Looks like Severian has been banned from MAD

[_mms]

Possibly, for now. I am suspended currently and awaiting a determination of whether I will be banned for being a so called "bomb thrower."

[_harmony]

Severian may be banned... but Moksha is not:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showuser=1351

Just for the heck of it, I tried the Moksha loggon. Moksha is banned as well. Maybe they picked up on this loophole from the Doctors post yesterday. Does this make me the only active LDS member banned from MAD?

Heck no! I'm active, and I'm banned from MAD. You're in good company, lil penguin!

[_moksha]

Severian may be banned... but Moksha is not:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?showuser=1351

Just for the heck of it, I tried the Moksha loggon. Moksha is banned as well. Maybe they picked up on this loophole from the Doctors post yesterday. Does this make me the only active LDS member banned from MAD?

Heck no! I'm active, and I'm banned from MAD. You're in good company, lil penguin!

It is nice to be in good company. Perhaps we are the polar opposites of Juliann and so have been repelled from her board. I think perhaps asbestosman could furnish an equation displaying this principle.

Still, I miss being able to post there.

[_Moniker]

What in the world! Why would you get banned?!

Did you get an email or anything? Do they reinstate people that are banned? You can use my account if you want...

[_malkie]

What in the world! Why would you get banned?!

Did you get an email or anything? Do they reinstate people that are banned? You can use my account if you want...

Isn't that ("...use my account...") just an invitation to the mods to ban you too?

[_moksha]

What in the world! Why would you get banned?!

Did you get an email or anything?

They have spoken of ridding themselves of bomb throwers. Selek has offered this formula: "Despite the trappings of innocence that most of the trolls and bomb throwers attempt to use at camouflage, it's really not that hard: if your posts are relentlessly negative and snarky, if you are pathologically incapable of acknowledging anything correct, nice, or productive about the Church, and all you can do is sneer about how foolish, deluded, or just plain wrong the Mormons are- then you are a candidate for the wood pile. If you are impervious to contrary evidence or thought, if you come here only to proselyte and condemn than we have neither need nor use for you."

No, I did not receive an email or even red lettering in my posts.

I did enjoy this post by Calmoriah:

QUOTE(juliann @ Dec 22 2007, 05:14 PM)

That could work. Sort of like the spambusters only more like bomb sniffing dogs. heh

Yeah, but keep the list anonymous so they don't have to worry about being kissed up to or hurting a friend's feelings by not
agreeing with them about other posters, etc.

QUOTE(juliann @ Dec 22 2007, 05:19 PM)

My ability to post is so sporadic that I'm not keeping up with who is who anymore. But I know I have seen other neener neener
posts naming other "mods" as well. It isn't just me they use.

Tis true, but you will always be their favourite.

I do think anyone who whines about the mods even in a little aside but refuses to use the report function should get an
automatic suspension, if only because it drives me insane (the whining that is, I have no clue if they are using the report
function or not; if they are at least trying to use the board system, a moment's pause to check to see that their reports have
been responded to prior to suspension seems justified....then they can be punted out, ).

[_krose]

One thing I noticed was your comment about Romney seeing his dad marching (with MLKjr) with his "spiritual eyes." A couple of people (including DCP) appeared to be quite offended by it. Could that have been enough to precipitate the ban, I wonder?

[_moksha]

One thing I noticed was your comment about Romney seeing his dad marching (with MLKjr) with his "spiritual eyes." A couple of people (including DCP) appeared to be quite offended by it. Could that have been enough to precipitate the ban, I wonder?

I suspect that saying Romney saw his Dad and Martin Luther King marching together, with his "spiritual eyes" was mixing a metaphor together in such a way as to be offensive. Dr. Peterson probably thought Romney was confabulating the march and hence if he saw it with spiritual eyes, then the Book of Mormons witnesses would also be called into question. It was undoubtedly a bad choice of words on my part and it probably helped result in my banishment. Below deck, Captain Juliann thinks I pilfered a quart of strawberries from the ward room locker with a duplicate key - but that is another story altogether.

[_krose]

I suspect that saying Romney saw his Dad and Martin Luther King marching together, with his "spiritual eyes" was mixing a metaphor together in such a way as to be offensive. Dr. Peterson probably thought Romney was confabulating the march and hence if he saw it with spiritual eyes, then the Book of Mormons witnesses would also be called into question. It was undoubtedly a bad choice of words on my part and it probably helped result in my banishment. Below deck, Captain Juliann thinks I pilfered a quart of strawberries from the ward room locker with a duplicate key - but that is another story altogether.

Well, I thought it was very clever, myself. What better way to describe how he could see the march in Detroit from France (although he is opting for the trial-tested "depends on what the meaning of the word 'saw' is" technique).

[_moksha]

Well, I thought it was very clever, myself. What better way to describe how he could see the march in Detroit from France (although he is opting for the trial-tested "depends on what the meaning of the word 'saw' is" technique).

Too bad Mitt cannot point to Monica's dress as corroborating evidence as to what he saw.