Departure, Effectively with a Gun to My Head

[_Tiktaalik]

Tik:

... manufactured home community ...

Sorry, but a MHC is NOT a trailer park. I've seen MHCs, and I've seen trailer parks, and I've seen The Great and Spacious Trailer Park™.

In my judgment, they are anything but synonymous.

Meh, you're just trying to save face after your compact Oxford failed you.

[_William Schryver]

Tik:

... you're just trying to save face after your compact Oxford failed you.

It's a Roget's, thank you. Pocket size, naturally.

And you're absolutely correct, of course. Without it, I'd be reduced to a meagre 64 word vocabulary, not counting the mezzanine* ... er ... "the", "and", and "poo poo".
.
.
.
* = vague allusion to The Hudsucker Proxy

[_Droopy]

In any case, this board is probably the single least-frequented LDS-related forum in cyberspace. Granted, it occasionally makes up in sheer psychotic majesty what it lacks in numbers and substance, but the thing was dying on the vine even before this latest episode. I only came back long enough to mock Ray for a while. And now that I've driven him to the precipice of cabbie cuckoo, I was already getting bored with the place.

Indeed, in a very real sense, if one looks closely at a number of the most vociferous critics here, Mormondiscussions.com appears to be, to a substantial degree, a dumping ground for banned posters at the MAD boards, who could not abide by the simple rules of civility and decency demanded in that forum.

This is the shock radio of LDS debate forums and Shades is its Howard Stern. Its not what he does himself, but what he allows here (or, perhaps given both its political leanings and its general tone, the AirAmericaRadio of LDS debater forums).

So this forum now follows ZLMB into backwater irrelevance. I actually think the MAD boards have done a pretty good job separating out those critics who wish to actually debate and discuss opposing points of view in good faith from those who are simply parading personal neurosis in public.

[_Trevor]

It is the most natural thing in the world that a discussion board devoted to Mormon Apologetics should 1) favor those who defend the faith, 2) limit those who do not, and 3) attract a larger, more loyal group of participants than a board where critics have relatively free rein.

Although my respect for Mormon apologists and Mormon scholarship has grown appreciably, MAD is still as much a ritualized activity as the rhetoric of the critics. The chief difference is that it will, in the long run, take far more effort to remain LDS than it will to punt it. Hence the greater participation in MAD. Furthermore, MAD will always be insured a certain amount of critic participation, whereas fewer faithful LDS will brave MDB. It simply is not in their interest to expose themselves to the opinions of those who have abandoned the LDS worldview to the degree that critics have.

[_Phaedrus Ut]

This is a perfect example of the benefits of anonymity online. If someone wants to be a ass about something they can become a real life nuisance. Such threats shouldn't be acceptable. I'm all for the wild west aspect of leaving speech completely open here. Letting people use legal threats to bully actually suppresses that freedom rather than enables it.

Phaedrus

//The Golden Rule is a good idea to follow whether you're a religious person or not.

[_Droopy]

Although my respect for Mormon apologists and Mormon scholarship has grown appreciably, MAD is still as much a ritualized activity as the rhetoric of the critics.

Its a primarily civil and intellectually substantive, in most respects, forum for debate, unlike the vulgar, many times adolescent atmosphere of this board. The differences are stark.

The chief difference is that it will, in the long run, take far more effort to remain LDS than it will to punt it.

Yes, its always more difficult to swim upstream than to take the coward's way out of apostasy and secular fashionability. However, losing a testimony, when one actually has one, takes monumental effort. Addiction can go along way towards it, but even itself is probably not sufficient. One has to really want to be carnal, sensual, and devilish, more than one desires the fruits of the Spirit, to drive it out completely. It takes sustained work. Alas, some such are among us.

Hence the greater participation in MAD.

No, the angry, bitter apostates that make up the bulk of (and always, it seems, in time come to dominate boards such as this) Mormondiscussions.com are really different people, in a fundamental way, than those critics who stay at MAD precisely because it isn't like this place.

Furthermore, MAD will always be insured a certain amount of critic participation, whereas fewer faithful LDS will brave MDB. It simply is not in their interest to expose themselves to the opinions of those who have abandoned the LDS worldview to the degree that critics have.

No. Few faithful LDS will brave this circus because its a mean, ugly, vulgar place that cankers and smothers the Spirit of the Lord, and makes them feel angry, ugly, and mean themselves. In a very, very real way, a substantial portion of the criticism of the Church that goes on here could well be termed intellectual pornography. Its not just the vulgar language, or attitude of pitched battle that persists, but the sheer atmosphere of mendacity that permeates many of the posts and assertions that have appeared here over the last few years.

Stop kidding yourself Trevor, your not kidding me.

[_moksha]

Mormondiscussions.com appears to be, to a substantial degree, a dumping ground for banned posters at the MAD boards, who could not abide by the simple rules of civility and decency demanded in that forum.

I feel very dumped, but I was always civil and decent. Maybe there are other factors at play in MAD's reasoning.

No. Few faithful LDS will brave this circus because its a mean, ugly, vulgar place that cankers and smothers the Spirit of the Lord, and makes them feel angry, ugly, and mean themselves. In a very, very real way, a substantial portion of the criticism of the Church that goes on here could well be termed intellectual pornography.

Sometimes it is hateful as well, but don't we get all those things in real world settings. This place is certainly no cocoon.

.

[_Trevor]

Its a primarily civil and intellectually substantive, in most respects, forum for debate, unlike the vulgar, many times adolescent atmosphere of this board. The differences are stark.

Oh yes, there are stark differences, but that does not mean that there aren't or can't be clear similarities as well. I am sure you get that basic point of logic.

Addiction can go along way towards it, but even itself is probably not sufficient. One has to really want to be carnal, sensual, and devilish, more than one desires the fruits of the Spirit, to drive it out completely. It takes sustained work. Alas, some such are among us.

What a touching confession. I am sorry you have had to struggle with your addictions, Droopy. I am glad that it hasn't kept you from holding onto something you value, even if you only choose to exercise that affection for Mormonism by acting poorly here.

No, the angry, bitter apostates that make up the bulk of (and always, it seems, in time come to dominate boards such as this) Mormondiscussions.com are really different people, in a fundamental way, than those critics who stay at MAD precisely because it isn't like this place.

And what of those who move back and forth? What category have you created for them?

No. Few faithful LDS will brave this circus because its a mean, ugly, vulgar place that cankers and smothers the Spirit of the Lord, and makes them feel angry, ugly, and mean themselves. In a very, very real way, a substantial portion of the criticism of the Church that goes on here could well be termed intellectual pornography. Its not just the vulgar language, or attitude of pitched battle that persists, but the sheer atmosphere of mendacity that permeates many of the posts and assertions that have appeared here over the last few years.

I think I could have come up with the Droopy translation on my own by now, but thanks anyway. So funny how in some ways your rant about this board sounds just as colorful and skewed as many of the angrier critics' remarks about the LDS Church. Mean. Ugly. Vulgar. Cankers. Angry. Deceit. Not all that different, really.

Stop kidding yourself Trevor, your not kidding me.

? Uh. Whatever. Really, don't flatter yourself.