Patrick Mason at FairMormon

[stemelbow]

33 minutes ago, juliann said:

He was violating copyright law. Do you think he would be on a message board wanting to talk about the content of his own subscription podcast?

I get that.  He indicated he did it in ignorance.  It's certainly possible. 

[stemelbow]

25 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

awesome.  Glad to hear you liked them.  I am curious though of what FairMormon Leadership thought of the talk and whether this is the perspective they wish to move towards?

it seems like your violation of copyright has them all suspicious of you, so I'm not sure they'll say.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I get that.  He indicated he did it in ignorance.  It's certainly possible. 

Ignorance too often is given as an excuse for carelessness.

[juliann]

47 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

Patrick Mason recently spoke at FairMormon and gave a very progressive Mormon speech.  I thought it would be good to have a dialogue about the actual points he raises.  the video and audio is behinds Fairmormon's paywall so you will have to take my word for it.  But here is a list of things he says.

1.)  He flatly says we have defined Prophets incorrectly.

2.)  That there is valid reason to doubt.

3.)  That belief is "plausible" (his words) 

4.)  That We made up much of our theology and have put way more in the truth cart then belongs there.

4.) That we should not blame the doubters and that we would be better looking at ourselves for our problems rather than secularists, feminists, intellectuals, and even Satan

5.) That the CES letter was an inevitable response to the false dominant narrative we have taught.  And that said narrative is not his mormonism nor the Mormonism that can flourish in the future.

6.)  He expressed that we must do better to support gender equality and our LGBT brothers and sisters.   He says we aren't loving or inclusive enough

7.)  He says our culture and leadership have sadly adopted a non-apologizing posture towards its mistakes

8.)    He says we need to repent as a church and apologize for our serious errors.

9.)  He says we need to Incorporate more diversity into our church ( race, gender, economic status. sexual orientation, and other differences)

 10.)  He concludes that he is scared of a immature faith never growing up and giving space for nuance and complexity and he fears a fundamentalist takeover

All this at Fairmormon and strangely this is the very same stuff I say and get blasted for.  I also have it on good account that FairMormon's leadership has said behind the scenes this kind of Mormonism and perspective is where they want to head.  Any comments from FairMormon would be appreciated on whether you liked and agreed with Patrick perspective.

 

Mason has already spoken up about the misrepresentations of his positions. I predicted at the outset that the critics would have a hard time with this. What Hardy and Mason have done is set out "rules of engagement." (Trite term but it gets close.) It is everything the critics have complained that "apologists" don't do. Well, now they do.  I hope that the critics will set the same standards in their discourse. Any chance of that?

I think these talks ripped the rug out from under the standard critic narrative. To be saying the same things, Bill, you would have to embed your critiques with expressions of belief and support. These talks received standing ovations. What may be of most benefit is to spend time analyzing why rather than ripping out disconnected soundbites for spin.

When you meet with "FM leadership," you will have the information you need to be announcing their direction. FM is not a hive mind.

 

[stemelbow]

14 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

the link on my facebook page was dead long before I posted comments here.  The link posted on facebook was last night.  It was dead this morning.  Once I saw it was taken down I messaged the person who shared it and they informed me it had been removed for copyright reasons.  I have not reposted or made an attempt to repost since then.  I get that everyone would like to make it work in their mind to have me doing something sinister.... so please by all means

I believe ya....

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I get that.  He indicated he did it in ignorance.  It's certainly possible. 

Possible for a guy who was a Fairmormon, participated in the conference itself and as someone who produced content and had a number of discussions about content production with others in management from what I could tell and who runs a premium copyrighted podcast himself?  Yes, possible though what it that would say about his level of attention and awareness and caring about what goes on around him and whether we should trust his appraisal of it is not very complimentary.

Edited August 16, 2016 by Calm

[DBMormon]

24 minutes ago, Calm said:

How does that change anything?  You knew that it was protected on FM.  You did not share it here intentionally because it was to be paid for content.  And now you are claiming you didn't know it was pirated?

no I didn't.  I assumed Fairmormon had posted it, and the person was sharing a fairmormon link.  First I in knew it wasn't was this AM when I was notified the link was dead and I messaged the person who shared it with me.  Would you like a image share of the conversation (with his name and photo grayed out of course)?

Edited August 16, 2016 by DBMormon

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

Mason has already spoken up about the misrepresentations of his positions. I predicted at the outset that the critics would have a hard time with this. What Hardy and Mason have done is set out "rules of engagement." (Trite term but it gets close.) It is everything the critics have complained that "apologists" don't do. Well, now they do.  I hope that the critics will set the same standards in their discourse. Any chance of that?

I think these talks ripped the rug out from under the standard critic narrative. To be saying the same things, Bill, you would have to embed your critiques with expressions of belief and support. These talks received standing ovations. What may be of most benefit is to spend time analyzing why rather than ripping out disconnected soundbites for spin.

When you meet with "FM leadership," you will have the information you need to be announcing their direction. FM is not a hive mind.

 

Where can we see what Mason said about the misrepresentations? 

[DBMormon]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I believe ya....

I wish we did this kind of questioning of LDS leaders when things like the First vision get removed from journals.

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Possible for a guy who was a Fairmormon, participated in the conference itself and as someone who produced content and had a number of discussions about content production with others in management from what I could tell and who runs a premium copyrighted podcast himself?  Yes, possible though what it that would say about his level of attention and awareness of what goes on around him and whether we should trust his appraisal of it is not very complimentary.

Fair enough.  But oh well.  He's upset with Fair, perhaps?  I don't know.  But the ten points he raises are interesting to me.  Now if they are a misrepresentation of what Mason said, then that'd be too bad. 

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

no I didn't.  I assumed Fairmormon had posted it, and the person was sharing a fairmormon link.  First I in knew it wasn't was this AM when I was notified the link was dead and I messaged the person who shared it with me.  Would you like a image share of the conversation (with his name and photo grayed out of course)?

So are you going to pay to use the material with integrity or will you continue to reference the pirated material as you have done in this post when you knew it was pirated but neglected to say where you had gotten it.

[Calm]

Is a hour previously "long ago" in your mind, DB?  Just curious.

[Buckeye]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Where can we see what Mason said about the misrepresentations? 

Ditto. Since the talk is behind a paywall I don't have access to it. Would be nice to actually have a discussion of Patrick's statements (and subsequent statements) rather than endless mudslinging. If Patrick's goal was to set a new tone for "engagement," this board's discussion so far has been a massive fail.

[Storm Rider]

3 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

I wish we did this kind of questioning of LDS leaders when things like the First vision get removed from journals.

Always easier to set up a standard of behavior for others when it is so evident that you, we, are not willing to observe the same standard.  How often does this happen and why do we continue to fall for it?

[DBMormon]

11 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

it seems like your violation of copyright has them all suspicious of you, so I'm not sure they'll say.

They have long been silent before that.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

I wish we did this kind of questioning of LDS leaders when things like the First vision get removed from journals.

Well, he's long gone now.  Who are we to question but each other?  He did it out of loyalty to his family or he did it to protect the Church....probably both.  Either way it was not a good idea. 

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

no I didn't.  I assumed Fairmormon had posted it, and the person was sharing a fairmormon link.  First I in knew it wasn't was this AM when I was notified the link was dead and I messaged the person who shared it with me.  Would you like a image share of the conversation (with his name and photo grayed out of course)?

I will accept you admitting to being clueless about how other people, including FM even though you were a member, use premiums to support their projects even though you have chosen to do the same for your podcast.

Now are you going to pay for the use or continue to use the pirated information?

Edited August 16, 2016 by Calm

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

They have long been silent before that.

Now this is sounding personal.  Hope everything smooths over.

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

I will accept you admitting to being clueless about how other people, including FM even though you were a member, use premiums to support their projects even though you have chosen to do the same for your podcast.

Now are you going to pay for the use or continue to use the pirated information?

How can he take back his thoughts on that which he heard?  Is it a violation to write up a summary of what he heard? 

[DBMormon]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

When this morning?

10:39 this am is when I noticed it dead and messaged the person.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

13 minutes ago, juliann said:

 These talks received standing ovations.

Well, partial standing ovations.

From what I could see from where I sat (front row, center section, aisle seat) no speaker got a solid standing ovation. (I wasn't there for the Thursday afternoon session, though.)

 

[Gray]

1 hour ago, DBMormon said:

Patrick Mason recently spoke at FairMormon and gave a very progressive Mormon speech.  I thought it would be good to have a dialogue about the actual points he raises.  the video and audio is behinds Fairmormon's paywall so you will have to take my word for it.  But here is a list of things he says.

1.)  He flatly says we have defined Prophets incorrectly.

2.)  That there is valid reason to doubt.

3.)  That belief is "plausible" (his words) 

4.)  That We made up much of our theology and have put way more in the truth cart then belongs there.

4.) That we should not blame the doubters and that we would be better looking at ourselves for our problems rather than secularists, feminists, intellectuals, and even Satan

5.) That the CES letter was an inevitable response to the false dominant narrative we have taught.  And that said narrative is not his mormonism nor the Mormonism that can flourish in the future.

6.)  He expressed that we must do better to support gender equality and our LGBT brothers and sisters.   He says we aren't loving or inclusive enough

7.)  He says our culture and leadership have sadly adopted a non-apologizing posture towards its mistakes

8.)    He says we need to repent as a church and apologize for our serious errors.

9.)  He says we need to Incorporate more diversity into our church ( race, gender, economic status. sexual orientation, and other differences)

 10.)  He concludes that he is scared of a immature faith never growing up and giving space for nuance and complexity and he fears a fundamentalist takeover

All this at Fairmormon and strangely this is the very same stuff I say and get blasted for.  I also have it on good account that FairMormon's leadership has said behind the scenes this kind of Mormonism and perspective is where they want to head.  Any comments from FairMormon would be appreciated on whether you liked and agreed with Patrick perspective.

 

Assuming this is an accurate summary, I think these are fantastic points. I wonder if this will find its way into the mainstream discourse? Mormons are intelligent people. I hope that means we will win in the struggle against fundamentalism, but fundamentalism been the dominant paradigm for many decades now. . 

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

10:39 this am is when I noticed it dead and messaged the person.

 

sounds evil

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Fair enough.  But oh well.  He's upset with Fair, perhaps?  I don't know.  But the ten points he raises are interesting to me.  Now if they are a misrepresentation of what Mason said, then that'd be too bad. 

I suggest you wait until a transcript of the speech is posted to discuss it accurately. I've noticed Bill tends to spin things when he summarizes them.

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, DBMormon said:

I wish we did this kind of questioning of LDS leaders when things like the First vision get removed from journals.

Yes, deflect the pressure away from yourself to your favorite whipping boy.