Page 1 of 1
Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:26 pm
by _Lemmie
For those not following the Sam Young thread, this post by Rosebud explains why she inserts her story into other people's threads.
I thought it deserved its own topic as it explains why she considers the specific and unrelated derailment of a topic to be her special right, even though it violates Universal Rule #4*. Everyone derails here and there, but Rosebud has taken this to a whole new level.
Personally, I think this is nothing more than a pretty extreme attempt to justify why she sees and interprets so many topics though the lens of her experience, reducing topic after topic to powerful, evil men taking advantage of powerless, innocent women, but she apparently doesn't see the correlation.
Her words:
Rosebud wrote:...The thing is.... I am here for the purpose of mentioning off topic things that don't necessarily align with the conversation. That is annoying to you, but it's pretty much the entire purpose of this board for me. This is the way I have chosen to manage the situation I'm in because it's easy for me to post when I have spare time and it allows me to create dated records. The topics on this board align, of course, with what I want and need to say, but what I want and need to say doesn't always exactly align with the threads or conversation.
If I were restricted to staying on the topic of threads, I'd have to start new threads and manage them. They would be full of people trying to hook me into saying something and I would either have to ignore most of my own threads (which is actuallly what I usually do -- I start my own threads when I want to draw attention to something I'm saying, but not because I want to answer a bunch of questions) or I would be roped into spending too much time trying to manage them. As I've already admitted, I'm creating records this way partially for my own convenience. Starting and managing threads full of people trying to hook me is not convenient... it'd be an energy draw. I get that for you what I'm doing is annoying and frustrating, but for me it's convenient.
And this is a free speech board. I'm allowed.
I recommend anyone who is bothered putting me on ignore. It's not all that interesting after a while.
*From Dr. Shades' stickied thread at the top of every forum, Universal rule #4:
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:39 pm
by _Dr. Shades
Rosebud wrote:...The thing is.... I am here for the purpose of mentioning off topic things that don't necessarily align with the conversation. That is annoying to you, but it's pretty much the entire purpose of this board for me.
Rosebud, I didn't see this comment, but if you wish to mention things that are off-topic, please do so either in their own threads (assuming they relate somehow to Mormonism) or in the Spirit Paradise or Spirit Prison fora.
If I were restricted to staying on the topic of threads, I'd have to start new threads and manage them.
Which is a small price to pay for obeying Universal Rule #4.
They would be full of people trying to hook me into saying something and I would either have to ignore most of my own threads (which is actuallly what I usually do -- I start my own threads when I want to draw attention to something I'm saying, but not because I want to answer a bunch of questions) or I would be roped into spending too much time trying to manage them. As I've already admitted, I'm creating records this way partially for my own convenience. Starting and managing threads full of people trying to hook me is not convenient... it'd be an energy draw. I get that for you what I'm doing is annoying and frustrating, but for me it's convenient.
Regardless of how noble you believe your motives to be, please observe and comply with Universal Rule #4 from now on.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:44 pm
by _Jersey Girl
I didn't see this until just now. Thank you, Lemmie.
If I were restricted to staying on the topic of threads, I'd have to start new threads and manage them.
Yeah. That's sort of how it's done.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2018 11:02 pm
by _Jersey Girl
Dr. Shades wrote:Regardless of how noble you believe your motives to be, please observe and comply with Universal Rule #4 from now on.
She's not going to read this, Shades. She's floating around in her own world up in Terrestrial.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:49 am
by _RockSlider
A few people have derailed this whole site. I miss the old days.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:56 am
by _moksha
Threads eventually all go off topic with enough posts. It has happened that way for billions of years. We do not know who introduced the first extra-topicality, but we suspect they are buried in the Tomb of the Unknown Poster.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 1:36 pm
by _Xenophon
Interesting catch, Lemmie. Thanks for posting it.
One of the oddest bits in Rosebud's posting, in my opinion, is how completely sure she is that "historians" will be combing the archives of MDB for her posts. If this was truly just meant to be a public dated record there are many options that would be better platforms, offer more security of their continued existence, and suffer from less outside interference. To each their own... I guess.
moksha wrote:Threads eventually all go off topic with enough posts. It has happened that way for billions of years. We do not know who introduced the first extra-topicality, but we suspect they are buried in the Tomb of the Unknown Poster.
Although I agree that tangents and off-topics are pretty natural parts of the growth of a thread; I do think it is entirely different to join a thread (or board, in this case) with nothing but the intent to derail.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2018 3:29 am
by _cwald
Great OP Lemmie. Well said and to the point.
But why is it down here in Paradise? Rosebud will never see it.
Re: Rosebud, on why Universal Rule 4 doesn't apply to her:
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2018 4:23 am
by _Lemmie
cwald wrote:Great OP Lemmie. Well said and to the point.
But why is it down here in Paradise? Rosebud will never see it.
Thank you. And you make a good point, yourself. I was trying to follow the rules, in that her propensity to see Dehlin and herself in every victimizing male and victimized female is not necessarily a Mormon story. (Although even when such roles are not evident, her ability to shoehorn her story in as well as her chutzpah in insisting her story of course fits everywhere is becoming apocryphal.)
In the end, however, her story is in actuality a Mormon story. I guess I don't really want to give it a bigger place than it deserves. (She announced she has me on ignore because I was mean to her, anyway. All I did was disagree with her but she finds that unsupportive. Go figure.
)