A New Form of MA&D Surveillance?

[_beastie]

It's funny how MAD has turned into a microcosm of everything that's troubling about the larger LDS church, too.

This is what MADdites who insist the church doesn't try to "edit" or "hide" past church history should think about... if MADdites, in their own little world, are, more and more, starting to "edit" what information is allowed to be presented and what is not, isn't it reasonable to assume that the "brethren" are acting out of the same motives and intent, with the same results?

[_Infymus]

Edited to add: Why MDB is in danger of self-destructing.

A highlight from that link:

There's a sort of Gresham's Law of trolls: trolls are willing to use a forum with a lot of thoughtful people in it, but thoughtful people aren't willing to use a forum with a lot of trolls in it. Which means that once trolling takes hold, it tends to become the dominant culture.

So are you calling me a Troll? Are you seriously ass calling me a Troll?

The only Troll that I've seen in the last six months on this board was that idiot jskains. The only one that comes close to being a Troll might be LifeOnAPlate.

I don't see trolling as a danger to MDB.

[_John Larsen]

Ok, does anyone have a picture of Juliann?

Can I have it please?

I don't have an actual picture, but I was told by a reliable source that she bears a strong resemblance to "Pat" from the infamous Saturday Night Live "It's Pat" sketches.

I hope that lack of good looks doesn't discredit one's message, or I am in trouble.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

The only one that comes close to being a Troll might be LifeOnAPlate.

[_Mister Scratch]

The only Troll that I've seen in the last six months on this board was that idiot jskains. The only one that comes close to being a Troll might be LifeOnAPlate.

Actually, with all due respect, I believe that LoaP is far more of a troll that jskains. (In fact, once he cracked under the pressure of the massive buttkicking I dealt him, he "fessed up" that his sole reason for posting on this board was to troll.) Jskains, as neurotic, whacked-out, and insane as he was, seemed genuinely interested in discussion. Granted, he was also interested in getting attention and in doling out silly TBM lectures, but at base, I think there was a genuine desire to engage other people.

LoaP, on the other hand, basically exists to stalk, harass, and mock people who are critical of the LDS Church. He trolls around the Internet looking for any place where he might pop in in order to try and discredit, ridicule, or harass anyone who is a Church critic. For example, you can Google his screenname and discover that he's posted to about a dozen different blogs relating to MMM, or September Dawn, or whatever else. And, of course, as other posters have observed, he exhibits a striking two-facedness. His posts on the aptly named MADboard are very, very different from his posts here. He is far more aggressive and bellicose on MAD---something he would be taken to task for here.

Some have wondered why I bothered with LoaP at all. Well, after some consideration, I think that LoaP is actually very significant because I believe he represents the last remaining sort of person that LDS apologetics---amateur or otherwise---is going to be able to recruit. Think about the other twenty-something LDS posters on the various LDS forums. Most of them are very reasonable, calm, thoughtful and sensitive posters, often with a slight liberal streak. LoaP, on the other hand, is uppity and obsessive---you sort of have to be in order to accumulate 50,000 posts in less than two years. Basically, he resembles a more extreme, less-educated and younger version of Scott Lloyd. Anyways, I think that the future of LDS apologetics is going to depend primarily on these uber-TBM, hyper-obsessive types such as LoaP.

[_Trevor]

Anyways, I think that the future of LDS apologetics is going to depend primarily on these uber-TBM, hyper-obsessive types such as LoaP.

Don't forget the "less educated" part.

[Guest]

*Trolling is not the "sole" purpose I came to this board. In fact, I hadn't thought of "trolling" at all, though I wanted to make some jokes and what not.

[_The Nehor]

I don't know why but I found that insanely funny.

[_Wheat]

I recently received an earth-shattering PM in my inbox:

Hello, Mr. Scratch. . . . I was responding to Juliann's post and was busy typing my message when I went to preview it to make sure my formatting was correct. Instead of getting the preview, I got a message which said I had been banned from responding or reading this particular thread. I just checked and I can still log on and read threads, just not the one I was responding on.

This was the thread about how the LDS should be careful whom they defend, meaning the FLDS. I would think that Juliann was watching me type my message before saving or previewing it and took steps to cut me off when she saw the point I was about to make.

Wow! I find this absolutely staggering. On the one hand, it seems we now have confirmation that the MADmoderating team has the ability to manipulate individual threads, thus helping them to create the impression that critics have "fled the scene." (Recall that Tarski was also "banned" from an individual thread in which he had begun to embarrass DCP.) I have to say, I am appalled that they would stoop to a cheap tactic such as this, though I can hardly say I'm surprised.

Secondly: Can you believe what this "informant" is suggesting? Is it really true that the MADmoderators can read critics' posts as they are being written??? I have to admit, I am skeptical about this bit, but it certainly does raise some significant concerns about the evolution of the aptly named MADboard. First, it came to light that they were spying on people's PMs; now it seems that (perhaps) they are reading posts as they are being written---a kind of messageboard prior restraint, if you will.

Absurd!

Not even instant messaging programs submit the form after each keystroke. It would bring down any server to process so much throughput.

This is just naked paranoia run amok.

[_The Dude]

This is just naked paranoia run amok.

Scratch may well suffer from "never-nude" syndrome, but bringing it up in this thread seems like a blatant attempt to derail. Or a cheap ad hom. Take your pick.