Problems in FARMS/FAIR: A Cassius CFP

[_Dr. Shades]

[MODERATOR NOTE: Thread temporarily "stickied" to give others a greater chance to see it and thus contribute the requested information.]

[_static]

I think there is an equally powerful "other side" to the topic of this thread (i.e. Problems with Mormon critics).

Will you sticky it if I start it?

I'm guessing no.

[_Kishkumen]

I think there is an equally powerful "other side" to the topic of this thread (i.e. Problems with Mormon critics).

Will you sticky it if I start it?

I'm guessing no.

How long do you plan on living?

"Critics" is a pretty broad category for you guys.

[_static]

How long do you plan on living?

"Critics" is a pretty broad category for you guys.

It would need to be clarified in the OP of the thread, of course. I'd want to focus on the really bad ones - the Ed Decker-types.

[_Kishkumen]

It would need to be clarified in the OP of the thread, of course. I'd want to focus on the really bad ones - the Ed Decker-types.

You're really trying to tell me that you are Stanley T. and not Simon Belmont. Really?

You sound so much like Simon.

In any case, I have no problem with that kind of thread.

What I can't stand is the Quinn/Dehlin/Brooks/Compton/etc. as anti-Mormon crap.

[_static]

You're really trying to tell me that you are Stanley T. and not Simon Belmont. Really?

I'll have to see if I can find some of his threads. Sounds like an interesting fellow.

But yes, unfortunately, I am not this legendary figure. You can call me Stan or static, I don't care.

In any case, I have no problem with that kind of thread.

Great.

But would it get the "sticky" treatment? The reason I guess that it wouldn't is because Shades seems to be heavily biased toward criticisms of Mormonism or apologetics.

What I can't stand is the Quinn/Dehlin/Brooks/Compton/etc. as anti-Mormon crap.

It is a bit harsh. Brooks is on Mormon Scholars Testify, after all. Quinn, from what I understand (he predates me by a long while), is a very nice guy and wishes no harm upon the church. Compton I am unfamiliar with.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I think there is an equally powerful "other side" to the topic of this thread (i.e. Problems with Mormon critics).

Will you sticky it if I start it?

I'm guessing no.

This sort of thing already exists. It's called FARMS, FAIR, SHIELDS, the FARMS Review, the FAIR Wiki, etc. Just post a link and be done with it. No one pretends that there's not tons of apologetic responses to criticisms of the LDS Church. On the other hand, people like Calmoriah (who is usually pretty even-handed and intelligent) and Allen Wyatt claim that Church critics never cite specific examples of apologists being nasty. This thread is meant to help rectify the situation.

[_Kishkumen]

But would it get the "sticky" treatment? The reason I guess that it wouldn't is because Shades seems to be heavily biased toward criticisms of Mormonism or apologetics.

Shades is the guy in charge. You should take it up with him. I can tell you that I have no problem with it.

[_Dr. Shades]

In any case, I have no problem with that kind of thread.

Great.

But would it get the "sticky" treatment? The reason I guess that it wouldn't is because Shades seems to be heavily biased toward criticisms of Mormonism or apologetics.

If a representative of a conglomeration of critics was to feign innocence of any and all mean-spiritedness by critics and put out a challenge for anyone to prove him or her wrong, then yes, I'd sticky it for his or her sake.

[_Equality]

Compton I am unfamiliar with.

Looks like you've got some very basic reading to attend to before coming in here with guns a blazin,' feller.