Dear Dr. Shades :-) Board Business

[dastardly stem]

I understand what you are laying down Stem but how much of our time spent here comes down to personal responsibility? If some at MD&D wish to post here but fear being overwhelmed they can take steps to avoid it. For me all of your issues are mostly addressed by our choices. We all choose what we post, who we respond to, what forums we post in, what topics we engage on. Even non-believers can feel overwhelmed here at times when they find themselves disagreeing with the majority. It is up to them to choose how they respond.

I'd also point out that every thing you talk about happening here happens to other parties over at MD&D. It doesn't remove our responsibility to engage in a way that is fulfilling to us.

In the end it comes down to the value proposition for your participation. If you think there is value to be had here you'll have to weigh that against the cost of participating and tailor your approach for it to make sense for you.

I agree for the most part. But I don't think its helpful to suggest they should have nothing to feel overwhelmed about.

[Xenophon]

I agree for the most part. But I don't think its helpful to suggest they should have nothing to feel overwhelmed about.

I agree with that and hope my comments didn't suggest there was no reason they could feel overwhelmed. I guess where I stand is that that to me they are mostly masters of their own destiny here and have some great avenues in which to have productive conversations. I'm also very reluctant for any structual board or rule changes that attempt to make some kind of specific area, just as I would reject anything that attempted to structurally keep them out.

[ceeboo]

We all make choices when/where/how we post on this board but there seems to be an elephant in the room that isn't being considered. The elephant being how other posters can, and do, greatly impact and influence your ability to choose a topic you find interesting and hope others will too. Hypothetically speaking (Wink!) Let's say a believer starts a thread and makes an opening post about God delivering the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. The thread hasn't even reached page 2 and the author has 15 questions addressed to him/her, 4 personal accusations and/or personal attacks made against him/her and 7 mocking posts about things in the Old Testament that have nothing to do with the Israelites, or Egypt, or being freed from slavery - Instead, they are posts about baby sacrifices in the Old Testament or mass murders in the Old Testament or teenagers being mauled by a bear in the Old Testament.

Now, at this point - what choices does the author of the OP really have? He/she had a specific topic that he/she wanted to discuss. Does he/she REALLY have any choices at all? Does he/she need to defend himself? Does he/she leave the thread he started? Does he/she need to talk about mauling bears and baby sacrifices and Abraham and Adam and Numbers and King David and talking snakes and Babylon and Moses and Mana falling from heaven and circumcision and the burning bush and ............................?

Yes, it is true that we all have choices - as a Bible believing Christian, I make them all the time here - I have been accused of not being willing to engage but that's not true at all - I just understand and accept where I am posting and I am very cautious what I post. But, to not consider how these personal choices can be, and are, impacted and influenced by things that are completely outside of our control (choices made by others) is simply not recognizing the reality of this board.

Anyway, just my take.

[MG 2.0]

We all make choices when/where/how we post on this board but there seems to be an elephant in the room that isn't being considered. The elephant being how other posters can, and do, greatly impact and influence your ability to choose a topic you find interesting and hope others will too. Hypothetically speaking (Wink!) Let's say a believer starts a thread and makes an opening post about God delivering the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. The thread hasn't even reached page 2 and the author has 15 questions addressed to him/her, 4 personal accusations and/or personal attacks made against him/her and 7 mocking posts about things in the Old Testament that have nothing to do with the Israelites, or Egypt, or being freed from slavery - Instead, they are posts about baby sacrifices in the Old Testament or mass murders in the Old Testament or teenagers being mauled by a bear in the Old Testament.

Now, at this point - what choices does the author of the opening post really have? He/she had a specific topic that he/she wanted to discuss. Does he/she REALLY have any choices at all? Does he/she need to defend himself? Does he/she leave the thread he started? Does he/she need to talk about mauling bears and baby sacrifices and Abraham and Adam and Numbers and King David and talking snakes and Babylon and Moses and Mana falling from heaven and circumcision and the burning bush and ............................?

Yes, it is true that we all have choices - as a Bible believing Christian, I make them all the time here - I have been accused of not being willing to engage but that's not true at all - I just understand and accept where I am posting and I am very cautious what I post. But, to not consider how these personal choices can be, and are, impacted and influenced by things that are completely outside of our control (choices made by others) is simply not recognizing the reality of this board.

Anyway, just my take.

Thanks for this insight, ceeboo. I was going to add something, but I think you covered this dilemma quite well.

Regards,
MG

[dastardly stem]

We all make choices when/where/how we post on this board but there seems to be an elephant in the room that isn't being considered. The elephant being how other posters can, and do, greatly impact and influence your ability to choose a topic you find interesting and hope others will too. Hypothetically speaking (Wink!) Let's say a believer starts a thread and makes an opening post about God delivering the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. The thread hasn't even reached page 2 and the author has 15 questions addressed to him/her, 4 personal accusations and/or personal attacks made against him/her and 7 mocking posts about things in the Old Testament that have nothing to do with the Israelites, or Egypt, or being freed from slavery - Instead, they are posts about baby sacrifices in the Old Testament or mass murders in the Old Testament or teenagers being mauled by a bear in the Old Testament.

Now, at this point - what choices does the author of the opening post really have? He/she had a specific topic that he/she wanted to discuss. Does he/she REALLY have any choices at all? Does he/she need to defend himself? Does he/she leave the thread he started? Does he/she need to talk about mauling bears and baby sacrifices and Abraham and Adam and Numbers and King David and talking snakes and Babylon and Moses and Mana falling from heaven and circumcision and the burning bush and ............................?

Yes, it is true that we all have choices - as a Bible believing Christian, I make them all the time here - I have been accused of not being willing to engage but that's not true at all - I just understand and accept where I am posting and I am very cautious what I post. But, to not consider how these personal choices can be, and are, impacted and influenced by things that are completely outside of our control (choices made by others) is simply not recognizing the reality of this board.

Anyway, just my take.

This is about right, in my view too. It's really difficult to imagine a conversation about something interesting to you, when many others seem intent on disrupting any chance at the conversation you would like. There can be too much "I don't care what you want to talk about, because I think you're wrong for these other reasons..." going on. I admit it's really hard to avoid doing this to believers. We want them to see the truth too. It'd be nice if we had an unspoken rule that went something like, "Take a deep damn breath, pay attention to what the other is saying, then take another deep damn breath and consider what they are wanting to convey here, before you respond".

But rules are tough. Its also nice to be like, "hey, do what you want. I'll work out in the end." Just kind of ignore disrupters or give them a pat on the head and hopefully they'll come around.

[Xenophon]

Ceebs, appreciate your thoughts. For me I still see plenty of choices for your poster in the listed hypothetical. In no particular order they can:

• Report any personal attacks. Especially in the Celestial forum they are a no go (this also highlights our need for a moderator outside of Shades)
• Place the most egregious posters on ignore
• Quote and respond to only substantive posters, particularly those that have a history of worthwhile discussion (every one of us has posters we prefer to engage with).

I'm still not seeing anything that for me requires the creation of a whole new forum or set of rules to facilitate discussion.

Personally I have done all of the above and more when I've felt overwhelmed in a conversation. I've also not entered a conversation I wanted to in order to try to help an already ongoing conversation continue. Stem's unspoken rule is nice but how can that ever be enforced while still respecting the free speech aspects this board was built on. The only thing we are left with, in my opinion, is trying to be a positive influence in the direction of the board and reporting the blatant rule breaks. Everything else is just noise.

[Res Ipsa]

So, it's not the lack of a place where they can discuss their religion that is heavily moderated (celestial), it's the reception they anticipate in the forums where most of the action is?

I don't think they think of it as separate forums. There's little reason to consider celestial because the activity there is minimal.

On Canpakes point, if they felt "safe" as in no one was going to harass them, 5 of them could get together and decide to come and post in Celestial and they may feel nothing overwhelming about that. But then, it's kind of like, what's the point? no one's there to participate with--the main activity that would be interesting is in the Terrestrial...and that brings a whole host of overwhelming thoughts.

I understand your point about Celestial, but it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm pretty confident that, if 5 faithful LDS folks showed up and started creating threads in Celestial, Celestial would rapidly become where the action is.

And I understand the point about hostility. I've thought about it quite a bit, and I don't think there's a structural solution to that. in my opinion, the culture that developed before the LDS folks moved out was, to me as an outsider, pretty dysfunctional if not toxic. Not pointing fingers -- everybody seemed to give as good as they got, at least in the lower kingdoms.

And that culture still exists here, at least when a new faithful LDS person shows up, not to troll, but to post substance. They are met largely with suspicion and distrust. Someone almost inevitably accuses them of being the sockpuppet of an existing or past poster. And if they happen to say something that resembles some argument that we've all heard before from apologists, half a dozen people will jump down their throat to tell them how stupid they are. (I exaggerate, but only a little and I do it out of love.) It's not exactly a welcoming place for the faithful.

But culture is created by the individual choices of a bunch of people, and I don't see it as within my remit to be culture police. If folks here felt it was important to attract faithful LDS folks for substantive discussions, I'm pretty sure we'd have the skills to change the culture in a way that would create an incentive for faithful LDS folk to come here and engage. I'm not passing judgment on what kind of culture would be "best." But I don't think we should be puzzled over why LDS folk aren't lined up for registration here.

[ceeboo]

Hey Stem

We want them to see the truth too.

This was, by far, my favorite part of your post.

[Res Ipsa]

We all make choices when/where/how we post on this board but there seems to be an elephant in the room that isn't being considered. The elephant being how other posters can, and do, greatly impact and influence your ability to choose a topic you find interesting and hope others will too. Hypothetically speaking (Wink!) Let's say a believer starts a thread and makes an opening post about God delivering the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. The thread hasn't even reached page 2 and the author has 15 questions addressed to him/her, 4 personal accusations and/or personal attacks made against him/her and 7 mocking posts about things in the Old Testament that have nothing to do with the Israelites, or Egypt, or being freed from slavery - Instead, they are posts about baby sacrifices in the Old Testament or mass murders in the Old Testament or teenagers being mauled by a bear in the Old Testament.

Now, at this point - what choices does the author of the opening post really have? He/she had a specific topic that he/she wanted to discuss. Does he/she REALLY have any choices at all? Does he/she need to defend himself? Does he/she leave the thread he started? Does he/she need to talk about mauling bears and baby sacrifices and Abraham and Adam and Numbers and King David and talking snakes and Babylon and Moses and Mana falling from heaven and circumcision and the burning bush and ............................?

Yes, it is true that we all have choices - as a Bible believing Christian, I make them all the time here - I have been accused of not being willing to engage but that's not true at all - I just understand and accept where I am posting and I am very cautious what I post. But, to not consider how these personal choices can be, and are, impacted and influenced by things that are completely outside of our control (choices made by others) is simply not recognizing the reality of this board.

Anyway, just my take.

In Celestial, that shouldn't be a problem. Except the number of questions. That's kind of unavoidable. The personal accusations get moved. The personal attacks get moved. And the irrelevant, mocking posts also get moved. All go to Telestial.

In Terrestial, well, the same thing should happen. There is more latitude in terms of civility and scope of what's considered on topic. But as you describe the posts, all that would be left are the questions.

In Telestial, well.... make a better choice next time.

So, what the author should do, in my opinion, is report the rule violations using the report functions and let a mod sort the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Then respond to the questions, assuming they're on topic. If nobody wants to talk about what you want to talk about, I feel your pain.

[ceeboo]

Hey Xeno

Ceebs, appreciate your thoughts.

I appreciate yours too!

For me I still see plenty of choices for your poster in the listed hypothetical. In no particular order they can:

• Report any personal attacks. Especially in the Celestial forum they are a no go (this also highlights our need for a moderator outside of Shades)
• Place the most egregious posters on ignore
• Quote and respond to only substantive posters, particularly those that have a history of worthwhile discussion (every one of us has posters we prefer to engage with).

Yeah, I get what you're saying and it probably works for some. In my decade plus resume, I have never - not even once - reported a post or placed anyone on ignore. Please don't misunderstand me, for those who have, I am cool remaining completely silent and have no opinion on the matter. But for me, I just don't see the point. As I see it, if I'm going to participate on a board then I am going to participate 100% (If not, I would leave or take a break)

I'm still not seeing anything that for me requires the creation of a whole new forum or set of rules to facilitate discussion.

Oh, me neither. If my post implied as much, it was not my intent. in my opinion - A new forum would just be a new forum with the exact same community.

The only thing we are left with, in my opinion, is trying to be a positive influence in the direction of the board and reporting the blatant rule breaks.

While I do find this to be an option (depending on who you are and how you see things, perhaps a very good option). I think it's just one option of many that we all have.

Anyway, thanks for engaging!