The purpose of message boards

[_Daniel Peterson]

I don't mean to be rude or to presume to read your mind, but perhaps one of the reasons that you're growing so tired of message boards is that you choose to focus on the personal attacks rather than spend the time and energy engaging the more interesting issues. You certainly seem to enjoy dwelling on any instance where a critic has insulted you.

I see that you've recently spent a fair amount of time in the Telestial forum going back and forth with Scratch, while a perfectly good invitation from Tarski (at MAD, no less) to discuss one of your published papers went, for the most part, unreturned. Perhaps if you focussed less on the perceived malevolence of some posters and more on the flaws in critics' arguments, you'd find the boards more fruitful.

I think you'll find plenty of substantive posts from me over on the board formerly known as FAIR.

That being said, it's nonetheless true (as I've said elsewhere) that I don't see message boards as a place where I choose to devote my time or energy to extended substantive treatments of serious issues. If I'm planning to expend such time or energy, I'll do it in print.

You may or may not have noticed that I've very rarely posted in the "Pundits" area on the board formerly known as FAIR. If I were going to dedicate myself to lengthy and substantial discussions anywhere on a message board, that would be the place -- where imbecilic name-calling and irritating mind-reading and absurd slogan-thought are rare to nonexistent, and from which the more pestiferous posters have been excluded. But I don't do it even there.

As for responding to Scratch, I confess that that reveals a personality defect on my part. (I'm guessing that most of my posts here have been replies to him, or associated with replies to him.) I've occasionally been seized by the utopian fantasy that Scratch or, more recently, at least one of his acolytes would be willing to part with some of his more malignant claims about my character and personality (e.g., that I'm an anti-Semite, a religious bigot, a smear-meister, and so forth). You know the old definition of insanity, that someobody keeps doing the same thing over and over and over again, expecting different results.

I'm done with Scratch for now, though. The urge to respond surfaces, and then, in frustration, it passes. It has passed. For now. (And, each time, I hope that I won't be back to make the pointless attempt again.)

[_bcspace]

I agree with you. I can't tell you how many times I have posted a VERY common LDS teaching on MAD only to have them come back and CFR.

One that comes to mind is the mindset that anything that shows the church in a negative light it assumed to be "anti". The general membership is terrified of this kind of material, regardless if it's sold in Deseret Book or not. And this mindset is perpetuated by the local leaders. Of course, DCP will list his impressive resume of callings and wards that he's attended and claim that he has NEVER heard anything close to that. Either he is woefully out of touch with the members, or he is lying.

I've never heard such a thing either. CFR please.

Another was that almost all of the Mormons I know obey the prophet without question. I got a CFR on that once. How do I CFR that???

By admiting it's an anecdote or by providing names and contact information.

[_antishock8]

I agree with you. I can't tell you how many times I have posted a VERY common LDS teaching on MAD only to have them come back and CFR.

One that comes to mind is the mindset that anything that shows the church in a negative light it assumed to be "anti". The general membership is terrified of this kind of material, regardless if it's sold in Deseret Book or not. And this mindset is perpetuated by the local leaders. Of course, DCP will list his impressive resume of callings and wards that he's attended and claim that he has NEVER heard anything close to that. Either he is woefully out of touch with the members, or he is lying.

I've never heard such a thing either. CFR please.

Another was that almost all of the Mormons I know obey the prophet without question. I got a CFR on that once. How do I CFR that???

By admiting it's an anecdote or by providing names and contact information.

Ha.

[_the road to hana]

I'm losing interest in message boards, for that and several other reasons. Now I simply need to overcome the addiction.

As long as you keep coming up with nifty avatars like that one, it will be verrrrryyyyyyy haaaaaaarrrrrrrrddddddddddd.

[_Chap]

I agree with you. I can't tell you how many times I have posted a VERY common LDS teaching on MAD only to have them come back and CFR.

One that comes to mind is the mindset that anything that shows the church in a negative light it assumed to be "anti". The general membership is terrified of this kind of material, regardless if it's sold in Deseret Book or not. And this mindset is perpetuated by the local leaders. Of course, DCP will list his impressive resume of callings and wards that he's attended and claim that he has NEVER heard anything close to that. Either he is woefully out of touch with the members, or he is lying.

I've never heard such a thing either. CFR please.

Another was that almost all of the Mormons I know obey the prophet without question. I got a CFR on that once. How do I CFR that???

By admiting it's an anecdote or by providing names and contact information.

What on earth do you mean by 'admitting it's an anecdote'?

This is not presented as a story that the poster heard from someone else. If they had posted someone else's story, you could say that they posted an anecdote. But if they make a statement on the purported basis of their own experience, you have two choices that makes some sense if you want to take exception:

1. Saying "you are lying". Fair enough.

2. Saying "that may be your experience, but my experience is different". Again, fair enough.

But saying 'CFR' is just plain vapid. Someone has explicitly told you that their basis for a statement is their experience. You have already been given the reference.

The request for 'contact information' from an anonymous poster is just foolish rhetoric.

[_Infymus]

Well, just for the record, I don't believe that all apostates are liars or adulterers, and have never said anything to that effect. Nor have I ever called them obscene names, let alone daydreamed (publicly or even privately) about horrible and humiliating deaths for them.

And yet here I sit thinking about your horrible death with fish net stalkings, three blenders and a rubber duckie - and of course, you calling out your own name.

[_The Dude]

You may or may not have noticed that I've very rarely posted in the "Pundits" area on the board formerly known as FAIR. If I were going to dedicate myself to lengthy and substantial discussions anywhere on a message board, that would be the place -- where imbecilic name-calling and irritating mind-reading and absurd slogan-thought are rare to nonexistent, and from which the more pestiferous posters have been excluded. But I don't do it even there.

Don't fool yourself. You know a Pundit thread is good when the regular board generates a blazing sideshow of name-calling, mind-reading and absurd slogan-thought. Yeah, you can try to ignore the sideshow and only look at the Pundit thread, but for most people, the sideshow is actually the main attraction. It's hard to stay clean and focused when you see how the partisan audience reacts.

[_moksha]

They needed a villain, she explained. She'd seen me about the neighborhood, and I fit perfectly.

I suppose it is alright typecasting the good doctor for a worthy cause.