Robert F. Smith Posted June 22, 2016 Posted June 22, 2016 4 hours ago, Jeanne said: Actually, I mentioned it because I DID read it somewhere. I was hoping that someone could calaborate with me and I could find out where I read it. Anyway, I do know what probable means and my take on things though more heresay is just as valid of an idea as others here. I am here to learn. Yes, I first read of Bennett's skulduggery in Robert Flanders' Nauvoo: Kingdom on the Mississippi (Univ. of Illinois, 1975). 1
MorningStar Posted June 23, 2016 Posted June 23, 2016 Welcome, Meg! I haven't been very active on the board lately and not sure why your name is being discussed, but I hope you like it here.
Meg Stout Posted June 23, 2016 Author Posted June 23, 2016 1 hour ago, MorningStar said: Welcome, Meg! I haven't been very active on the board lately and not sure why your name is being discussed, but I hope you like it here. I'm not sure "like it here" is how I'd characterize my first two days. I was being called rude things before I showed up, and it didn't change much once I had shown up. But most of the comments on this thread have been OK. 3
BlueDreams Posted June 23, 2016 Posted June 23, 2016 On 6/20/2016 at 10:43 AM, Meg Stout said: Someone reached out to let me know I was being discussed here at Mormon Dialogue. Intrigued, I decided to stop by. I felt introductions might be in order, given the nature of some of the comments. I was born in Utah, at a time when the marriage of my Chinese father and White mother was considered "void and prohibited," though Mom tells me that due to reciprocity I don't get to claim to be a *******. They had been married in the LA temple. I have a degree in Physics from George Mason University and was the first female civilian admitted to The Naval Postgraduate School, where I obtained a Master's Degree in Systems Engineering and Management. I have been involved in design of both warships and combat systems in my decades with the Navy. Part of what I do involves keen awareness of the boundaries of what can and cannot be said, with respect to national security, intellectual property, and acquisitions. As an endowed Mormon, I am familiar with similar boundaries in ecclesiastical circles. this may sound weird. But I think I once knew your family when I was growing up and played with one of your daughters. I can't remember when, I just recognize your name and face. I was probably in the Annandale ward at the time and had a single mom and a younger little bro. If not it was burke and she was married. Anyway, welcome to the board. it's an interesting place to be
Eek! Posted June 23, 2016 Posted June 23, 2016 15 hours ago, Meg Stout said: I'm not sure "like it here" is how I'd characterize my first two days. I was being called rude things before I showed up, and it didn't change much once I had shown up. But most of the comments on this thread have been OK. Thank you for your shining example of grace under pressure. When my turn in the hot-seat comes, I hope to be even half so patient with my critics.
Meg Stout Posted June 23, 2016 Author Posted June 23, 2016 5 hours ago, BlueDreams said: this may sound weird. But I think I once knew your family when I was growing up and played with one of your daughters. I can't remember when, I just recognize your name and face. I was probably in the Annandale ward at the time and had a single mom and a younger little bro. If not it was burke and she was married. Anyway, welcome to the board. it's an interesting place to be Hi BlueDreams, It would have been in Annandale. I'm always running into people who know me from some distant past. That's the beauty of using my real name and picture on the Internet. 2
Meg Stout Posted June 23, 2016 Author Posted June 23, 2016 3 hours ago, Eek! said: Thank you for your shining example of grace under pressure. When my turn in the hot-seat comes, I hope to be even half so patient with my critics. Hi Eek!, May you never be in the hot-seat...!
JLHPROF Posted June 23, 2016 Posted June 23, 2016 19 hours ago, Meg Stout said: I'm not sure "like it here" is how I'd characterize my first two days. I was being called rude things before I showed up, and it didn't change much once I had shown up. But most of the comments on this thread have been OK. Once again, I apologize for the quack comment. It was wrong. I still don't agree with your theories on the history. 1
Meg Stout Posted June 23, 2016 Author Posted June 23, 2016 29 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Once again, I apologize for the quack comment. It was wrong. I still don't agree with your theories on the history. Hi JLHPROF, It was gracious of you to apologize. There are things others have said that go beyond "I don't agree with you theories on the history." For better or worse, we'll never know if all the comments others have made would have occurred if you (respected as you are) hadn't initially labeled me as a quack in that thread. Have you considered my argument that Bennett came back to Nauvoo in 1843 and then booked a hall in Boston where he attempted to confess his sins? Alas, the audience nearly killed him. Sometimes apologizing can't take back damage. In the case of Bennett, almost no one even knows he tried to take back his stories about Joseph.
JLHPROF Posted June 23, 2016 Posted June 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, Meg Stout said: Hi JLHPROF, It was gracious of you to apologize. There are things others have said that go beyond "I don't agree with you theories on the history." For better or worse, we'll never know if all the comments others have made would have occurred if you (respected as you are) hadn't initially labeled me as a quack in that thread. Have you considered my argument that Bennett came back to Nauvoo in 1843 and then booked a hall in Boston where he attempted to confess his sins? Alas, the audience nearly killed him. Sometimes apologizing can't take back damage. In the case of Bennett, almost no one even knows he tried to take back his stories about Joseph. True, apologies don't fix every mistake. But if you think my reputation here would cause anyone to question your theories you are seriously underestimating the board members. I think people like Julian, Calm, JKWilliams and ALarson understand the history and evidences probably better than I do seeing as I focus on doctrines and teachings more than dates and names. If they are questioning your theories you can trust that is based on their knowledge on the subject, not any inappropriate label I was foolish enough to use. 2
Meg Stout Posted June 23, 2016 Author Posted June 23, 2016 15 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: True, apologies don't fix every mistake. I think people like Julian, Calm, JKWilliams and ALarson understand the history and evidences probably better than I do seeing as I focus on doctrines and teachings more than dates and names. If they are questioning your theories you can trust that is based on their knowledge on the subject, not any inappropriate label I was foolish enough to use. There are ways to disagree without being disagreeable. As I am not respected here, things are being said and tactics are being used that would not be used in other circumstances.
Calm Posted June 24, 2016 Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) I can pretty much guarantee that Prof's comment did not affect any other who was posting save those who protested he was wrong. The rest of us have evaluated others' writings in similar ways multiple times and your own work when it first came out way before the "quack" remark and we are fully responsible on our own for leading ourselves astray if we actually went astray. Edited June 24, 2016 by Calm 2
Meg Stout Posted June 24, 2016 Author Posted June 24, 2016 1 hour ago, Calm said: I can pretty much guarantee that Prof's comment did not affect any other who was posting save those who protested he was wrong. The rest of us have evaluated others' writings in similar ways multiple times and your own work when it first came out way before the "quack" remark and we are fully responsible on our own for leading ourselves astray if we actually went astray. Imagine you are someone who has watched a young person blossom in your circle. Perhaps a child or protégé or friend. Then imagine that they are treated the way I've been treated in these first days.
Calm Posted June 24, 2016 Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) There is a difference between criticizing your work and criticizing you as a person. Any person who puts their work out in the public eye to promote ideas should expect those ideas to be critically analyzed and if found wanting, labeled as so. Personally I expect and hope for the same level of attention that has been given your work here, if not even more intense, put to anything I put serious time into and if I screwed up somewhere in my public writing, I want to hear it without punches being pulled. You are an experienced and mature writer, are you not? Why do you compare yourself to an inexperienced youth? Edited June 24, 2016 by Calm 1
Calm Posted June 24, 2016 Posted June 24, 2016 (edited) PS: I got harsher comments on my college papers from my profs than anything said here (got some really nice "this is publishable" ones as well though never for my creative writing which was where I really wanted it at the time, lol). With all your years of writing, going to workshops (iirc), posting on blogs....it is hard to believe you still take criticism of your work so personally. Edited June 24, 2016 by Calm 2
Nemesis Posted June 24, 2016 Posted June 24, 2016 39 minutes ago, Meg Stout said: Imagine you are someone who has watched a young person blossom in your circle. Perhaps a child or protégé or friend. Then imagine that they are treated the way I've been treated in these first days. We're not in relief society anymore Toto. I'm closing this thread as its not much of an introduction anymore. Nemesis
Recommended Posts