TBM gets into trouble at FAIR conference

[_wenglund]

Could you also let us know what your experience has been in terms of contracting with convention centers and your familiarity with local fire codes as they relate to conventions (Sandy City in particular)?

I highly doubt the person who ordered the table moved knows much or cares much about Utah fire codes and I doubt the local Mormon Fire Marshell was standing outside, axe in hand. There is talk about how this was all a misunderstanding. And, in fact, the person who ordered the table moved says on the MAD thread that "emotions were running high". Misunderstanding as to what the city codes or contractual agreements were?

Most building codes are innocuous to the caual observer, and could hardly stimulate emotions to run high. "What! a woman in the middle of row 49d is in violation of SLC building code section G 119.8l sub-paragraph two?!" If you're a home owner, you might know that at any time your house is probably in violation of one or more building codes. It's nothing to get excited over. Further, those who enforce rules or laws typically don't take it personal nor do they let emotions "run high". Have you ever witnessed an arrest or watched someone get kicked out of an event? I was at an event a few weeks ago in a casino where a couple were ejected for some incredibly rude behavior - far more than just having inadvertantly moved their chairs into a non code-acceptable position. While the couple were foaming at the mouth, security was dead calm. They knew that it wasn't personal and that their actions reflect their establishment.

Three basic points Wade:

1) City codes, unlike Mormon doctrines are specific, there is little room for "misunderstandings".
2) It was personal, not professional, otherwise emotions would not have been running high. A professional staff would not let emotions "run high" over, especially, infractions of city codes.
3) Lynch's post was classic apologetics. Pulling out every reason that perhaps they should have used for apprehending Ardith hoping to smoke screen the reason that was used: Bee entered a bonnett.

I am sorry, but I have searched through your lengthy response in hopes of finding a direct answer to my questions, but for the life of me I don't see them. Granted, there is ironically much in the way of tangential flack and rationalizations, but no direct answers. Care to try again?

On second thought, please never mind. I don't want to be any more of a party than I already have been to this whipped-up drama over a relatively momentary and insignificant event. Unlike some, there is no agenda driving me to become more involved. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

Perhaps Ardiss wanted her computer close to the front so she could make a transcript of the conference. You know, like they do in courtrooms.


(snicker)

[_Runtu]

Perhaps Ardiss wanted her computer close to the front so she could make a transcript of the conference. You know, like they do in courtrooms.


(snicker)

I just spit out my diet pepsi. That just made my day.

Quote of the day from lunch with Who Knows:

Runtu: You've seen Juliann? What does she look like?
Who Knows: You know how you imagine her from her posts? That's exactly what she looks like.

[_Gadianton]

Wade,

Your questions were red herrings. I chose not to answer them. In fact, if you'll read Jan's comments, you'll see clearly that I am right on Lynch's smoke screening. The incident had nothing to do with codes, it had to do with the bee in bonnett.

Everyone else,

The incident began with a person taking chairs that might be used by others to accomodate a table for herself. Whatever city codes might have been in jeopardy are in hindsight, and had nothing to do with the incident. Jan being nice, I'm certain, and knowing nothing about the underlying tensions made a request. The person the request was made to apparently stood her ground. I've never said anything one way or other about that person's justification, I know nothing of her. It could very well have been the case that she acted rudely. At that point, however, there were two choices: allow an exception to the rule, independent of the persons attitude, or enforce the rule. FAIR chose to enforce. But interestingly, and humorously, somehow a facilities issue gets escalated to MAD's controversial founding member, someone who is prone to personal conflicts and cat fights. Based on how it all went down, Kevin took a crack at the identity and scored. I kind of cringed when he did that because I thought, who else! But at the same time, really, there are plenty of FAIRites and it could have been anyone, yet it wasn't. So a tough customer service issue ended up in exactly in the right hands to ensure an explosion. And then in the aftermath, an apolgetic statement gets created pointing to pressing technicalities which have nothing to do with the issue at hand.

"Unfortunately, you have to marry me. It's mostly an issue with a whole list of Celestial codes, various covenants and agreements, and an Angel with a drawn sword.."

[_capt jack]

Ironically, the believers over at MAD are still piling on. Gad, I think you're right when you say it is personality driven with Juliann and Ardis. Juliann posted the following over at MAD; I'm copying it here because I'm afraid it's going to go down the memory hole.

Someone made this statement:

I've since learned that Ardis gave someone at last year's FAIR conference an earful about FAIR as well (not related to any type of confrontation, though).

To which Juliann responded:

I was sitting in front of her and asked her if she was enjoying the conference and she unloaded on me about how much she didn't want to be there, loudly and right in front of everyone. It was really embarrassing and I walked away when she calmed down a little. I didn't know anything about her, her behavior didn't match with the credentials she was claiming, so I just kept an eye on her to make sure she wasn't a street preacher who was going to disrupt the conference. I checked online that night and saw that she was what she claimed and chalked it up to just one more weird conference story. I could hardly believe it when I realized we were dealing with the same person again.

It's just sad when professional women make it harder for other women. I would also appreciate Ardis giving us a list of women speakers since that was one of her complaints this year. We would be happy to follow up on anything she can offer.

Ardis might be looney, but she obviously didn't know who she was dealing with.

[_Dr. Shades]

Juliann mentioned that Ardis is likely not only anti-critic but is anti-apologist as well.

Could Ardis Parshall be Chapel Mormonism's version of Juliann?

[_beastie]

Juliann mentioned that Ardis is likely not only anti-critic but is anti-apologist as well.

Could Ardis Parshall be Chapel Mormonism's version of Juliann?

I picked up on that as well. It reminded me of what you once said, Shades, which was that the FAIR/MADdites apologists don't necessarily respond to chapel Mormons any better than they do exmormon critics. It doesn't just take belief in the LDS church to be accepted as one of the tribe and hence not subjected to suspicious treatment - it takes acceptance of and willingness to defend the FARMish output and crowd. I don't remember exactly how you phrased it, but it's almost a form of FARMs apologia, not just LDS apologia.

So if Ardiss comes off as a chapel Mormon willing to criticize aspects of FAIR, I would say that she would be far more likely to be treated with hostility and suspicion by Juliann and the MADdites willing to follow her lead.

[_Blixa]

Ok I wasn't there. Let's say Ardis was rude.

I still say the villification and mocking conducted at MAD has been despicably over the top.

We've gone from DCP dragging up some kind of online encounter from years ago so he can label her "anti-Mormon" "bitter" "grudge-holding" and "belligerent," to puerile jabs at her weight and attractiveness, to Juliann's claim that she suspected she was a "street preacher," someone with false credentials and the capper: "It's just sad when professional women make it harder for other women."

Please, spare me the faux feminist "saddness."

Professional women, indeed.

[_Dr. Shades]

It reminded me of what you once said, Shades, which was that the FAIR/MADdites apologists don't necessarily respond to chapel Mormons any better than they do exmormon critics. It doesn't just take belief in the LDS church to be accepted as one of the tribe and hence not subjected to suspicious treatment - it takes acceptance of and willingness to defend the FARMish output and crowd. I don't remember exactly how you phrased it, but it's almost a form of FARMs apologia, not just LDS apologia.

I phrased it something like this: The purpose of MAD isn't to defend the Mormon church. The purpose of MAD is to defend Mormon apologetics.

[_Trevor]

I just wonder who the two "burly" bodyguards were.

This is hilarious.

The same guys who intimidated protesters at the anti-Cheney-visit rally at BYU? Give us your signs now. Tell us who you are but we won't give you the same information...