Request to MAD mods for reconsideration

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu May 29, 2008 9:15 pm

I am a MAD mod. I'll see what I can do.

Post by **_beastie** » Thu May 29, 2008 9:17 pm

I am a MAD mod. I'll see what I can do.

Oh, Lord. Now seth will be banned from the entire internets.

Post by **_Sethbag** » Thu May 29, 2008 9:20 pm

The Dude wrote:Heh, I saw that "RequestfromSethbag" avatar, in italics down at the bottom. I thought... "when is his post going to appear?" You took too long composing a petition that would have been too long and complicated anyway.

I should have known. I should have composed what I was going to say first in Notepad or something like that, and only then created the account and immediately pasted it in. And you're right that I should have been more succinct. ;-)

Post by **_Sethbag** » Thu May 29, 2008 9:28 pm

Does anybody else find it hilarious, in a bizarre way, that it is considered offensive and rude, on a religious apologetics board, for a known atheist to say that the Lord does not exist?

What else is an atheist supposed to say? Of course the atheist doesn't believe in the Lord. And how is it rude and offensive, on an LDS apologetics board, for a non-believer to say that the LDS Prophet is actually speaking for himself, and not God? What non-believers do you know who don't think this?

Are there any non-believers in the LDS Church who believe that the LDS Prophet really is speaking for God? Anyone?

Post by **_Scottie** » Thu May 29, 2008 9:31 pm

Sethbag wrote:Does anybody else find it hilarious, in a bizarre way, that it is considered offensive and rude, on a religious apologetics board, for a known atheist to say that the Lord does not exist?

What else is an atheist supposed to say? Of course the atheist doesn't believe in the Lord. And how is it rude and offensive, on an LDS apologetics board, for a non-believer to say that the LDS Prophet is actually speaking for himself, and not God? What non-believers do you know who don't think this?

Are there any non-believers in the LDS Church who believe that the LDS Prophet really is speaking for God? Anyone?

Yes, it is hilarious is a VERY sad kind of way.

My gosh, a stiff breeze would break the skin of the MAD posters. I have never seen thinner skin in my life.

Post by **_Nightingale** » Thu May 29, 2008 10:14 pm

Seth: And how is it rude and offensive, on an LDS apologetics board, for a non-believer to say that the LDS Prophet is actually speaking for himself, and not God?

Could be a question of tone. :)

I've been doing a lot of reading about perspective, mindset, confirmation bias, etc. I am now seeing that "tone" is something that arises in the reader's perception. They often see something that the writer did not intend at all. That is definitely at play in this kind of thing. So it isn't what you said, it's what they heard.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu May 29, 2008 10:23 pm

Well Sethbag, I may think that a woman looks fat in a particular outfit, but I probably wouldn't tell her so.

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Thu May 29, 2008 10:28 pm

asbestosman wrote:Well Sethbag, I may think that a woman looks fat in a particular outfit, but I probably wouldn't tell her so.

This is a silly comparison. When an issue arises where the existence of God makes a difference to one's argument, is one supposed to not make the argument (remember, discussion is supposedly encouraged, even to the point of quarreling) because it might hurt someone's feelings?

Post by **_Infymus** » Thu May 29, 2008 10:36 pm

Dear Mormon God. Please let me come back. Please just give me one more chance.

I will raise my arm to the square and obey.
I will no longer be an intellectual.
I will no longer think critically, challenge doctrine or look outside the circle.
I will put my underwear back on (and my pants).
I will throw out all logic and reasoning.

Seth, dude, with all due respect... Why? You have a place here where you can post your creative ideas, thoughts or just ramblings. Here you don't have to worry about whether or not you are going to offend the Mormons.

I think the worst thing you can do is go crawling back asking to be let back in. Even if they let you back, how long will it be before you again say something they deem offensive?

You'll be much better received, here.

Post by **_asbestosman** » Thu May 29, 2008 10:47 pm

skippy the dead wrote:This is a silly comparison. When an issue arises where the existence of God makes a difference to one's argument, is one supposed to not make the argument (remember, discussion is supposedly encouraged, even to the point of quarreling) because it might hurt someone's feelings?

I think that for many people, Sethbag's bluntness about how he thinks there is no God is seen as rude. I think Sethbag could have said it in a more polite manner. That said, I tend to like bluntness. I just think that many people do not. Maybe the fat thing was a bad example because it's something that allows for no polite way to discuss the subject unless perhaps you are a physician. In such cases there is a professional way to tell a patient that he or she should trim down a bit and then there are rude ways of doing so. Bluntness is (in my opinion unfortunately) often perceived as rude even when it is not intended to be insulting.