that apparently, Elder Duran registered not only the domain name of ponderize.org on 9/4/15, but also ponderize.net?

These are just facts.

I leave the conclusions to others.

As well as the prediction that the unexpected backlog of t-shirts and rubber bracelets will end up being marketed at Deseret Book stores in the not too distant future.

Seems to be more evidence pointing to that conclusion than there is evidence pointint towards any of the LDS truth claims.

[_MsJack]

I don't know what's funnier, that the Durrants actually thought "ponderize" had the potential of becoming the Mormon equivalent of "WWJD" bracelets, or that they had no clue using insider knowledge to monetize a GC talk would blow up in their faces.

That said: in my time with evangelicals, I've seen some truly loathsome attempts at monetizing spirituality. As trying to turn a dollar on the Lord goes, this was mild.

[_sock puppet]

I don't know what's funnier, that the Durrants actually thought "ponderize" had the potential of becoming the Mormon equivalent of "WWJD" bracelets, or that they had no clue using insider knowledge to monetize a GC talk would blow up in their faces.

That said: in my time with evangelicals, I've seen some truly loathsome attempts at monetizing spirituality. As trying to turn a dollar on the Lord goes, this was mild.

Using religion to leverage profits dates back hundreds and hundreds of years. This instance is minor as compared to innumerable instances that predate it, but is a fresh reminder of it.

[_Lemmie]

Oh please, did you not just lecture readers about how the theory of in-groups and out-groups?

Yes, I did. And attributing sinister motives to everything that Mormon leadership does wrong is a perfect example of how out-group antagonism structures its relationship.

If you can believe an out-grouper's memory changes when he goes from being an in-grouper to an out-grouper, then surely you recognize an affinity for in-group members' stories.

I can. I also heavily criticized Elder Durrant's son and insisted that Elder Durrant knew about it beforehand. As much as your rhetoric needs me to be some fawning sycophant, that's just not how I work. I'm quite critical of LDS leadership. More than you will ever know. So save your assumptions.

I certainly recognize the homogeneity effect that makes you see all of us as the same.

The giveaway is the fact that so many of you trip over yourselves trying to rush to appeal to the same tired old stereotypes about corrupt motivations with every silly thing LDS leadership does. I know you're all different people with different histories and perspectives and values and prejudies, but the shared stereotyping is just blinding.

And no, I am not presuming to lecture you on your dissertation topic, I know that offends you mightily.

You should take a step back and take account of all the stuff that offends you guys mightily. You might be less cavalier with your silly patronizing.

Seriously, do you really think you are any different? You've given example after example of "the giveaway" that "offends you... mightily," and example after example of your "silly patronizing, " while engaging "the same old stereotypes." Now if you tell me that I am emotionally masturbating, as you said to another poster, I might take offense at that, but at the moment I'm just laughing.

Learning about in-groups and out-groups includes recognizing when you are part of one, and hopefully finishing your education will help you to not be so intense that you can't recognize when someone is making a joke (that would be me. With my last post. Hint, hint. ; ) )

Lighten up Mak, you are going to give yourself a heart attack wading into 'the enemy' with such intensity! Or maybe you could just see people as individuals and potential friends. That's one thing I learned when I joined the Out-group of everyone else in the world. There are a lot of unique people, and a lot of friendliness! Constantly looking for anti-Mormon bogeymen is going to wear you out.