Battle Of The Boards

[Calm]

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.

Unfortunately it was damaging to FAIR's mission to have it.  People got into a habit of talking about the board that way and apparently lots kept the habit and passed it on to others.  It wasn't just a worry over the confusion, it was the experience that led to the change.  We were dealing with complaints about how uncivil FAIR members were so that they would never look at anything else we had done when the people they were talking about weren't even FAIR members, and it still dogs us even years later.  We just got a complaint letter about how the board so shocked someone that they described FM as the opposite of what we attempt to do, the person had never actually looked at what was actually FairMormon from what I could tell from the description, but had just come to this board and someone told them it was the FAIR board and they bought it and they had been telling people for years how bad we were over this.  I have read dozens of such comments over the years.  And this one couldn't be the FM support board either, the timing was long past when FM divested itself of this board and long before they started the ill fated support board.

[why me]

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.

I think that this board would do well to have the limited status limited to a time frame. When a limited person behaves well or shows a change in direction, they should be allowed back in for full fellowship on the board. Now, it seems that the limited status is eternal. Even the lds church allows disfellowshiped members to come back into the fold. And of course, if the former limited person begins to go back to their old ways, back on limited they go.

 

But maybe this is too complicated to do.

[3DOP]

I think you are thinking of David Waltz.

 

Yup Scott. That was David. I finally became Catholic in 1995 but not without considering LDS claims mainly through Dave's influence. In the late 90's, Dave was still working things out and invited me to UTLM and eventually we went to ZLMB. I had already met pacumeni9 at Dave's house. There was some other board or group on which we discussed subjects raised by Barry Bickmore who had written a new book at the time. Does anyone have a recollection of those discussions involving Barry B?

Edited November 21, 2015 by 3DOP

[why me]

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.

At that time there needed to be heavy moderation. Also, there needed to be a balance between the faithful and the critic. If more critics than faithful were posting, a 'purge' needed to be done. Also, the fairboard did help many people to remain in the church. People lurked on the fairboard, reading the posts of the apologists and received a different perspective from what the critics were saying on their sites. It certainly helped me. It wasn't easy for church members to deal with all the critic perspectives and interpretations that were coming from the internet. But FAIR was there to give more pro-lds interpretations with their message board by having some very top-notch apologists post.

 

I think that now, people have become rather soft. I don't think that many could take such a hard hitting debate like existed on the fairboard. There would be cries of being offended etc. Now, it seems that some people believe that this board should be a huddle and cuddle board for members who are experiencing a crisis of faith over a policy issue both past and present. We all need to be teddy bears.  And maybe this is the way it should be because it seems that many seem to be falling away over past and present policies (OW, SSM, blacks and the priesthood, new policy statement etc) and losing their testimony because of it or having their testimony dented. Or they are questioning more the GAs.  However, on the other board, very few really care about offending a believer, likewise on most critic boards. 

Edited November 21, 2015 by why me

[Scott Lloyd]

I think you are thinking of David Waltz.

Ah, yes. Thanks.

3DOP was Rory, right?

[Scott Lloyd]

Unfortunately it was damaging to FAIR's mission to have it. People got into a habit of talking about the board that way and apparently lots kept the habit and passed it on to others. It wasn't just a worry over the confusion, it was the experience that led to the change. We were dealing with complaints about how uncivil FAIR members were so that they would never look at anything else we had done when the people they were talking about weren't even FAIR members, and it still dogs us even years later. We just got a complaint letter about how the board so shocked someone that they described FM as the opposite of what we attempt to do, the person had never actually looked at what was actually FairMormon from what I could tell from the description, but had just come to this board and someone told them it was the FAIR board and they bought it and they had been telling people for years how bad we were over this. I have read dozens of such comments over the years. And this one couldn't be the FM support board either, the timing was long past when FM divested itself of this board and long before they started the ill fated support board.

All things considered, I believe the right decision was made.

And FWIW, let me here reiterate my personal endorsement of FairMormon and its mission. It continues to be a trustworthy source of information and analysis potentially offering a lifeline for those who are troubled in the intellectual and ideological conflict that besets the church of the Lamb of God in latter days.

For it to remain trustworthy, it must be careful and selective of the content on its Internet properties and even of those who purvey that content. In all things it must seek to be consistent with the doctrines, principles and policies of the Church of Jesus Christ as taught by the Brethren.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

At that time there needed to be heavy moderation. Also, there needed to be a balance between the faithful and the critic. If more critics than faithful were posting, a 'purge' needed to be done. Also, the fairboard did help many people to remain in the church. People lurked on the fairboard, reading the posts of the apologists and received a different perspective from what the critics were saying on their sites. It certainly helped me. It wasn't easy for church members to deal with all the critic perspectives and interpretations that were coming from the internet. But FAIR was there to give more pro-lds interpretations with their message board by having some very top-notch apologists post.

I think that now, people have become rather soft. I don't think that many could take such a hard hitting debate like existed on the fairboard. There would be cries of being offended etc. Now, it seems that some people believe that this board should be a huddle and cuddle board for members who are experiencing a crisis of faith over a policy issue both past and present. We all need to be teddy bears. And maybe this is the way it should be because it seems that many seem to be falling away over past and present policies (OW, SSM, blacks and the priesthood, new policy statement etc) and losing their testimony because of it or having their testimony dented. Or they are questioning more the GAs. However, on the other board, very few really care about offending a believer, likewise on most critic boards.

You forgot the "p" word, that one's a biggy.

[juliann]

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.

 

Heavy moderation is what killed it originally but when ZLMB migrated it really grew. And the reason it grew was because Mormons were given a much safer space. Antagonists could still post but they couldn't abuse. After the board got new admin, it continued to grow.  I thought that wouldn't last because so many who followed the Mormons over here were banned when they kept posting like they were on ZLMB. That is when Dr. Shades board began, IIRC. It was the reaction of  those who couldn't do as they pleased here. They complained for years over there about being banned and that was probably the only thing keeping it going. They would import posts from here or rag on posters they didn't like over there.  I remember a lot more were banned when they tried to keep the conflict going by bringing their posts from there over here.

 

It is still really odd to me that those who only wanted to antagonize felt so entitled to a board they didn't own. It still mystifies me. That has been one of the most bizarre things I have seen in my many years online. Running a board costs money on several levels and we have an owner who pays out of pocket to keep this going but people still seem to think that they should determine how it is run and who should be admitted in a manner that goes beyond helpful suggestions.

[BCSpace]

Well, maybe with the two boards we have perfect harmony as per there must needs be opposition in all things.  One can freely switch boards at any time and abuse, or be abused, or find safe harbor or the company one enjoys most, or the discussion one enjoys most, or the debate one enjoys most, etc.

[sunstoned]

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

Not better or worse, just different.  I do find the topics here to be interesting and the dialog is usually respectful.  I think the moderators are doing a good job of keeping the tone of this board respectful and still allowing different points of view.  

 

There are some good discussions to be had on the other board.  The main difference is that the discussions on the other board then to be more critical of the church than what is seen on this board.   

[Ham Clam]

Telling this miliential the early days of the Mormon Internet.

[Nemesis]

We won...

[rodheadlee]

I was sitting in an anchorage in American Samoa about August 2008, we had cheap internet harbor wide. I had been inactive for years when I stumbled upon these boards. We had been reading the Book of Mormon as we crossed the Pacific and had had several profound spiritual experiences. I have no idea who ran the board at that time but I was stunned that right there on my computer was a battle raging between good and evil. It made me want to choose sides and get off the sidelines. I thank you all for that. It is alarming that the battleground has shifted to inside the membership of the Church. What does it mean? I think there is prophecy of that in the BoM but no verses come to mind. It's our 42nd anniversary, we're still not sealed and I've got to get to work. Have a nice day.

[Scott Lloyd]

I was sitting in an anchorage in American Samoa about August 2008, we had cheap internet harbor wide. I had been inactive for years when I stumbled upon these boards. We had been reading the Book of Mormon as we crossed the Pacific and had had several profound spiritual experiences. I have no idea who ran the board at that time but I was stunned that right there on my computer was a battle raging between good and evil. It made me want to choose sides and get off the sidelines. I thank you all for that. It is alarming that the battleground has shifted to inside the membership of the Church. What does it mean? I think there is prophecy of that in the BoM but no verses come to mind. It's our 42nd anniversary, we're still not sealed and I've got to get to work. Have a nice day.

Thanks for sharing your story.

 

By this time next year, I hope you can report to us that you have been sealed!

 

I don't know what Book of Mormon passage you have in mind, but there are a couple that occur to me:

 

Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

 

2 Nephi 15:20 (part of the quotations from Isaiah

 

Also, there is that grand vision of the latter days that Nephi beheld.

 

And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations and she is the whore of all the earth.

 

And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all the nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.

 

1 Nephi 14:10-11

Edited November 30, 2015 by Scott Lloyd