Is this a Mormon board anymore?

[juliann]

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite. 

 

[JLHPROF]

I think that's definitely true to some extent.  But it seems like the board goes through phases.  This too shall pass.

Personally I like the doctrinal threads the best and Church history threads second.  All the science, Church administrative, and societal threads are definitely overwhelming right now.
I certainly hope we don't become "Mormon Discussions-lite".  I visit over there some times but the tone is very angry.

[probablyHagoth7]

9 minutes ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?...

No.

Likely because I am pretty selective as to which threads I even enter.

The ones I enter tend to be upbeat and worthwhile...or at least that's what I find there.

[Gray]

Some of the more radically conservative LDS posters seem to have left. I have noticed more critical voices as of late. I think the board functions best when, whatever the topic of conversation, we avoid emotionally charged language, which comes from extremes on either side. I think a good moderate tone is key to the life of the board, regardless of the viewpoints of the posters. 

[rongo]

I think the discussions have been good lately. That doesn't mean that I agree with the tendency of certain threads, just that I have enjoyed the discussion.

I also agree that it goes in cycles, and is driven by current events. I think the discussion that takes place here is better than anywhere else.

[Robert F. Smith]

44 minutes ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite. 

Perhaps so, but it is still an open discussions board with good rules, and the LDS Church is still quite lively -- and will survive the relentless negativity, just as it has survived so well for almost 200 years.  We can still learn a lot from one another, even though some participants come here without any intention of learning anything -- some only want to vent, which is also a legitimate purpose.

[stemelbow]

For every negative criticism around here, there is posted a defense, albeit, in many cases, not very good ones.  I think you're just realizing what many of us have realized before, the Church has many areas of concern and needs to make some drastic changes.  With a that said, the negative seems to stand out more loudly than the other to you as a result, because its more convincing. 

[Ahab]

A Mormon board?  I have never seen it that way, although many members of the board are "Mormon".  But many are not, too, and this board has always been open to all who want to join in.

I see it as a board where we, generally, discuss Mormons and things about Mormon culture. And since some members of the board are not Mormon, and usually do not accept "Mormonism" or things that are associated with it, our discussions usually include both positive and negative comments.

If this was a "Mormon" board and every member of the board was a Mormon, I imagine our discussions would be a lot different than they usually are, with a lot less of the negative comments.

[clarkgoble]

9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

For every negative criticism around here, there is posted a defense, albeit, in many cases, not very good ones.  I think you're just realizing what many of us have realized before, the Church has many areas of concern and needs to make some drastic changes.  With a that said, the negative seems to stand out more loudly than the other to you as a result, because its more convincing. 

Really?  

I admittedly don't read most of the threads. Plus I've only been posting here two week. So I can't speak to what I've not seen.. But there is an attitude that if one can't convince the other that somehow the argument isn't good. This makes sense if you're passively waiting to be convinced of Mormonism by Mormon defenders. But one can easily turn this around and have the Mormons say that the critics haven't made good arguments and that people coming here realized critics don't really have any new arguments. All depends upon the stance.

The problem is that I think most of those I've read the past couple of weeks making defenses of Mormonism recognize this. They know they aren't going to convince the critics. Oddly though many of the critics don't quite seem as able to objectively see that their arguments fall into exactly the same category.

Edited March 23, 2017 by clarkgoble

[Duncan]

I love Jesus but i drink a little..................JUST KIDDING!!! yeah, I am a member of the Church in full affect

[stemelbow]

49 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Really?  

I admittedly don't read most of the threads. Plus I've only been posting here two week. So I can't speak to what I've not seen.. But there is an attitude that if one can't convince the other that somehow the argument isn't good. This makes sense if you're passively waiting to be convinced of Mormonism by Mormon defenders. But one can easily turn this around and have the Mormons say that the critics haven't made good arguments and that people coming here realized critics don't really have any new arguments. All depends upon the stance.

The problem is that I think most of those I've read the past couple of weeks making defenses of Mormonism recognize this. They know they aren't going to convince the critics. Oddly though many of the critics don't quite seem as able to objectively see that their arguments fall into exactly the same category.

Yeah.  I have a tough time seeing this as critics verses non critics.  I'm critical and non critical I think.  I just think over time in some ways some criticisms remain because they carry validity.  Those criticisms in particular have not been adequately addressed nor refuted.  And people keep bringing them up because they represent problems in the Church we love.  We want action and there's no better way to see improvement then to work towards it and let people know what you're doing by identifying the problems. 

Surely though, when there is disagreement its unlikely someone will be convinced of the other side, right away.  But over time, people's views tend to evolve to some extent, slowly in most cases.  The way the Church speaks today about homosexuality is a far cry from what the Church said 30 and 40 years ago on the topic.  The ultimate teaching hasn't changed much, but there have definitely been changes in teaching and attitude.  It'll continue to shift even though many in the Church are hardliners on the topic.  It'll be subtle changes until one day we'll see the whole church miles away from where we are today.  That's how it's always been in the Church, it seems to me. 

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts.

[Kevin Christensen]

I try to do my bit for faith, appreciating the good and true and wise, and responding to the negativity when I have something meaningful to say.

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

[clarkgoble]

5 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I just think over time in some ways some criticisms remain because they carry validity.  Those criticisms in particular have not been adequately addressed nor refuted.

Oh, I agree. The answers on metal or bows and arrows for instance aren't good. Answers for horses and a few other things aren't ideal, but have the benefit of being a demonstrable phenomena. But I think the number of criticisms not adequately addressed (as opposed to being persuasive to skeptics) is relatively small. And I think the other side has problems like that as well, although they don't see them as problems any more than believers see horses or metal as a problem.

[Ahab]

10 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I just think over time in some ways some criticisms remain because they carry validity.  Those criticisms in particular have not been adequately addressed nor refuted.  And people keep bringing them up because they represent problems in the Church we love.  We want action and there's no better way to see improvement then to work towards it and let people know what you're doing by identifying the problems.

Identifying the "problems" shouldn't lead to criticism, though, especially when the "problem" is essentially that we do not know or understand enough about the issue.

When we don't know something, we should just say we don't know while being open to receiving more information on the issue.

 

[MormonVideoGame]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  

It is relative, saying things like "Bruce R Mcconkie made a mistake to attack Evolution" is seen as relentless negativity by some Mormons. Or saying "the priesthood ban wasn't from God" is also seen as relentless negativity. 

You won't find CES letter negativity here. 

Edited March 23, 2017 by MormonVideoGame

[kllindley]

To answer the question, I think no.  It is mostly a post-mormon board with a few people who haven't fully left yet and a handful of others who believe the Church and put up with the constant attacks.  

[Jeanne]

Maybe all you guys need to do is be outspoken with Nemisis and those who monitor the board and change some rules.  Make the board one you would like it to be.

[CA Steve]

It does not appear to be a Mormon board if you thought you were getting your own planet.

 

 

 

 

[CV75]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite.

If you could hie to “Poor Slob”

In the twinkling of an eye,

And see the drudge whose whinge

Upon his keyboard flies,

Methinks improvement and progression

In this space don’t abound:

He just ain’t got no other place,

And nowhere else to pound.

[juliann]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

A Mormon board?  I have never seen it that way, although many members of the board are "Mormon".  But many are not, too, and this board has always been open to all who want to join in.

I see it as a board where we, generally, discuss Mormons and things about Mormon culture. And since some members of the board are not Mormon, and usually do not accept "Mormonism" or things that are associated with it, our discussions usually include both positive and negative comments.

If this was a "Mormon" board and every member of the board was a Mormon, I imagine our discussions would be a lot different than they usually are, with a lot less of the negative comments.

Yeah, it was a "Mormon" board run for the benefit and protection of Mormon posters. I was a founder. And I know the current owner sees it that way, too. It has just always been harder to keep people who were the ones under attack which is why I am concerned about the balance.  To date, the wiki leaks stuff is so overrated, to the point of silly, and it is now an ongoing topic.

But boards, blogs, and the like have all lost their former glory, I suspect. 

[JulieM]

2 hours ago, juliann said:

Is anyone else as tired of the relentless negativity as I am?  We are obviously losing our Mormon posters and I can only surmise it has stopped being fun after the tenth "look what the awful Church did!" thread a day. I appreciate the more neutral tone as the church is slowly dragged down, and even the perspectives. But when it is to the point we have excited threads about what hasn't even happened yet, it is overwhelming the Board, in my opinion, and quickly turning it into Mormon Discussions-lite. 

 

I think with the leaks, there came a lot more negative or sensational type threads.  I read those, but don't always comment or even follow them if they don't interest me.  

I agree with JLHPROF that the threads of most interest are doctrinal or about a church history topic (they reflect where I'm at right now with my own personal studies and looking for resources).  So the thread on the leak regarding the doctrine of "having your own planet" discussion is of interest to me.

I think what takes place here with the different topics is pretty reflective of what is happening with the church and the members too.  I see many more struggling and asking questions in my own ward and family just like we see here.  

I feel this board is the best one online for discussing topics related to the church.

Edited March 23, 2017 by JulieM

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

Some of the more radically conservative LDS posters seem to have left. I have noticed more critical voices as of late. I think the board functions best when, whatever the topic of conversation, we avoid emotionally charged language, which comes from extremes on either side. I think a good moderate tone is key to the life of the board, regardless of the viewpoints of the posters. 

While I agree for the most part, I always enjoy the radical perspectives.  They are entertaining and can add some much needed flavor.  What good is a salad dressing without the vinegar?

[Garden Girl]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

For every negative criticism around here, there is posted a defense, albeit, in many cases, not very good ones.  I think you're just realizing what many of us have realized before, the Church has many areas of concern and needs to make some drastic changes.  With a that said, the negative seems to stand out more loudly than the other to you as a result, because its more convincing. 

Hello stemelbow...

I'm no Pollyana when it comes to the Church, nor do I march lock step as some believe of we faithful... but I'd be interested in what you consider to be the "many areas of concern" or what "drastic changes" need to be made... you throw out statements like this that are your opinion (and perhaps others like you), but frankly, in my opinion, I don't see the need for anything close to drastic changes being needed... there's improvements that can be made, and that the Church has made, and hopefully will continue to evaluate and seek guidance in making.  (I guess I'm asking you rhetorically because I'm really not concerned with what you think needs to drastically change in the Church).

GG... from the beach on an overcast, chilly Spring day... 

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, juliann said:

... It has just always been harder to keep people who were the ones under attack which is why I am concerned about the balance.  

That can be fixed but only at the Moderator level.

Critics complain, because that is what critics do. So when critics complain, either in a thread or in a report to a Moderator, the Moderator is the one who should determine how to, or whether or not to, respond to that complaint.

Seems to me that when people complain the Moderators respond to the complaint by removing the person the complainer is complaining about, rather than removing the complainer.  Thus we see more complainers running the show.

Or at least that is how I see it.

Not that I am complaining.

 

 

[JulieM]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

While I agree for the most part, I always enjoy the radical perspectives.  They are entertaining and can add some much needed flavor.  What good is a salad dressing without the vinegar?

I agree.  An echo chamber is awfully boring, but it can become too radical as well.  I've found that extremes here (on either side) don't usually stick around too long.