Jason Bourne wrote:Interesting. My interactions with him lead me to the exact opposite conclusion about the man. And my interactions go beyond this board to personal discussion via email and real life encounters.
I know I'm in the minority, but I've always liked Dan. I guess I've never taken his online persona all that seriously. I don't see him putting out a lot of substance either here or on MADB. What he does is poke fun at the critics. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes not.
I did wholeheartedly disagree with him when he contacted GoodK's father. I thought then (and still do) that what he did simply enflamed an already bad situation.
"To anyone... I didn't think the temple ceremony was copyrighted? Any information on this?"
If the LDS Church has filed copyright on the ceremony, written or video, it is available for all to see at the office of the Registrar or Copyrights. Copyright protection is granted on any original work done pretty much by anyone but is not really enforceable if you have not formally registered. The registration requirements vary from photography, videos, written word and various forms of visual art. Go to the US Copyright office website and you can see what is required. A search should turn up whether the written or video version of the ceremony has been filed for formal copyright protection.
Various depictions or uses of copyrighted material are OK. 'Fair Use' is a defense when one is being harassed for copyright violations but is limited. Commentary on copyrighted material can use some of the material itself. Parody is pretty much a free-for-all.
I doubt the Brethren would file formal copyright on what they currently show/do in the Temple.
The site that doesn't allow any discussion of The Temple sounds quite negative. Will they allow discussion of Temple photos in the book the LDS Church put out some time ago? About the information the LDS Church has put out over the years?
Hermes wrote:The Dude was given many many chances this time, contacted thropugh private message about particular matters, but decided he did not want to live up to the board expectations.
And what precisely are "the board expectations"? They appear to be as follows:
1. Those who are critical of the doctrines of the LDS church, or of any position of that church in regard to historical facts, may not be seen to win an argument against a believing member of that church.
2. Members of the LDS church may if they wish employ any terms of abuse they fancy in referring to critics, and may use sarcasm and irony freely. Critics who reply in kind, however mildly will have their posts deleted and may be threatened with banning.
As a result of this, any critic who wishes to continue posting on the MAD board in a fashion that is not completely neutered has to resort to a continual tone of irony so subtle as to be doubly ironic in its subtlety. In the end this becomes a kind of artform, the practice of which is almost an aesthetic pleasure in itself, and that I suspect is one of the motives that makes people continue to post there, despite all the frustrations to normal communication.
But sooner or later the MADmods are bound to notice the fatal combination: poster X appears to be well-informed, poster X appears to be intelligent, poster X is critical of LDS positions, and worst of all TBM posters do not appear to be gaining any notable victories over poster X. Then you have to go.
You're right about that. Not only does it work against well-informed posters who they want to ban, but it also works in individual posts where the non-mormons are winning an argument against the mopologists. I've seen many such posts where Chronos or other asshat moderator steps in when the battle has turned against the LDS faithful, saying something to the effect "Ok, this thread has played itself out...thread closed..." Has anyone else noticed this?
I gave up on MAD months and months ago. I got tired of creating a sockpuppet every time I was banned for no good reason. I got tired of trying to show reason to those who refuse to see reason.
Once in a great while, if I'm bored, I'll stop by MAD to see what they are discussing. After about 5 minutes, I roll my eyes, have a good laugh, and move on.
"There is no shame in watching porn." - why me, 08/15/11
"The answer is: ...poontang." - darricktevenson, 01/10/11
Daniel Peterson is a "Gap-Toothed Lizard Man" - Daniel Peterson, 12/06/08
selek wrote:You're right about that. Not only does it work against well-informed posters who they want to ban, but it also works in individual posts where the non-mormons are winning an argument against the mopologists. I've seen many such posts where Chronos or other asshat moderator steps in when the battle has turned against the LDS faithful, saying something to the effect "Ok, this thread has played itself out...thread closed..." Has anyone else noticed this?
Jason Bourne wrote:Interesting. My interactions with him lead me to the exact opposite conclusion about the man. And my interactions go beyond this board to personal discussion via email and real life encounters.
I would have to agree. It is my impression that DCP really enjoys the conversation and back and forth, so it would be counterproductive to get people banned. On the same token, if the situation were reversed and I somehow had the power to ban people, I wouldn't ban them for their views, but only for their incivility and the "crap:gold ratio" of their posts.
cinepro wrote:I would have to agree. It is my impression that DCP really enjoys the conversation and back and forth, so it would be counterproductive to get people banned. On the same token, if the situation were reversed and I somehow had the power to ban people, I wouldn't ban them for their views, but only for their incivility and the "crap:gold ratio" of their posts.
Which means that Paawhoran should be the first to go.
