DiscussMormonism.com

I think I've been thinking about the AI "problem" in completely the wrong way - particularly in not looking beyond the surface in order to try to tackle underlying causes.

MG has said that he has used AI as a "force multiplier", allowing him to somewhat redress the imbalance of the small number of defenders (mostly just himself) trying to fend off the rabid horde of critics (most of the other posters).

The real answer, I believe, is for the defenders to attract other like-minded people to join the battle.

Let me head off the inevitable objection that this board would be too offensive to the average active believer, and that only a stalwart like MG could withstand the pressure and maltreatment dished out by us nasty apostates and heretics. True disciples of Jesus have historically withstood much worse situations than anything found on this board. Especially if they stuck to the Celestial Kingdom - that's where they are headed post mortem, after all - they should find a safe enough atmosphere. For sure, anyone who served a mission in Scotland is tough enough to fight the good fight here.

If MG could find just one other, valiant like unto himself, and that person brings two friends, and they each tell two friends ... soon the critics will be begging Dr Shades to be allowed to use AI as they will otherwise crumple under the weight of the attack.

Even critics could invite TBMs they know! I'll excuse myself, however, because:
- firstly, I'm antisocial, and have never made friends easily, so I'm not close enough to any suitable candidates, and
- secondly, TBMs that I have been close to over the past 10 years or so, have been becoming inactive, or even resigning, at an alarming rate

What do you guys think?

That’s an interesting distinction—if a position needs force multipliers, it’s probably worth asking whether the issue is numbers or the claims themselves. (I tried to work in something about game theory but decided it was an overreach)

My memory of Mormon on line folks is that MG despite frustrating qualities is generally more pleasant than a number stuck in my memory. I would not claim he to be the most gentlemanly. Philo was not ungentlemanly that I remember. The winner is momentarily slipping my mind. I am sure Philo remembers.

malkie wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 2:12 am

I think I've been thinking about the AI "problem" in completely the wrong way - particularly in not looking beyond the surface in order to try to tackle underlying causes.

MG has said that he has used AI as a "force multiplier", allowing him to somewhat redress the imbalance of the small number of defenders (mostly just himself) trying to fend off the rabid horde of critics (most of the other posters).

The real answer, I believe, is for the defenders to attract other like-minded people to join the battle.

Let me head off the inevitable objection that this board would be too offensive to the average active believer, and that only a stalwart like MG could withstand the pressure and maltreatment dished out by us nasty apostates and heretics. True disciples of Jesus have historically withstood much worse situations than anything found on this board. Especially if they stuck to the Celestial Kingdom - that's where they are headed post mortem, after all - they should find a safe enough atmosphere. For sure, anyone who served a mission in Scotland is tough enough to fight the good fight here.

If MG could find just one other, valiant like unto himself, and that person brings two friends, and they each tell two friends ... soon the critics will be begging Dr Shades to be allowed to use AI as they will otherwise crumple under the weight of the attack.

Even critics could invite TBMs they know! I'll excuse myself, however, because:
- firstly, I'm antisocial, and have never made friends easily, so I'm not close enough to any suitable candidates, and
- secondly, TBMs that I have been close to over the past 10 years or so, have been becoming inactive, or even resigning, at an alarming rate

What do you guys think?

I see a lot of snark here. Some of it directed at MG. All good I suppose.

What the hell is the problem you are trying to solve here? Yours is an answer to what, exactly? And it also seems that your answer is for someone else to do something. So you are not part of your own answer to this unknown problem. Have I got this right?

Limnor wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 2:37 am

That’s an interesting distinction—if a position needs force multipliers, it’s probably worth asking whether the issue is numbers or the claims themselves. (I tried to work in something about game theory but decided it was an overreach)

Perhaps the "force multiplier" idea is not quite right. The issue was more that (I believe) MG felt that he was required to respond to everything from everyone, and found that he could not do so on his own. I suggested to him that he pick a subset of comments/posts to be involved in, but, understandably he was reluctant to do so. I'm sure that MG will correct me if I'm misstating the issue.

Under these circumstances, even the strongest of claims may be overcome by the sheer number of responses required. MG felt that, with the help of AI, he could respond faster to more "attacks", although I believe that - as I stated elsewhere - for that to work, everyone but MG would have to submit to an AI ban.

Does that make sense?

Whiskey wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 3:12 am

malkie wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 2:12 am

I think I've been thinking about the AI "problem" in completely the wrong way - particularly in not looking beyond the surface in order to try to tackle underlying causes.

MG has said that he has used AI as a "force multiplier", allowing him to somewhat redress the imbalance of the small number of defenders (mostly just himself) trying to fend off the rabid horde of critics (most of the other posters).

The real answer, I believe, is for the defenders to attract other like-minded people to join the battle.

Let me head off the inevitable objection that this board would be too offensive to the average active believer, and that only a stalwart like MG could withstand the pressure and maltreatment dished out by us nasty apostates and heretics. True disciples of Jesus have historically withstood much worse situations than anything found on this board. Especially if they stuck to the Celestial Kingdom - that's where they are headed post mortem, after all - they should find a safe enough atmosphere. For sure, anyone who served a mission in Scotland is tough enough to fight the good fight here.

If MG could find just one other, valiant like unto himself, and that person brings two friends, and they each tell two friends ... soon the critics will be begging Dr Shades to be allowed to use AI as they will otherwise crumple under the weight of the attack.

Even critics could invite TBMs they know! I'll excuse myself, however, because:
- firstly, I'm antisocial, and have never made friends easily, so I'm not close enough to any suitable candidates, and
- secondly, TBMs that I have been close to over the past 10 years or so, have been becoming inactive, or even resigning, at an alarming rate

What do you guys think?

I see a lot of snark here. Some of it directed at MG. All good I suppose.

What the hell is the problem you are trying to solve here? Yours is an answer to what, exactly? And it also seems that your answer is for someone else to do something. So you are not part of your own answer to this unknown problem. Have I got this right?

No snark intended, Whiskey, towards MG or anyone else. I'm simply trying to take a fresh view of something that has been supposed to be a problem, and trying to dig a little deeper, but perhaps my language could do with being a bit less "flowery". If MG believes that I'm not representing the issue correctly from his PoV, or that I'm being unpleasant towards him in my presentation, I'm sure he'll let me know in no uncertain terms.

I thought that I was clear enough about the problem I'm trying to solve here. If you think that I haven't explained clearly enough, I could attempt to provide more detail, perhaps with quotes and links. I wonder if it would be worth my time to do that for you.

I assume you read my "excuse" for not following my own suggestion. I'm hardly in a position to do so in a constructive manner, I believe.

In general, I think it's good for the person making the suggestion to try to participate in the action. But there are times when identifying a problem is enough, without proposing a solution; and other times when identifying a problem and suggesting a solution is enough, without the person making the suggestion actually following through on it, for a variety of reasons.

Perhaps you see things differently, but so far you seem to be in the same position as me, or a lesser one - you've identified what you believe is a problem, but not suggested a solution. What would you suggest?

MG needs AI as a stop-gap because he's outnumbered, and he will see this (in your view) as a problem from the critics, for not maintaining a welcome atmosphere for fellow believers to join in and help? Given it's the critics fault then, the AI should be allowed (from his perspective as you speculate)?

Well that, and the fact he's not a super serious student of his own beliefs. He's sure he's right about his beliefs, but doesn't want to do any work to support them. There have been other lone dog believers who have come through here and not complained about not having a team to help them. The late Clark Goble, for instance. Gemli, as a critic, braved Sic et Non by himself for years and not only didn't he have backup, the guy didn't want any. He had no interest in his alleged supporters from elsewhere.

On the objection that the board isn't inviting to believers, you are correct that real believers have survived far worse. A social media board could barely be considered a trial. This board would find a regular trickle, at minimum, of devout members if they thought they had a chance of winning. On the objection that this board is too small and insignificant for believers to notice, I note that members are known to be quite aggressive and act in pact instinct when they think they can win. I remember as a kid, there was one house on our street that was Catholic, everyone else was Mormon. The two kids were in a local field doing something. Other kids from the street, including me rode up on them on our bikes. I was just looking on, but the other guys started bugging them about what they were doing. They were building a cross out of wood they hunted down for their mom and dad. So they Mormon kids made fun of it, and eventually tore apart the cross. I found it quite repulsive, but I admit I was too morally weak to defend those two kids. A shame on my part. But, the point is Mormons would be flooding even this little corner to confound us all and teach us a lesson if they thought they could.

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 2:45 am

My memory of Mormon on line folks is that MG despite frustrating qualities is generally more pleasant than a number stuck in my memory. I would not claim he to be the most gentlemanly. Philo was not ungentlemanly that I remember. The winner is momentarily slipping my mind. I am sure Philo remembers.

I've seen some online believers who are quite ... firm, shall I say. For example, characterising this board as a cesspit. I cannot imagine any of them participating here.

malkie wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 3:19 am

Limnor wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 2:37 am

That’s an interesting distinction—if a position needs force multipliers, it’s probably worth asking whether the issue is numbers or the claims themselves. (I tried to work in something about game theory but decided it was an overreach)

Perhaps the "force multiplier" idea is not quite right. The issue was more that (I believe) MG felt that he was required to respond to everything from everyone, and found that he could not do so on his own. I suggested to him that he pick a subset of comments/posts to be involved in, but, understandably he was reluctant to do so. I'm sure that MG will correct me if I'm misstating the issue.

Under these circumstances, even the strongest of claims may be overcome by the sheer number of responses required. MG felt that, with the help of AI, he could respond faster to more "attacks", although I believe that - as I stated elsewhere - for that to work, everyone but MG would have to submit to an AI ban.

Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes sense, if you mean managing volume is a real issue. I was mostly pointing to the difference between needing help with volume versus needing reinforcement for the claims themselves, which are distinct.

The thing is, even with the AI help, MG can’t answer the basic issues of Book of Abraham, DNA, anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, Joseph married in secret a teenage girl who worked in his home, probably before the sealing power was restored, and married wives of men he had sent on missions.

No amount of help is going to make those problems go away, with AI or without. And that’s really the short list of problems.

Limnor wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 3:43 am

malkie wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 29, 2025 3:19 am

Perhaps the "force multiplier" idea is not quite right. The issue was more that (I believe) MG felt that he was required to respond to everything from everyone, and found that he could not do so on his own. I suggested to him that he pick a subset of comments/posts to be involved in, but, understandably he was reluctant to do so. I'm sure that MG will correct me if I'm misstating the issue.

Under these circumstances, even the strongest of claims may be overcome by the sheer number of responses required. MG felt that, with the help of AI, he could respond faster to more "attacks", although I believe that - as I stated elsewhere - for that to work, everyone but MG would have to submit to an AI ban.

Does that make sense?

Yes, that makes sense, if you mean managing volume is a real issue. I was mostly pointing to the difference between needing help with volume versus needing reinforcement for the claims themselves, which are distinct.

The thing is, even with the AI help, MG can’t answer the basic issues of Book of Abraham, DNA, anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, Joseph married in secret a teenage girl who worked in his home, probably before the sealing power was restored, and married wives of men he had sent on missions.

No amount of help is going to make those problems go away, with AI or without.

Quite!

But I chose to look at one problem at a time, and chose the one stated problem that I had an idea about

I would be happy if MG were able to bring along some reinforcements, if that would make him feel better. OTOH, he may actually enjoy being the lone defender, in spite of the implications of his complaints. I really don't know. I think he's mentioned at least once that he needs to get away from this board because he finds the lack of respect for his views to be disturbing - not to mention our lack of faith

The "basic issues" problem is one that I cannot imagine being able to help with, or suggest a solution for.