Who has been where I am? Questioning. Where did you end up?

[_rcrocket]

As I have pointed out before, chest beaters have no credibility.

I'm glad you have admitted you have no credibility. However, let me make it clear that I think you have no credibility not because you happen to be very pious, but because you have not said anything that I find true, justified or substantiated.

Well, I certainly concede that I lack in many areas. I apologize for my lack of credibilty.

rcrocket

Hey, no problem, Bob. Nobody's perfect after all, right? In any case, the only place where you really lack "credibilty" is in your lectures to others on their morals. Perhaps you'd like to tell Zoidberg about the time that you manipulated that MMM letter in order to create a historical spin-job? I'm sure one of these days you'll learn your lesson, my old friend. Until then, carry on.

When did I ever manipulate any letter? Perhaps you could enlighten us all. I might add that Will Bagley and I have discussed that letter in detail in debates on LDS.bookshelf and he never accused me of "manipulating" anything -- and instead conceded that he should have used the letter to which you probably refer.

But, I await your further explanation.

rcrocket

[_dartagnan]

Bob, I think your main problem is that you cannot get it in your head that his posts are not about attacking the Church. They are sincere questions he has asked and he came here for answers because MAD rejected him. Now you’re one of the few TBMs on this forum and you’re treating him the same way he was treated there.

Congratulations.

And by the way, how many Mormons speak about their conversion from Evangelical Christianity? They do it all the flippin time at MAD but I don’t see any Evangelicals wailing and moaning about how they’re probably lying. Mormons are so scared to death when struggling members speak out.

Very few people post with their real identities and I don’t recall you ever bashing other LDS for cowardice. But even if they did post with their real identities, there would really be no way to verify their claims as an “ex-Evangelical” unless they dished out further information like what denomination they attended, where they attended Church, what year etc. Whereas former LDS simply have to give out their name and they’re screwed as soon as some LDS idiot starts his or her investigation and writes the stake President, threatening the lifestyle of not only the poster, but his or her family as well.

Remember how you responded when someone posted a link to private information about you, which detailed the names of your children? All of the sudden you felt anonymity was justified. Well, that is precisely how former LDS feel all the time, and they could really care less what you personally feel about them. They are here to share their personal feelings on issues that impact their lives.

Jackasses like you aren’t doing the Church any favors with this tactic.

And by the way, since you’re so into integrity and courage, why didn’t you answer the simple question I asked you? Because you know very well that since you don’t post anonymously, and the fact that you’re a bishop, means you could get into real doo doo if you gave the wrong answer. This is why you refrain from debating anything where you might slip up and say something you could be held accountable for.

If not, then why not answer the question?

[_Zoidberg]

Well, I certainly concede that I lack in many areas. I apologize for my lack of credibilty.

rcrocket

I suspect you are beng sarcastic, but apology accepted. I can say the same about myself.

Perhaps someone can point me to the specific location of the writings about the MMM letter and the cicumstances surrounding it.

[_rcrocket]

Congratulations.

Well, I appreciate that.

And by the way, how many Mormons speak about their conversion from Evangelical Christianity? They do it all the flippin time at MAD but I don’t see any Evangelicals wailing and moaning about how they’re probably lying. Mormons are so scared to death when struggling members speak out.

I am certainly not one of them. I welcome it and trumpet that to the skies. Just because I criticize somebody for posting anonymously does not mean that I criticize the substance of the question. I don't think you'll see anything like that in my posts. I welcome the challenge.

Very few people post with their real identities and I don’t recall you ever bashing other LDS for cowardice.

I do condemn the posters on MAD who post anonymously I just don't post there, or rarely post there. But hear ye all ends of the earth. If you post anonymously any negative things about any known and living person (be it Quinn or Metcalf) you will burn in hell some day.

Whereas former LDS simply have to give out their name and they’re screwed as soon as some LDS idiot starts his or her investigation and writes the stake President, threatening the lifestyle of not only the poster, but his or her family as well.

Yeah, you're right. It is much safer to use a mask to rob a bank.

Remember how you responded when someone posted a link to private information about you, which detailed the names of your children? All of the sudden you felt anonymity was justified.

Untrue.

And by the way, since you’re so into integrity and courage, why didn’t you answer the simple question I asked you? Because you know very well that since you don’t post anonymously, and the fact that you’re a bishop, means you could get into real doo doo if you gave the wrong answer. This is why you refrain from debating anything where you might slip up and say something you could be held accountable for.

Must have missed that question. I don't pretend to know everything. I'm sure I give wrong answers all the time.

[_wenglund]

In hopes of getting the discussion back on topic. Mms mentioned in the OP:

So here I sit considering how to proceed.

What options have you considered in terms of how to proceed from here?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_asbestosman]

I do condemn the posters on MAD who post anonymously I just don't post there, or rarely post there. But hear ye all ends of the earth. If you post anonymously any negative things about any known and living person (be it Quinn or Metcalf) you will burn in hell some day.

Bob, is anonymity really the issue or is it a red-herring? Elsewhere you stated, ""I think the point of my analogy is that it is better not to libel someone at all than libel someone anonymously. The internet is only a medium; it is not a justification for boorish and cowardly behavior. "

There you seem to recognize that posting libelous or defamatory remarks under your own is not exactly that much better. But I think you and I still fail to agree on what constitutes libel--which I find reprehensible--and what constitutes criticism for which I think anonymity is a valuable asset in encouraging frankness. Cars help bank robbers as well as saints.

I think there is are different kinds of criticism. One can criticize to hurt others. That is indeed bad. One can be critical in order to explore his own thoughts. One might also be critical in hopes that someone will either change or better explain their position. One might also be critical of something in order to warn others or to contemplate avoiding things.

[_moksha]

In hopes of getting the discussion back on topic. Mms mentioned in the OP:

So here I sit considering how to proceed.

What options have you considered in terms of how to proceed from here?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Thanks to Wade we can stay on track and try to be helpful to mms. Discussing options is an important point in knowing how to proceed

[_harmony]

If you post anonymously any negative things about any known and living person (be it Quinn or Metcalf) you will burn in hell some day.

This is the most hilarious post I've seen all day.

You're honestly saying no one can say anything negative about any living person, or they'll burn in hell? What kind of idiotic claim is that? You just condemned every soul on earth to hell (assuming it exists, which isn't a given by any means), since I'm prepared to bet the farm there isn't a soul on earth who has never griped about a living person, whoever that may be, from their mother to their tax collector.

Good grief, retract that statement or be forever known as the fool you think the rest of us are.

[_rcrocket]

If you post anonymously any negative things about any known and living person (be it Quinn or Metcalf) you will burn in hell some day.

This is the most hilarious post I've seen all day.

You're honestly saying no one can say anything negative about any living person, or they'll burn in hell? What kind of idiotic claim is that? You just condemned every soul on earth to hell (assuming it exists, which isn't a given by any means), since I'm prepared to bet the farm there isn't a soul on earth who has never griped about a living person, whoever that may be, from their mother to their tax collector.

Good grief, retract that statement or be forever known as the fool you think the rest of us are.

I reiterate that few posters on this Board have any sense of humor. OK, I retract the statement so that you can feel better about me.

rcrocket

[_harmony]

If you post anonymously any negative things about any known and living person (be it Quinn or Metcalf) you will burn in hell some day.

This is the most hilarious post I've seen all day.

You're honestly saying no one can say anything negative about any living person, or they'll burn in hell? What kind of idiotic claim is that? You just condemned every soul on earth to hell (assuming it exists, which isn't a given by any means), since I'm prepared to bet the farm there isn't a soul on earth who has never griped about a living person, whoever that may be, from their mother to their tax collector.

Good grief, retract that statement or be forever known as the fool you think the rest of us are.

I reiterate that few posters on this Board have any sense of humor. OK, I retract the statement so that you can feel better about me.

rcrocket

Next time you're trying to be funny, use a smilie. You know... :-)