Am I responsible for the "culture" of MormonDiscussions.com?

[_Buffalo]

I still want to know who these blasphemers are. Great jumping Jesus on a pogo stick! Give us a list so we can put them ignore.

[_Rambo]

Anyone ever heard of the website called thedirty.com. Dr. Phil had the creator of this website on his show. Basically this website allows you to post pictures of anyone and then write what ever you want about them. Most of the time they are not very nice things said about this person and the pics that are posted are not ones this person would want up on the web (although some of them might like it).

I had a friend that got posted on that website and it hurt her a lot. She tried to get some lawyers so that it would be taken down but she couldn't do anything about it. It is sad that such a website exists.

What happens in MD is pretty tame compared to this website. Another big difference is Dr. Shades does not allow in real life information unless it is posted by that person already (it least I think this is a rule).

Maybe MDD should be focusing its attack on thedirty.com. If they can't take down thedirty.com then good look taking down MD.

[_Wisdom Seeker]

The Internet seems to promote and bring about all types of creativity, individuality and unique ideas however absurd they may or may not be. I believe the individuals right to have an opinion and in this case either defend or criticize things learned about the LDS church has more to do with the "culture" that exists here than Shades simply providing a forum where people can express these views.

Does the LDS apologist have delusions of grandeur in terms of having a greater responsibility for bringing about a righteous "culture" that exists within the LDS church? Perhaps it is this type of thinking which explains why they place the blame on Shades.

[_Mudcat]

IS DR. SHADES RESPONSIBLE FOR THE "CULTURE" OF MORMONDISCUSSIONS.COM?

One person can not be responsible for a "forum culture". You are responsible for the forum's existence, so in that respect you are responsible for the cultures environment.

Also part and parcel of the forum environment is the laissez faire moderation. From the home page "We pride ourselves on a minimalistic moderation policy, so that your voice is always heard."

You are only responsible to culture based upon your contribution to that culture. In your case, that would be the sum total of the cultures environment plus your forum actions. You certainly aren't solely responsible for the culture, however you are certainly the most impactive person in regards to the culture so I don't think you are without culpability.

Regards,

Mudcat

[_cafe crema]

It is absurd to compare my position to me blaming Thomas Jefferson for the things said by George Carlin or Howard Stern.

What is the difference in principle between

(a) setting up a country with free speech and not being responsible for how every idiot in the country exercises that right thereafter,

and

(b) setting up an internet board with free speech and not being responsible for how every idiot who joins the board exercises that right thereafter?

(Of course, the speech on this board is markedly less free in the most frequented forums than public free speech in the US, but I won't bother you with that.)

Don't forget God who set up/created the whole shebang and just sits back not stopping all the evil idiots.

[_Brad]

No.

I don't think I've ever posted on this board or its predecessors or the board that shall not be named or its predecessors. I just wanted to drop in to say that, in my opinion, this forum fills an important niche in the world of boards involving Mormonism. There are boards for Mormons, boards for non-orthodox Mormons, questioning Mormons, and exmormons. This is a place where anyone can engage in a free wheeling discussion of Mormonism with a minimalist approach to moderation.

It's fascinating for me to watch the interplay of the two forums after the takedown incident. Over at the other board, Nemesis (what an oppressive name for a board moderator) hands down regular pronouncements on what is said here in the most bombastic tone imaginable in a closed thread with no discussion is permitted. Apparently, any moderator can speak through Nemesis, kind of like Big Brother. We're at war with East Asia. We've always been at war with East Asia.

Meanwhile, any discussion of the incident has to occur here. Because no discussion is permitted there. So all those folks who decry this place have to drop in here to criticize --something that is absolutely permitted here, but not at their home. And here, Dr. Shades is willing to ask a question like this and permit all comers to answer and criticize. There, Nemesis never asks if he/she is on the right track and permits no criticism. The contrast between the two forums is pretty stunning.

Sometimes we forget that people are smart. People get that the person who posted lewd and obscene captions on the memegenerator picture is a prick. They don't have to have it hammered at them over and over in melodramatic fashion. They also get that the prick, and not anyone else, is responsible for the prick's actions. Likewise, most people (outside of an authoritarian culture) respect the value of free speech, and get that a person who provides a forum for free speech is not responsible for how it is used/abused.

So, no, you're not responsible Dr. Shades. And, in my opinion, you've done a good thing here. Thanks.

[Guest]

Thanks. You drove this guy away with a sophomoric joke about memes before we had a chance to take his logic to pieces in front of his eyes and make him admit we had done it, which would have been much more satisfying.

Way to go.

Hello Mr. Chap,

While I appreciate your intent, and I do feel duly chastised, I would like to say that if you think for a second you'll get Mr. Bob to admit anything at any point that will give you a measure of satisfaction you're up in the night. It ain't gonna happen.

Ever.

V/R
Dr. Cameron

[_Chap]

It is absurd to compare my position to me blaming Thomas Jefferson for the things said by George Carlin or Howard Stern.

What is the difference in principle between

(a) setting up a country with free speech and not being responsible for how every idiot in the country exercises that right thereafter,

and

(b) setting up an internet board with free speech and not being responsible for how every idiot who joins the board exercises that right thereafter?

(Of course, the speech on this board is markedly less free in the most frequented forums than public free speech in the US, but I won't bother you with that.)

Don't forget God who set up/created the whole shebang and just sits back not stopping all the evil idiots.

Well, yes ... I can't think of an answer to that. There isn't one.

I suppose the ideal answer by Dr Shades to a TBM who tries to blame him for nasty posts is:

"Well, I followed Heavenly Father's example and gave them their free agency"


Why is Nemesis, on the other hand, following a moderation policy more like that advocated by our brother Satan?

[_just me]

Here's a thought:

What if Shades didn't start Mormon Discussions?

The world as we know it would be a bleak and lonely place.

I'd wager it'd be lone and dreary indeed!

[_consiglieri]

If the founding fathers will still alive and such a church can be allowed to annoy the grieving, I would say that they are responsible. Shades who oversees this board has an obligation to watch that personal attacks do not happen on this board.

May I ask, out of idle curiosity, why it is you think criticism of other people's actions (or, as you put it, "personal attacks") are per se objectionable?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri