Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_Philo Sofee]

Midgley is just being silly. Do I FIRST have to know who I am playing chess against online before I can be their friend and have a good game? Do I FIRST have to know how good they are, how many years they have played, how many tournaments they have won, how many teeth they have, if they own a gold and silver chess set BEFORE enjoying a game of chess?! Does it even matter if they are a male or female, gay or straight, black or white, American or Norwegian BEFORE I enjoy a good friendly game of chess with a person I can automatically be a friend sharing some great experiences together EVEN AS STRANGERS?

Come on Midgley, get a frickin clue you blockhead.

[_Dr Moore]

We all have blind spots. As I am reminded, sometimes gently and sometimes not so much, by my better half. I would rescue myself and Dr. Midgley from too much ridicule for making an effort to see better and improve as a result. Progress is better than no progress.

[_Lemmie]

Do I FIRST have to know....how many teeth they have... BEFORE enjoying a game of chess?!

exactly, philo, exactly.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

The Midge continues to announce that he won't respond to specific people:

Louis Midgley -> Fred Kratz 16 hours ago

I have made a decision not to respond to those who come to Dan's blog merely to pick a fight or, from the perspective of their world, thrash the faith of Latter-day Saints. I think that they need to be answered once or twice or even perhaps ten times. Sorry, FK, I will no longer respond. I should explain that I have made a list of those to whom I will no longer respond. This list begins with gemli, and includes Fred Kratz. I see no point in posting replies when it turns out nothing is ever accomplished. And I strongly urge other to ignore those who tend to annoy them.

Boy, that really goes against Mr. Peterson's bold proclamation he believes in free speech and the free exchange of ideas (despite banning and threatening to ban various posters that annoy him).

- Doc

[_Dr Moore]

It is one interpretation, Doc. But also possible you're misreading, if in fact Dr. Midgley isn't discouraging free speech, but encouraging respectful disagreement when it becomes evident agreement is impossible.

Which would be a healthy signal, no?

You and I may never agree on whether God exists literally or only in the minds of certain deluded people. This question can be argued ad infinitum around the logical leaps we allow for in valuing non-repeatable, non-testable personal experiences and testimony. But the conclusion remains that we can no sooner prove God's existence as we can prove his/her/its non-existence.

If one sets a goal to avoid slipping into personal attacks or derogatory insults, then is it not better on matters requiring a leap of faith, once all of the logical cards are played, to instead shake hands, "agree to disagree" and walk away?

Color me optimistic, but I think Louis is attempting to signal other smarmy sarcasm slingers at SeN to follow suit.

[_Lemmie]

The Midge continues to announce that he won't respond to specific people:

Louis Midgley -> Fred Kratz 16 hours ago

I have made a decision not to respond to those who come to Dan's blog merely to pick a fight or, from the perspective of their world, thrash the faith of Latter-day Saints. I think that they need to be answered once or twice or even perhaps ten times. Sorry, FK, I will no longer respond. I should explain that I have made a list of those to whom I will no longer respond. This list begins with gemli, and includes Fred Kratz. I see no point in posting replies when it turns out nothing is ever accomplished. And I strongly urge other to ignore those who tend to annoy them.

Boy, that really goes against Mr. Peterson's bold proclamation he believes in free speech and the free exchange of ideas (despite banning and threatening to ban various posters that annoy him).

- Doc

And now Shades is on that list! Success! The more people on that list, the fewer the midge can attack. That’s definitely a plus.

[_Lemmie]

In which Midgley can’t resist fishing for in real life details, opining it makes for a more civil conversation ( )

Link for conversation:

is Midgley DanielPeterson
12 hours ago

I wish jcwo would introduce himself and explain a bit about why he has chosen to post on sic et non, and how he has come to hold the opinions he sets out.

Recently I have explained why I believe that the more we know about each other the more likely we are to communicate more with civility and hence have more productive exchanges. This is not to say that we cannot have fruitful exchanges with those with who we have strong disagreements.

But this is not at all likely when the exchange becomes a kind of theater in which the point is to score points in front of a real or imaginary audience.

jcwo Louis Midgley
11 hours ago

And I feel that our conversations would be much more fruitful if the participants would worry more about the ideas being discussed than the person behind the ideas.

It's much more likely that a person will be completely honest about their thoughts and opinions if they aren't worried about real world repercussions.

−
Avatar
Louis Midgley jcwo
5 hours ago edited

jcwo: I was not asking for your name, or your bank transmittal and social security number. You will notice that I post under my real name, and I do not hide the fact that I am a Latter-day Saint and so forth, and I openly publish my opinions, and I am completely honest about my opinions, since I strive to back them with evidence and reasoning. And I have never been "worried about real world repercussions" for doing so.

And the owner of this blog is currently a professor at Brigham Young University. It is remarkably easy to discover what he teaches and something about his qualification for teaching.

And I retired from teaching 23 years ago. That is very easy for anyone to discover. And am actually delighted to have people read the things that I have published. I seek "real world repercussions" for doing this. And so does Professor Peterson.

Please keep in mind that this is a blog owned by a Latter-day Saint, and it is for Latter-day Saints, and for those genuinely interested in their faith, and not all that interested in what someone who knows little or nothing about the faith of Latter-day Saints but is ready and willing to opine up a storm.

−
Avatar
jcwo Louis Midgley
an hour ago

Is your family LDS? What would happen to you personally, if you came to the conclusion that some or all of the religious claims of the LDS church weren't true?

No real world repercussions, yeah right. How is a member of the LDS church viewed by fellow members when they express doubts about the religion?

Might I point you to some apologetic writings on the subject that might clarify what the real world repercussions are?

If Professor Peterson started questioning the teachings of the church, would his employment be in jeopardy?

I'd like to hear a little bit of your "evidence and reasoning" to explain the consistency or rather inconsistency regarding Joseph Smith's teachings regarding the nature of God and why/how they evolved from the traditional christian trinity understanding to what is taught now?

It’s fascinating to me that midgley can say this with a straight face, after posting literally dozens of nasty, biting, rudely-fictionalized comments based on the few in real life details gemli gave. Midgley twisted every detail gemli gave into ugly slurs, frequently adding a poop, fart, outhouse stench, or spit and swallow reference to ante up the filth.

(Note that all of his attacks on gemli’s in real life can still be found in SeN comment sections. No effort has been made to remove these attacks based on in real life details.)

People remain anonymous in encounters with mopologists such as midgley, BECAUSE of the lack of character of mopologists such as midgley. For him to now argue he would be more civil if people would tell him who they were is the height of hypocrisy. Luckily, his reputation precedes him, and people are forewarned of his propensity to behave like the ass whose activity he loves to describe. Literally.

[_Lemmie]

Louis Midgley
18 hours ago

...Recently I have explained why I believe that the more we know about each other the more likely we are to communicate more with civility and hence have more productive exchanges.

So, the more in real life information Midgley has, the more civil he will be?

Let’s see...

Louis Midgley jcwo 13 minutes ago

I have now spent 45 minutes reviewing jcwo's postings on sic et non. These are minutes I could have used in more productive ways. Five years ago jcwo had a burst of comments. I cannot tell if they were on Dan's blog. The reason is that I did not recognize any of the names of those to whom he was opining.

With a lapse of several years, jcwo was back posting on Dan's blog. He was clearly venting his hostility to what has to be his former faith. Now he has explained that he did this to avoid "real world repercussions."

This seems to be his way of wanting not to have his clients, employer, Bishop or Stake President, or husband or wife, or family members know his real opinions, since doing so would change things. To do this is clearly to lack both courage and probity, especially given that he blasts away at his former faith under a false name. It seems obvious that one who comes to no longer have faith in God, and who is paid with tithing funds ought to immediately resign and find different employment. Or they simply lack even a semblance of courage and probity.

Finally, I have yet to see any evidence that jcwo has come up with that there are the faults that he attributes--John Dehlin style, yet--to the faith of Latter-day Saints.

I am now adding jcwo to my list of those to whom I do not intend to respond again. And I urge others to do exactly the same thing. And I strongly urge jcwo to take his game somewhere else. That would be the honest thing to do, would it not?

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/danp ... 4636475822

This part really disturbs, however:

midgley >> jcwo:

It seems obvious that one who comes to no longer have faith in God, and who is paid with tithing funds ought to immediately resign and find different employment...

In no way did jcwo’s previous comments suggest he worked for the LDS church, so is Midgley saying that he has learned that jcwo works for the LDS church? Or is he just speculating with possible slurs? Or has he accessed private Patheos data in some way, and is using that information to make oblique threats? Truly, truly disturbing.

[_Gadianton]

So, the more in real life information Midgley has, the more civil he will be?

How well did that work out for Grant Palmer?

jcwo, do be careful about what tell Mr. Midgley.

[_Dr Moore]

Louis argues that a church employee who loses faith has a moral obligation to resign and “repent on their own dime.” Not to do so is dishonest and cowardly.

In a business setting, an employee who discovers fraud is obligated to report the fraud — whether authorities, auditors, legal counsel — but not necessarily to resign from employment. Workers have obligations as providers too.

For the church as a business, outright fraud such as financial theft, government bribery, or tax evasion, for instance, carry a similar duty to report, but not necessarily to resign.

What is it m, then, about the church as a religious institution, that seems to justify expecting the inverse — to resign, but also to “leave the church alone” — from those who lose faith in the underlying teachings or become otherwise disaffected?