More this, less that - an open letter to NAMIRS

[Guest]

I'm sure from your perspective you are right. But sadly, the truth is these types of complaints won't be taken seriously by many and thus change will not take place partly because this place is full of so much hostility. I realize there are some good insights and thoughts here. They are just drowned quite often by the vitriol. The two articles you complain about come off as rather gentlemanly and thoughtful compared to the majority of what goes on here (and as I said I do not find the two articles all that helpful in the sum of things). COnsidering that, I can imagine why the complaints aren't taken seriously.

I don't think the terms "gentlemanly" and "thoughtful" should ever be used when discussing an article that uses a man's sexuality as a polemical weapon against his work. I recognize that you are speaking in relative terms but still.

Anyway, I understand where you are coming from let's not lose sight of the context here. The context is this thread and this thread alone. This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with anything anyone else has ever written on this board -- good or bad. If you bring baggage with you into every thread I think you will miss out on a lot of really great stuff.

[_stemelbow]

I don't think the terms "gentlemanly" and "thoughtful" should ever be used when discussing and article that uses a man's sexuality as a polemical weapon against his work. I recognize that you are speaking in relative terms but still.

Anyway, I understand where you are coming from let's not lose sight of the context here. The context is this thread and this thread alone. This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with anything anyone else has ever written on this board -- good or bad. If you bring baggage with you into every thread I think you will miss out on a lot of really great stuff.

I appreciate the advice. I'm just trying to be helpful in my own right. These types of complaints won't be taken seriously, and not necessarily because they aren't justified complaints.

[_Kishkumen]

I don't think the terms "gentlemanly" and "thoughtful" should ever be used when discussing an article that uses a man's sexuality as a polemical weapon against his work. I recognize that you are speaking in relative terms but still.

Anyway, I understand where you are coming from let's not lose sight of the context here. The context is this thread and this thread alone. This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with anything anyone else has ever written on this board -- good or bad. If you bring baggage with you into every thread I think you will miss out on a lot of really great stuff.

Well said.

[_aussieguy55]

I appreciated Bushman's review because of its tone. I had a long letter exchange with Walters and he was generous in sharing his comments and material to me in the land down under. An area the Bushman concedes is that of the timing of the family joining the West Palmyra Presbyterian church. Bushman conceded in RSR that circumstantial evidence supports the 1824/23 date rather than 1820.

[_stemelbow]

I don't think the terms "gentlemanly" and "thoughtful" should ever be used when discussing an article that uses a man's sexuality as a polemical weapon against his work. I recognize that you are speaking in relative terms but still.

I do have problems when I see posters here going after LDS folks for any perceived sexuality too. That is my point. I"m not condoning the piece at all. I'm just saying. I recall when I first coming around this joint one of the main complaints about a couple of LDS posters was they were so bad because they were gay and hiding it, or something. It was pretty relentless. Those posters left (good for them). So again, these complaints do help a cause when they are offered here, I would say.