Battle Of The Boards

[Scott Lloyd]

Interesting.

No Daniel Peterson's screen name didn't show up while I was there.

I think you would have to be aware of one or the other of his screen names and be alert to them coming up there to be able to identify his posts (if, indeed, any do show up there these days in the archives).

[Scott Lloyd]

I was there under a different name.  I loved the more substantive doctrinal discussions that the scholars engaged in.  The couple of times I went to the "other" boards there was a lot of potshots, name calling and dirty dealing under the guise of freedom of speech and recovery.  I even got a profile on Dr. Shades board as one of the sycophants of the TBMs.  That kind of sophomoric nonsense was not for me.

Quite a few of us were "profiled" there by Dr. Scratch (I think that's what you have in mind).

 

My "I'm dethpicable" avatar is largely inspired by how I was being depicted over there.

[rongo]

I really miss the old FAIR message board (2004 to about, oh, 2010 or so). I was late to computers/online in general, and joined after writing a paper for FAIR and being informed that Will Bagley's head was exploding over it online.

 

John Dehlin's start, the UTLM lawsuit against Allen Wyatt, Simon Southerton, Martha Beck, etc. were some of the major events during that time.

 

FAIR as an organization has changed a lot from then to the present as well. To me, it seems that the first decade of the 2000s was the heyday of FAIR apologetics. Not that FAIR's work is now outdated and less-effective, but that the nature of online apologetics has changed (and the change with the Maxwell Institute is a part of that). The theater of action has shifted to disaffected LDS and ex-LDS. 

 

Makes me wonder what the next shift will be (after CES letter-style approaches).

[Calm]

I think you would have to be aware of one or the other of his screen names and be alert to them coming up there to be able to identify his posts (if, indeed, any do show up there these days in the archives).

I think he left the board before the change to yuku and was not registered with them, so when they shifted his post would be anonymous or whatever the generic handle is. Any earlier versions would be lost as well.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Calm

[Tacenda]

Is it easier to defend the church against the EV group vs. those questioning that are LDS? IMO, saving the already members seems to be the most crucial. But see that to an apologist, baptizing the non member antagonist would be quite the accomplishment. Is apologetics considered missionary work I wonder? Or does it help your own testimonies, speaking to the apologists. Have any of you gone through a crisis and if so, is that why you're here defending, because you firmly believe or have witness that it is true? Because most, I'd venture to say 98% or more members, aren't on these boards or are apologists. They don't discuss controversial topics in Mormonism in my world, it's taboo, IMO.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

I think he left the board before the change to yuku and was not registered with them, so when they shifted his post would be anonymous or whatever the generic handle is. Any earlier versions would be lost as well.

A lot of good stuff was lost with the format changes and what not that occurred on that board. A pity, really.

[Scott Lloyd]

Is it easier to defend the church against the EV group vs. those questioning that are LDS? IMO, saving the already members seems to be the most crucial. But see that to an apologist, baptizing the non member antagonist would be quite the accomplishment. Is apologetics considered missionary work I wonder? Or does it help your own testimonies, speaking to the apologists. Have any of you gone through a crisis and if so, is that why you're here defending, because you firmly believe or have witness that it is true? Because most, I'd venture to say 98% or more members, aren't on these boards or are apologists. They don't discuss controversial topics in Mormonism in my world, it's taboo, IMO.

I believe that counseling an individual in love and patience when that person is going through a faith crisis is a fine and sorely needed thing. Do I believe a message board such as this is an appropriate milieu for engaging in that sort of thing? Definitely not.

 

For one thing, one thus cannot feel at liberty to have a free-wheeling, candid, academic discussion for fear of wounding sensitive feelings.

 

As a corollary, one should not come to this sort of venue expecting to be gently shepherded through a faith crisis. There is too much rough-and-tumble going on for that, too much overt attack calling for vigorous defense.

 

For another thing, I understand that board rules prohibit any manner of overt proselytizing or preaching. If you're helping someone with a faith crisis, I don't see how you can avoid at least a measure of that and likely a great deal of it, possibly including but not limited to admonition to a person to pray, study the scriptures, repent and humble himself. That is appropriately the province of a bishop or stake president, or perhaps a close and caring friend or family member, but not a stranger on a message board.

 

In short, I come here to help defend the faith in principle -- and simultaneously to have my fervently held beliefs bolstered and sustained through strong arguments from others -- not to counsel people who are "having issues."

Edited November 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[rongo]

Is it easier to defend the church against the EV group vs. those questioning that are LDS? IMO, saving the already members seems to be the most crucial. But see that to an apologist, baptizing the non member antagonist would be quite the accomplishment. Is apologetics considered missionary work I wonder? Or does it help your own testimonies, speaking to the apologists. Have any of you gone through a crisis and if so, is that why you're here defending, because you firmly believe or have witness that it is true? Because most, I'd venture to say 98% or more members, aren't on these boards or are apologists. They don't discuss controversial topics in Mormonism in my world, it's taboo, IMO.

Dealing with claims from religionists is a completely different animal than dealing with claims from atheists/agnostics/skeptics. It's not a question of "easier vs. harder," in my experience, but different. But, that's how things have shifted. There are many, many more people now whose issues with the Church are of the latter type instead of the former. And, in my experience, people who have faith crises are difficult to help, even when they acknowledge that explanations offered are solid or have merit, because their concerns aren't usually about evidence, per se. They're about a feeling betrayed or deceived, and no matter what the explanations are, those feelings are hard to shake.  

[Damien the Leper]

There were three Scratch threads that I saw and one of them had Calmoriah stating that she banned Scratch. From the comments in the thread, it seems he had it coming.

[Tacenda]

Dealing with claims from religionists is a completely different animal than dealing with claims from atheists/agnostics/skeptics. It's not a question of "easier vs. harder," in my experience, but different. But, that's how things have shifted. There are many, many more people now whose issues with the Church are of the latter type instead of the former. And, in my experience, people who have faith crises are difficult to help, even when they acknowledge that explanations offered are solid or have merit, because their concerns aren't usually about evidence, per se. They're about a feeling betrayed or deceived, and no matter what the explanations are, those feelings are hard to shake.  

Thanks Rongo, I agree it's probably harder to help those that feel betrayed.  Another question for you and others, did any of you struggle with issues that you were unaware of?  Was that how you began your apologist journey?  I just wonder how an apologist starts out. 

[rongo]

I haven't gone through a faith crisis, but I have always loved Church history and firmly believe in the Restoration. My family background is unique; both sides of my family fully discussed all of the controversial subjects (i.e., Gospel Topics essays) in an atmosphere of faith --- with sources. Bishops, stake presidents, mission presidents, etc. That's why I've never related to shock or anger at the Church because of these issues --- they were discussed frequently at family gatherings, and my children are well-aware and well-versed in them.

 

One my mission I was the go-to guy for doctrinal or historical concerns. I have always wanted to be able to resolve people's arguments and concerns, so when running into tough issues, it was from a perspective of trying to shore up "gaps" and be able to persuasively explain them rather than being plunged into doubt because it's a tough issue. 

[Scott Lloyd]

There were three Scratch threads that I saw and one of them had Calmoriah stating that she banned Scratch. From the comments in the thread, it seems he had it coming.

Having the power to ban Scratch and actually wielding it? Now that has to bring a terrific rush of euphoria!

[Calm]

There were three Scratch threads that I saw and one of them had Calmoriah stating that she banned Scratch. From the comments in the thread, it seems he had it coming.

While some may not agree, we never banned carelessly (and bannings were group decisions even if I was the hands and voice of the group). None of the moderators liked to moderate, we all preferred hands off but that quickly led in several cases to board meltdown. And many bans were temporary for a cooling off period in hopes that later conversation would cool down. We didn't have the limited or thread banning option to separate out posters.

[Damien the Leper]

Having the power to ban Scratch and actually wielding it? Now that has to bring a terrific rush of euphoria!

I do not approve of your humble subtlety. Please be less passive. :-)

[Damien the Leper]

While some may not agree, we never banned carelessly (and bannings were group decisions even if I was the hands and voice of the group). None of the moderators liked to moderate, we all preferred hands off but that quickly led in several cases to board meltdown. And many bans were temporary for a cooling off period in hopes that later conversation would cool down. We didn't have the limited or thread banning option to separate out posters.

Fair enough. I hope we here aren't as frustrating despite watching Ares close a bunch of threads consecutively.

[Calm]

I would assume it really helps to have a lot more options than banning.  And since most of my frustration came from having posters argue endlessly with me over my explanations of banning and demands they be given a pass, the mods here are avoiding that so I bet while this has been a much longer term job than mine was, over all they have spent less time and thus less frustration.

[3DOP]

Wow. I hadn't looked over there at ZLMB for a couple of years. Looks the same. I mostly see it like cal. I sure wish the names had stayed. Often there are clues if you follow the thread as to who is talking. Apparently one of my names was registered with YUKU. I think I used three during my time there. When I have some spare time it might be fun to go poking around. I saw a thread on homeschooling I started when I was very in favor of it. Long time ago. Kids older now. ( I haven't aged at all...heh.) Now that it is their turn, I want them to send my grandkids to Catholic school. But...its their decision.

 

Anyway...lots of reminiscences over there for a few of us over here. Val, thanks for reminding me of that pretty good memory lane. There were some pretty good discussions at ZLMB. I am never ashamed to have spent a lot of time there.

Edited November 20, 2015 by 3DOP

[juliann]

No, what happened is that FAIR started a board because (actually I don't know as I wasn't involved in the creation of the FairMormon board so someone else will have to fill this in as mine would be speculation) and there were many participants who posted on both boards and as that board died, more came over here looking for action.  So I would say this board benefited from the death of ZLMB but didn't start because of anything that went on over there.

 

 

FAIR started as a message board and evolved into a website. The message board then became rather inactive. When ZLMB got too unpleasant for LDS to want to stay there, a migration to the FAIR board began. DCP made the switch and just about everybody followed.  FAIR then divested itself of the board because some were unable to make the distinction between a message board full of non-FAIR posters and FAIR itself.   

[Sanpitch]

I was never on LDSTalk.

 

Back about that time, I had landed on the message board of the Dr. Laura Schlessinger website, and I posted there for quite a few years. For some reason, a lot of anti-Mormons were posting there, and I could not restrain myself from countering the bile they were constantly spewing forth. These tended almost exclusively to be strident, Mormon-bashing evangelicals.

 

That might be what you are remembering. I recall that someone on that board mentioned Dr. Peterson was posting on ZLMB (had mentioned me by name, in fact) and that's how I found ZLMB.

 

My experience posting on the Dr. Laura board was quite a bit different than my experience later on ZLMB and other boards. Most of the Church's antagonists there were so full of crap, it was easy to counter their ignorance-driven attacks. On the Mormonism-related boards, people have tended to be a bit more intellectual -- if not knowledgeable -- although there is a great deal of outlandishness on those boards as well.

Well somebody somewhere was on LDSTalk board, but I guess I remember from a later board. That was quite a few years ago.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Sanpitch

[Ahab]

I started going to message boards in about 1995-6 on LDSTalk. Has anyone mentioned that board yet, I remember Scott Lloyd and Dan C Peterson posted there a lot. Are there any other survivors here of that board?

I started on LDSTalk about that time too, as Ray (my middle name from my Mom and Dad). I stayed there a few years, not aware of the Z board, leaving just as it started to die down. I remember Heather, the owner/main moderator, and somebody named Snow who was a lot like consiglieri was to me here. My arch nemesis, kinda. Some good talks that helped me to grow quite a bit.

[Scott Lloyd]

Wow. I hadn't looked over there at ZLMB for a couple of years. Looks the same. I mostly see it like cal. I sure wish the names had stayed. Often there are clues if you follow the thread as to who is talking. Apparently one of my names was registered with YUKU. I think I used three during my time there. When I have some spare time it might be fun to go poking around. I saw a thread on homeschooling I started when I was very in favor of it. Long time ago. Kids older now. ( I haven't aged at all...heh.) Now that it is their turn, I want them to send my grandkids to Catholic school. But...its their decision.

Anyway...lots of reminiscences over there for a few of us over here. Val, thanks for reminding me of that pretty good memory lane. There were some pretty good discussions at ZLMB. I am never ashamed to have spent a lot of time there.

As I recall, you were unaffiliated for a while and considered Mormonism and Catholicism, eventually ending up Catholic. Is my perception/memory correct? Edited November 21, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

I think you are thinking of David Waltz.

[rongo]

FAIR started as a message board and evolved into a website. The message board then became rather inactive. When ZLMB got too unpleasant for LDS to want to stay there, a migration to the FAIR board began. DCP made the switch and just about everybody followed.  FAIR then divested itself of the board because some were unable to make the distinction between a message board full of non-FAIR posters and FAIR itself.   

I think FAIR should've kept the message board. It was great when it was under FAIR, and declined when FAIR divested itself of it. I think the powers-that-be worried too much about the confusion you talked about (confusion which was only confusing to simpletons), contention that is really unavoidable with robust discussion, etc.

 

The real tragedy was lost posts with the two or three major switch-overs. I had really good stuff in my threads that was find-able that took a lot of time and effort to compile, only to have it disappear overnight forever when they did major switch-overs.

[sunstoned]

I am of the opinion that this board has improved since FAIR let it go.  Under FAIR the moderation was very heavy and slanted towards the faithful perspective.  So much so that open discussion was hard to come by.  I think because of the heavy moderation, many left or were forced out and ended up in the trailer park.

[rongo]

How do you think the trailer park compares with this site, sunstoned? Better, worse, just different, etc.?