A Meltdown of Epic Proportions

[_just me]

Damn. This sure spiraled out of control.

I believe it is called a Meltdown of Epic Proportions.

[_RockSlider]

Damn. This sure spiraled out of control.

I believe it is called a Meltdown of Epic Proportions.

geeze, now look who shows up ...

let me guess, your trevor

[_Kishkumen]

Geeze, now look who shows up ...

let me guess, your trevor

Who isn't these days? Except Daniel Peterson, of course.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Thank you, Liz: I enjoy it when people save me some work. Frankly, I would have preferred that The Cafeteria remain private, but, obviously, it's your baby, and yours to run as you please.

Regardless, attention must be called to this gem:

BUT, P

My actual name is "Peterson." It's not a nickname, and not a pseudonym. I don't appreciate the disrespectful abbreviation.

BUT, P should not expect free reign to be unchallenged.

I expected disagreement. That's fine.

What has disappointed and disillusioned me about this board, for which I once had high hopes, is the personal hostility and personal criticism, the increasingly adversarial tone. (Timpanogos really led out on this front, and has energetically persisted in it and promoted it, but, unfortunately, he hasn't been alone.)

Incidentally, the word is rein. As with a horse. A rider gives a horse "free rein."

Best wishes to all.

I noticed, too, that Dr. P. is taking swipes at John Dehlin, saying that one shouldn't "place too much stock" in the fact that Dehlin hasn't been excommunicated or formally disciplined "yet". Quite nasty, if you ask me.

[_moksha]

I will rely on a higher power for justice to be done.

Let us pray that the Wilkinson Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance Satellite (WEMSS) will relay the pertinent details to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. If they decline, we can notify Nehor to have his Danites on standby alert.

.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

To be truthful, I can't recall the poster's moniker immediately (it's been 8 years), but if it was mentioned, I'd remember it immediately. It's right there in the back of my mind, but I'd need some prompting. I think it was "Bob" something. The moniker wasn't crucial to me, but what was said. I didn't "hunt down" this poster, though I later saw him posting somewhere else. By then I just avoided "Exmo boards", and started posting on FAIR.

Sooooooo... Basically you make an unsubstantiated claim that someone on the Internet called your daughter a crack whore. Ok.

Well, back in 2006 I recall you called a poster by the name of... Starts with an E or something... A shrill, hyperventilating, drag queen with crappy tattoos. Pretty harsh stuff for a faithful Mormon, friend.

- Dr. Cam

[_why me]

I think that scratch must be very happey with this thread. Why enable him with all this bombast? My gosh...some people need to get a life.

[Tator]

Interactions between believer and exbeliever are hopeless and doomed, and will forever remain so absent alteration of the nature of the LDS church.

Here's what I posted on liz's board. I admit I wanted to try liz's board to see if a willingness to ban or not allow historically problematic posters would make a difference. I also admit that I first joined out of sheer frustration with the former deputy dan situation (the poster who held the board hostage due to the image issue). I have never fully agreed with Shade's libertarian ideals. I didn't join liz's board in order to leave this one behind. I have been extraordinarily occupied with real-life demands and have little time to read/post anywhere.

I admit I haven't read this entire thread. Frankly, I don't see the need to. So here's what I posted on liz's board:

I think I've said it before, and this recent brouhaha (and I admit I haven't read all the posts on the topic, I just didn't have the time and figured reading twenty more of the same wouldn't change my opinion) reaffirmed my opinion:

Interactions between believer and exbeliever are hopeless and doomed, and will forever remain so absent alteration of the nature of the LDS church.


I don't care anymore. I care very little about the LDS church, although I still remain more interested in it than in any other religion, and will probably always be somewhat interested in certain topics. And having LDS family means the LDS church will always be part of my life. But I completely abandon my former ideas of being able to have civil and meaningful interactions between believer and exbeliever. I now more fully understand why posters on both sides devolve into posting snarky one-liners and little else.

Liz's board was one more try for me. I'm not leaving or going anywhere, and maybe this is just pointless venting like so much else on these boards. But I do give up. It ain't happening. There may be a few decent and meaningful conversations that pop up now and then, but they can pop up on any board. There is no board vision that's going to fix this problem. It's the nature of the beast itself. The various boards, that always devolve into what we've seen these past few days, are just different warts of the same beast.

And the beast is this: as long as the LDS church continues to teach that it is the ONE TRUE CHURCH and that any sincere person can find that out with CERTAINTY from GOD HIIMSELF, then people who no longer believe in that truth will be viewed with suspicion and antagonism. And those negative biases will be duplicated on the side of the exbeliever.

We all know that isn't going to change. So it is what it is. Either we want to discuss these issues enough to ignore the inevitable ugliness, or it's not worth it. No board is going to be able to change or fix the nature of the beast.

Maybe this will seem as unduly pessimistic, but this opinion is the result of over a decade of trying on various boards.

I. Give. Up. And don't care much, anyway.

[_Yoda]

Frankly, I would have preferred that The Cafeteria remain private, but, obviously, it's your baby, and yours to run as you please.

I'm curious, Scratch. Why would you have preferred I keep it private?

[_Some Schmo]

Who isn't these days? Except Daniel Peterson, of course.

I'm a trevor, he's a trevor, she's a trevor, we're a trevor, wouldn't you like to be a trevor too?