Westridge & Other Schools(Formerly LDS Perceptions thread)

[Guest]

How would you have handled it were you a moderator, why me? What would you have stated?

On the link that Liz posted with the orginal thread on this thread I would have stepped in when goodk said he forgave rcrocket and said that he was basically a good guy. Any criticism of rcrocket would have been met with a warning and a reminder that all was forgiven by the offended party. No name calling would be allowed and I would have heavily moderated the thread for then on. And if rcocketed was still in the game, I would have warned him with red letters and if he didn't stop, a three day suspension would be in order.

When the problem with Dan and goodk developed, I would have warned dan not to play games like that anymore under risk of a suspension. I would have also began to warn others that this board is not a bean bag game and it was time to take a breath and gather one's thoughts. Dan's post should have immediately been deleted or reported to enhance damage control.

This could have stopped the lawsuit threat that came in the future. The posters forgot that they were human beings and because of this, things got out of hand.

PS: I am not interested in being a moderator. Moderators can also come under attack unlike on the MAD board where they rule supreme.

[_Jersey Girl]

This is something else I had thought about. I've been snowed in for two days and had nothing better to do!

What about the part of GoodK's copy of the email that describes his step dad as a "Mormon Blowhard".

That could have been:

1. One reason why DCP and crock thought it was offensive. (Not justifying their stuff here, just trying to reason it out)

2. An indication that GoodK has no respect for his step dad and so why would he care about suing because someone "outed" him to his step dad?

Not much of this makes a whole lot of sense. We can't know what either "side" was thinking when they did whatever they did. We can't exactly know what GoodK is thinking about the threat of law suit.

And what about GoodK's choice to post the email in the first place? If it goes on the Internet it's readable by the entire universe. That someone read it and reported it to the step dad isn't that outrageous when viewed in the grand scheme of what is possible on the Internet. If GoodK didn't want things to get back to the family, he probably should have paraphrased the email instead of posting it and giving leading information about the identity of the step dad.

In other words, if you don't want your family screwed around with....don't elect to put them on a message board.

I'm still snowed in. Can't tell, can you?

[_why me]

This is something else I had thought about. I've been snowed in for two days and had nothing better to do!

What about the part of GoodK's copy of the email that describes his step dad as a "Mormon Blowhard".

That could have been:

1. One reason why DCP and crock thought it was offensive. (Not justifying their stuff here, just trying to reason it out)

2. An indication that GoodK has no respect for his step dad and so why would he care about suing because someone "outed" him to his step dad?

Not much of this makes a whole lot of sense. We can't know what either "side" was thinking when they did whatever they did. We can't exactly know what GoodK is thinking about the threat of law suit.

And what about GoodK's choice to post the email in the first place? If it goes on the Internet it's readable by the entire universe. That someone read it and reported it to the step dad isn't that outrageous when viewed in the grand scheme of what is possible on the Internet. If GoodK didn't want things to get back to the family, he probably should have paraphrased the email instead of posting it and giving leading information about the identity of the step dad.

In other words, if you don't want your family screwed around with....don't elect to put them on a message board.

I'm still snowed in. Can't tell, can you?

All good points. And also, goodk, rcrocket, and dan all seem to know each other bacause of FARMS connections. It was basically a 'family affair' played out on the internet when it could have been done privately between the parties. Lets just say that there were too many personal feelings involved in this. And that would not be a problem if there were no lawsuit threat. However, posters need to take a look at their own role in the fight. Did they attempt to calm the situation or did they fan the fire. Lets just say that all should learn something from the experience...

My suggestion: goodk, dan, rcrocket and stepdad need to get together and offer apologies accordingly and kiss and make up. And then, have a fourth of july hot dog bash and have a good time.

[_Jersey Girl]

Going back to the intro of the post in question:

This is somewhat off-topic, I just wanted people to see it before it gets moved...

My step-sister who goes to school in Utah came down with a bad infection and was very seriously ill, to the point where my mother and step-father told me she may not make it. After a week in the hospital, she is doing better, but I went to my email inbox to find that I was CC'd on the following email from my step-father - needless to say he's one of the F.A.R.M.S cronies and what I consider to be a Mormon Blowhard:

Now, I being a never-Mo wouldn't know who he was talking about, but it's possible that a number of LDS poster would know who that was if nothing else, by process of elimination regarding people they know.

That, including the description of the sister's illness, was apparently what tipped off crock and DCP.

Didn't GoodK KNOW it would tip them off? Was it intentional?

I have no clue.

[_beastie]

I think it's clear that the point of sharing the email was to tattle that GoodK called his stepfather a blowhard. After all, GoodK's family is already aware of his disbelief, so nothing was new in that regard.

So the question is: did GoodK's stepfather need to know GoodK referred to him as a blowhard? That's the question upon which many of us have such a different opinion that it seems to create a complete impasse. Personally, I have no desire to know if my children happen, in a moment of frustration, to refer to me with an unflattering word. Others here obviously think it is very important that they know that. See Nightingale's post that went into this difference in worldview in astute detail.

by the way, NG - in regards to Will's harsh words toward me - it's my impression of Will that he views critics who normally present themselves as calm, rational, and tempered in their criticism of LDS truth claims are more dangerous to the faithful than frothing, rabid ant-mormons. Hence, he feels it is his personal imperative to expose these calm, rational, and tempered critics as the Minions of Satan they are.

Personally, I view Will as the Drama Queen of MD Histrionics, so I take little of what he says seriously.

whoops, NG's post was actually on a different thread, the one about bishop confidentiality

[_Jersey Girl]

I think it's clear that the point of sharing the email was to tattle that GoodK called his stepfather a blowhard. After all, GoodK's family is already aware of his disbelief, so nothing was new in that regard.

So the question is: did GoodK's stepfather need to know GoodK referred to him as a blowhard? That's the question upon which many of us have such a different opinion that it seems to create a complete impasse. Personally, I have no desire to know if my children happen, in a moment of frustration, to refer to me with an unflattering word. Others here obviously think it is very important that they know that.

No, the step dad didn't need to know that.

But he knows it now. He's known it for a year.

It's over with or should be.

[_Yoda]

Does being called a blowhard qualify as a "family humiliation"? This seems a bit extreme. Apparently, however, Bob views it as such.

Are there any other TBM's who view this as family humiliation?

If so, as a fellow LDS parent who thinks this view is overkill, would you mind explaining your position?

I really want to understand this because I just don't get it.

[_Jersey Girl]

Liz,

I think that the men need to answer that question. I don't think the women can easily relate.

[_Kishkumen]

Does being called a blowhard qualify as a "family humiliation"? This seems a bit extreme. Apparently, however, Bob views it as such.

Are there any other TBM's who view this as family humiliation?

If so, as a fellow LDS parent who thinks this view is overkill, would you mind explaining your position?

I really want to understand this because I just don't get it.

I am afraid it is difficult for me to relate personally, since I would not find such a thing humiliating. Mildly embarrassing perhaps, but humiliating? I don't think so.

But then I was never the typical patriarchal-minded Mormon that looks toward the priesthood with reverential awe. For those who believe that the priesthood confers an aura of sacrosanctity upon its bearer, making light of a priesthood holder's cherished faith is not to be tolerated.

Remember, God will not be mocked, and by extension neither will his holy priesthood.

[_harmony]

I would like the board to succeed and this why I am making my comments. Posters should not be saying that this is a free speech zone anymore. Rather, all should be told that language and tone need to be guarded. In other words, it is important to disagree civilly with eachother. This would not be a bad thing and it will attract more Mormon posters. Lets just say that the lawsuit threat was a wake up call that something needs to change. Another lawsuit threat coming from this board would send this board down the toilet. I think that the moderators and shades need to call a meeting and discuss a new policy of interaction on the board. Name calling and personal insinuations against a poster should get deleted and the poster should get a warning or a suspension.

The lawsuit threat did not come from a mopologist.

Thank you for your input. We don't moderate that way. It's one of the basic promises Shades made when he built the board: we don't moderate that way. The rules are very clearly stated and stapled to the top of every forum here. Those who don't follow them learn the consequences.

If you'd like to start a board with those policies in place, have at it. And good luck.

One more thing: I'm not sure you realize this isn't the first threat of a lawsuit that we've seen on this board. It's just the current one.