The Nehor has left the building...

[_RockSlider]

Sock,
I was shocked at DrCam4's personal attacks on Liz's beliefs and his becoming her judge and jury. And now here you are taking up that same approach, attacking her for where ever she may personally stand between NOM and TBM. Exactly how and why is that an issue?

I thought that was the purpose of this board, to allow for discussion between diverse personalities and beliefs.

Why is Liz condemned for standing up for the likes of Ttribe? This board's highlighted critics cannot handle a reasonable TBM like Ttribe, only being able to handle the likes of Simon. Such a wonderful board! Just keep chasing them off based on personal attacks on those things that are most sensitive to the individual. When you find those buttons, make sure and keep on pushing them.

[_sock puppet]

Exactly how and why is that an issue?

It boils down to one word, RockSlider, honesty. She's honesty-challenged, plain and simple.

Why is Liz condemned for standing up for the likes of Ttribe? This board's highlighted critics cannot handle a reasonable TBM like Ttribe, ... .

Take a look at ttribe's interactions on this board with Dr Scratch and all of his postings last October. Reasonable TBM? If whining incessantly is what makes someone reasonable in your book, count me out.

Why is liz standing up for the likes of ttribe? It makes reason stare, doesn't it?

[_Buffalo]

What does it take to be considered a "firebrand" of a critic?

1. Point out factual errors and inconsistencies within Mormonism it's history and doctrine.
2. Point out factual errors and inconsistencies within apologetic works.
3. Point out the scholarly sloppiness of apologists.
4. Point out when apologists (and wanna be's) duck, dive, fudge, divert and generally avoid talking about/answering questions about, 1, 2 and 3.

Any one will do, but all four and you're definitely going to hell.

If you wish to avoid these four horsemen of the apologetic apocalypse then it sounds like Liz's board is a safe haven...

I think numbers 2-4 are actually worse sins in the eyes of apologists than number one. You'd think number one would be most important, but they seem to get most apoplectic about 2, 3, and 4.

[_Morley]

Whether intentional or not, Liz's board appears to have been created as a refuge for Daniel. Those ‘invited’ seem to be those who have not clashed with (or critiqued) DCP in recent history. I have no problem with this, but do find it interesting. Good luck to you, Liz.

[Guest]

It boils down to one word, RockSlider, honesty. She's honesty-challenged, plain and simple.

This is not a trait/label I would ever have given to Liz. I see nothing in her long posting history that would support this judgment. But of course let’s make sure that every thread on this board finally ends up with everyone calling each other liars. Hard to see how one would tire of this board isn't it.

Take a look at ttribe's interactions on this board with Dr Scratch and all of his postings last October. Reasonable TBM? If whining incessantly is what makes someone reasonable in your book, count me out.

I was present and active when scratch, out of the blue, started in on ttribe. I defended ttribe at those beginnings as scratch’s attack was unprovoked and unreasonable. This was long before everyone came around the whiner/board nanny crap and scratch basically blackmailing him off the site.

I’ll stand behind ttribe in a heartbeat. He is a good man in my book.

Now as far as you, I started to “count you out” from the minute you moved this to a level of nothing but attacks on a very personal nature. Is your goal to continue to cutting her to the core, driving her from being a moderator, keeping it up until her participation on this board ends?

Much like ttribe ended up labeled as being the “whiner”of MDB, I assume you will be satisfied if this thread now proves that Liz is the honesty-challenged poster child of MDB?

Sock, you are wrong in this personal attack and false labeling of a good woman

[_Tarski]

While I see a few apostates above Darth J's name, the closest to a critic might be Blixa, The Dude and Ray Agostini--who certainly do not bear anywhere near the critic ardor that Daniel Peterson, the nehor, and ttribe do defender ardor. Firebrands of TBM, but none of critics? Very moderate (not).

OK, Sock, I might have to take issue a little bit here:

1) The Dude is no more of a critic and no less of a critic than I am. He doesn't seem all that worked up about things and doesn't even post that much anymore.

2) Ray A is a smart and likable guy but I think you will find that he oscillates -he becomes more or less sympathetic to Mormonism over extended periods of time (he admits as much). Even more dramatic are his changes in attitude toward DCP. Right now he seems to be very sympathetic to DCP so I am surprised you listed him.

3) The existence of Liz's board is no big deal. Almost nothing is happening there for one thing. At any given random time there are usually no users browsing the board. Even if it this were not the case I am not sure why one should care.

Personally, I think it is disappointing how these various message boards become about personalities and cliques rather than about Mormonism (especially considered as a set of beliefs about which one can be skeptical).

It seems that each board eventually develops an "in-crowd", or maybe several, with corresponding group leaders and a corresponding orthodoxy about what it means to be one of the "real" critics. RfM is a perfect example.
I find this trend disappointing and ultimately boring.

For me, the best kind of posts are ones that are compelling without being gratuitously aggressive and alienating. I like to imagine that someone's mind might actually be changed. That's where it gets interesting. But that is just me. Of course I enjoy humorous posts and socializing too. In fact my own posts these days are much lighter since I have basically made all my "deep" points long ago and multiple times.

Others might just like to vent and this is fine but frankly I can only take a certain amount of tales of how stupid Mormons are or jokes about skid marks in garments and so on.

Still others might decide to focus on particular people and personal grudges but I hate to see this kind of thing dominate. (I also hate reality TV and that's kinda what it can end up being like).

I can only hope that people will stop caring so much about this kind of thing (in particular about Liz's board)

[_Chap]

Others might just like to vent and this is fine but frankly I can only take a certain amount of tales of how stupid Mormons are or jokes about skid marks in garments and so on.

I don't recall that kind of stuff here in Terrestrial at all frequently. Are you sure you are not getting mixed up with Recovery from Mormonism?

[_Tarski]

Others might just like to vent and this is fine but frankly I can only take a certain amount of tales of how stupid Mormons are or jokes about skid marks in garments and so on.

I don't recall that kind of stuff here in Terrestrial at all frequently. Are you sure you are not getting mixed up with Recovery from Mormonism?

Which is why I am still posting here and not at RFM. In general I was talking about all the boards at once and about trends, and about what could happen it we are not careful. A surplus of vulgar anti-Mormon jokes and jibes is not the only way things can go bad--the war of personalities thing is more of a real concern here.

[_MsJack]

Those ‘invited’ seem to be those who have not clashed with (or critiqued) DCP in recent history.

Not true.

[_sock puppet]

I can only hope that people will stop caring so much about this kind of thing (in particular about Liz's board)

I only care about thecafeteria to the extent that it shows what it does about liz. I have for many years been a moderator on an online board (not of a religious topic), where we have more than 10,000 registered users and approximately two dozen mods. We've had several be defrocked by that board's admin. Usually it is because they are passively aggressive, favoring a single school of thought. With time it becomes more and more apparent until it hits critical mass.

liz exhibits a passive aggressive style, to dispel tough, substantive questioning of TBMs. It is very un-mod of her, and she's the only one here at MDB that is afflicted with this problem. The OP in this thread showed more of liz than the persona (facade) she has sought to cultivate here. That's why the challenges to her in the thread are driving her nuts.

She continues with this distinction without a difference about 'missing' The Nehor's 'wit, and perspective'. The topics are the same on the two boards. The Nehor is over there. He's made posts. So what aspect of his 'wit, and perspective' is she missing? His pedantic, dismissive one-liners aimed at critics who take him on--such critics are ostensibly the very thing she has wanted to avoid. So it is disingenuous for her to have stated that, and to try to make a difference where none exists. liz uses a passive aggressive style in masking matters of this nature. This thread uncovers that. That's why she is so adamantly protesting there's a distinction in The Nehor's "wit, and perspective", when there's no reason for any difference than the very confines she has set for thecafeteria that do not exist here.

In short, this thread dropped the facade and left the true liz standing naked in full view. And she's not the person she's pretended to be.