Big Brother is Monitoring your Temple Attendance

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

charity wrote:In those temples which use bar coded recommends, they are specifically prohibited from collecting that information either by name of the person or ward or stake they attend. They do know how many people attend on each day. But as raw numbers, males and females. That is it.

Bull. When the new bar-coded TR's were handed out, each one had a unique barcode assigned to the person who received the TR, and that information is kept in the bishop's record book. The primary purpose of the barcode was to identify and stop persons who tried to get into the temple for whom the TR had been rescinded (as well as to stop forgeries). To claim that a barcode cannot be matched up with an individual member, is simply ludicrous.

Patrons do not register, do not sign their names on lists, nothing.

They do now, thanks to the barcode on the new TR's.

And in the temple, groups are known only by the number of people attending, not by names. For instance, they know that X number of young people with X number of adults are coming in for a baptism assignment. But they don't even know how many actually show up. People do not sign up to do endowments at all. And when the ordinance cards come in for recording, we do not know which group even did how many ordinances. All the temple records is total number done.

But the computers know, even if temple recorders do not. And you can bet that information from the computers is sent to leaders without temple recorders ever knowing.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_Who Knows
_Emeritus
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:09 pm

Post by _Who Knows »

charity wrote:That is a false accusation.


What's false about it? You claimed your bishop read something directly from the CHI. It turns out, that there's no such thing in the CHI.

Feel free to clarify.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Post by _Dr. Shades »

Do you think that Mike Norton is the entire reason they went to a barcode system?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_Who Knows
_Emeritus
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:09 pm

Post by _Who Knows »

Dr. Shades wrote:Do you think that Mike Norton is the entire reason they went to a barcode system?


I don't really know who that is. I'm guessing it's some guy who tried to get into temples?

I just think the reason is that they're just catching up to the rest of the world - technology wise. The old system was outdated. Additionally, the church is so 'stats focused', this allows them to gather and analyze even more stats.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Post by _Dr. Shades »

Who Knows wrote:I don't really know who that is. I'm guessing it's some guy who tried to get into temples?


It's the guy who not only tried, but succeeded multiple times. He's the one who first described the new mode of doing initiatory work.

He is registered here as "Nortinski." His website is http://www.josephlied.com.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_Wintersfootsteps
_Emeritus
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:07 pm

Post by _Wintersfootsteps »

charity wrote:
Wintersfootsteps wrote:
charity wrote:Who Knows is adding to this as he goes along. In the first post was nothing about "I want to see everyon'e's name on the list."

Do you non-temple attenders know there is no mechanism for taking down names of people who go to the temple? In those temples which use bar coded recommends, they are specifically prohibited from collecting that information either by name of the person or ward or stake they attend. They do know how many people attend on each day. But as raw numbers, males and females. That is it.

Patrons do not register, do not sign their names on lists, nothing. When wards and stakes are given assignments such as baptisms, initiatory or sealings, bishops can know who participated from their wards, because these people sign up to go. And in the temple, groups are known only by the number of people attending, not by names. For instance, they know that X number of young people with X number of adults are coming in for a baptism assignment. But they don't even know how many actually show up. People do not sign up to do endowments at all. And when the ordinance cards come in for recording, we do not know which group even did how many ordinances. All the temple records is total number done. .


Or that is what they tell you... just saying. They wouldn't want it public knowledge that they are getting information from these bar coded temple recommends, but that is exactly the purpose of the bar codes. It was fairly obvious to everyone when the bar coded temple recommends were issued that that was the case... at least with the people I knew.

It is possible that they are *gasp* not giving you the whole story... it is the Mormon Church after all...


No. The bar codes have to do with security. And of course, we expect the conspiracists to come crawling out. How long before we start to hear about the recall of the Danites. We who know are about to die laughing.


Okay, again... the bar codes do help with security, BUT there is personal information along with that security. They will easily be able to tell who entered what temple on any given day. The bar codes have that personal information... if they didn't have the personal information, they would be useless for security, would they not?

Again, the church is giving you half the story...
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Buddha

http://windysydney.blogspot.com/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/windysydney/
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Again, the church is giving you half the story...


To be fair, I don't think the church has stated anything along the lines of what Charity claims.

I think it is her own, "interpretation,"

;-)

~dancer~

by the way Winterfootsteps,

Welcome to the board... I like your blog! :-)
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_Wintersfootsteps
_Emeritus
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:07 pm

Post by _Wintersfootsteps »

truth dancer wrote:
Again, the church is giving you half the story...


To be fair, I don't think the church has stated anything along the lines of what Charity claims.

I think it is her own, "interpretation,"

;-)

~dancer~

by the way Winterfootsteps,

Welcome to the board... I like your blog! :-)


Thank you :)
Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. -Buddha

http://windysydney.blogspot.com/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/windysydney/
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

Who Knows wrote:
charity wrote:That is a false accusation.


What's false about it? You claimed your bishop read something directly from the CHI. It turns out, that there's no such thing in the CHI.

Feel free to clarify.


I don't know what you are talking about. What do you think I said? A quote would be nice from a post, to document your vague accusation.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

truth dancer wrote:
Again, the church is giving you half the story...


To be fair, I don't think the church has stated anything along the lines of what Charity claims.

I think it is her own, "interpretation,"

;-)

~dancer~

I really would like to see the accusation spelled out. What did I claim the Church stated? Please incluide quotes in posts with your vague statements. I asked this of Who Knows also. It is onlyh common courtesy.
Post Reply