Sethbag banned at MAD

[_asbestosman]

When she yells, "off with their head", it is hard for the second string moderators to know exactly what to do.

Perhaps it means that it's time to head off.

[_asbestosman]

Hypothetical question: how much lower would I sink on MDB opinion polls if I went over to MADB and praised them for banning Setbag?

MADB doesn't look kindly on those who question mod decisions, and I suspect that I'm not too far from the chopping block myself what with my temporary banning a little while ago and all. I just kind of wonder if MADB mods would appreciate praise for mod decisions since they do not like complaints about it.

I like Sethbag's posts over here, so maybe I just want him to spend more time with this disfunctional family instead of that one. Or maybe I'm just a coward. Probably the latter (and an anonymous one to boot).

[_Jersey Girl]

I don't believe he warranted a banning at all, personally. Nothing that I saw, anyway.

There's gotta be something seriously screwed down there if LoP voices his criticism towards MAD&d Brethren.

You don't know me.

I agree with this. LoaP is utterly terrified, possibly to the point of apoplexy, that someone will one day discover whatever doubts he might have, or whatever sins he may have committed. When it was suggested, in another thread, that LoaP might not agree with every last little thing that the Prophet says, he went ballistic, spending countless time preparing images replete with clarifying arrows and the like, all in order to prove to everyone just how obedient and compliant he is.

No, he didn't. He created the posts to demonstrate your attribution error. "utterly terrified, possibly to the point of apoplexy"? Bucking for a daytime Emmy are ya?

[_Jersey Girl]

All this Sethbag banning buisness made me remember last year when Sethbag had his "Please don't ban me" post regarding proper use of taglines. I then asked him if I could add those words to my sig-line and did so. Scratch then started a thread about Sethbag's plea saying that it seemed that Sethbag was almost pleading for his life. Remember that episode?

What soap was it on?

[_Sethbag]

All this Sethbag banning buisness made me remember last year when Sethbag had his "Please don't ban me" post regarding proper use of taglines. I then asked him if I could add those words to my sig-line and did so. Scratch then started a thread about Sethbag's plea saying that it seemed that Sethbag was almost pleading for his life. Remember that episode?

Yeah, I remember that. I don't agree with those who say I am groveling or whatever, or kissing ass trying to get reinstated. I pledged not to type the word "Taliban" in any future posts, and I pledged to preface any denial of the existence of a Deity, Lord, or whatever with something to the effect of "I believe..." or "I think that...". That's it.

I have never regarded myself as "protected" over there. I was just glad that I was tolerated, and I tried not to go out of my way to antagonize people. If not going out of my way to antagonize people is kissing ass, then I guess I kissed ass. Whatever.

But some people are antagonized merely by challenging their beliefs, or stating beliefs that are contrary to them. Some people are antagonized by an atheist's assertion that there is no Lord, just people. Some people are antagonized by the fairly obvious corollary to non-belief in the LDS church, ie: that the LDS Prophet is representing himself and other humans, but not a Lord as such.

I can not help the fact that such people are antagonized that way. All I can say is that perhaps they ought not to participate on an apologetics board where discussion between believers and non-believers is going to take place, because I can't name one single non-believer who believes that the LDS Prophet represents anyone but himself and other humans, and I can't name one single atheist who believes that the Lord actually exists outside the imaginations of human beings. That's sort of what it means to be a non-believer in the LDS church, or an atheist.

[Analytics]

You don't bother me, Sethbag and I like having you bring up ideas here and even on MADB, but I'm not the typical MADBite and I don't have any influence there anyhow.

As far as tone is concerned, well, even Skippy appeared somewhat offended when I said that felt critics were mistaken (edit: the initial word I used was "deceived") about the LDS church. I thought the word mistaken was both polite and appropriate--I don't take offense to having critics say they feel I'm mistaken (or deceived) about the church ((It was this post)). My point is that maybe it's not exclusively a TBM thing to be offended when people tell you that you're wrong (or in their opinion you are wrong).

I guess I don't see MADB bannings as worth much of anything. I didn't care all that much when I was temporarily banned. I just wanted to know why. I would have been completely fine with never coming back even though I have enjoyed many times there. But that is a personal thing. Different people value different things.

[_Sethbag]

You don't bother me either, Abman, and I pretty much agree with what you said. Given my very low posting frequency over at MAD in recent months, there won't be much practical difference between being banned, and not being banned. That said, I regret the loss of the ability to use the search facility over there, and I did enjoy participating in the occasional thread over there from time to time. But, honestly, in the last six months to a year there have been strings of many weeks, even months when I didn't post at MAD even once.

[_Scottie]

Sorry, but I just do not get it.

Do you MA&D exmos spend time in church refuting the lessons with logic and facts? No, of course not! They would kick you out.

MA&D is nothing more than online Mormon priesthood and gospel doctrine class. WHY do any of you spend any time there?

Think of it this way. I have received several PM's from struggling members who told me that my alternate viewpoint really helped them to see just how flawed the apologetic arguments are.

I don't do it to try and actually "win" a debate. I do it to show just what ridiculous lengths the arguments have to get to in order for Mormonism to still be true.

I know for myself, when I was first researching Mormonism, it wasn't the critical argument, but the incredibly ridiculous answers to these arguments that made it untrue. I kept thinking, "THIS is the best you can do??? Horses were really TAPIRS??? WTF???"

There are MANY more lurkers on MAD than here. So I kind of feel like I'm doing a duty to provide a counterpoint to the apologists there.

And, Sethbag was a great loss to the cause. His posts are a thousand times more thought provoking than mine are.

I think that's why he's gone and I'm still there. I'm not much of a threat, where Sethbag was just making too much sense.

[_Scottie]

Well said, seth.

Not only does it wear on their souls, but it wears on their egos. Some of these folks are very smart people, and it "smarts" to consistently lose these arguments. I believe that deep down, the smartest among them know they're losing. Sure, they may reassure themselves that one day, evidence will appear that will vindicate them and THEN it will all be fabulous, but right now, with what they've got, they're losing. So it wears on their egos, and I think that is part of the problem. So many of them have this huge chip on their shoulders, which is why I think several obsess about degrees. And that huge chip is definitely part of the problem. People who have huge chips on their shoulders tend to be very easily offended and aggressive when offense is perceived.

What makes you think any of the apologists think they have lost ANY argument???

Even when hard data basically proves your point, they can always fall back to "the spirit told me it was true, so none of this matters." In the apologists mind, they have just won the argument and they can't see how you don't see it!

[_Scottie]

The thing that gets me is that you have been posting long enough that we pretty well know your overall tone is respectful and thoughtful.

Even if you have a few bad days, which everyone does now and then, shouldn't the overall tone of the poster weigh in here? I mean, sure, if they thought you were crossing the line, suspend you for a bit. But you are not a bomb thrower. A banning was absolutely uncalled for.