MiserereNobis Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 1 minute ago, Calm said: Hi Jolly was a board member who was with the MoTab. He would post the music a week or two before conference here to give us something to look forward to. The board is stalking out bringing up his posts or I would give an example. A MoTab mole! Now that is exciting!
Popular Post Calm Posted March 26, 2017 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) I think Johnnie is assuming the leak is done by a 'mole' because MormonLeaks posted it. He is assuming that it was given to MormonLeaks by someone up high in Church admin. He is ignoring the possibility that it was someone who was a friend or relative who was told by someone who was officially given the info, that it is not a particularly major secret...there is a limited number of women likely to be speaking, so casually sharing the info around the office might happen, his whole premise of a limited number of individuals knowing has been disproven as there is the long list of translators, reporters, probably makeup and dress people, PA people preparing info on speakers for bios if asked as well as new releases, and likely plenty of other tech prep people who get involved in setting things up (do they have practice sessions at the pulpit to test for any adjustments due to voice or just for comfort?) in addition to all those involved in choosing the lineup and maybe proofing the talks for errors, footnoting sources, and helping with preparation of videos and PowerPoint or whatever you call it needed for the talks these days. Probably hundreds of mid and low level employees and their friends and relatives might be the ultimate source. Mormonleaks might have even come across it online or someone pointed out an online site and they just picked it up to promote themselves so it doesn't have to be originally from someone who is supportive of ML's tactics. Like I said before, Johnnie likes drama. All of his 'expose' posts sound much more exciting than when others talk about it. I think he is the most well written alleged bomb dropper we have had so far, though the actual explosions have been rather less than impressive so far. I wonder if he gets into conspiracy theories much. Johnnie, some advice...you want to be taken seriously, present your theory for dissection before exclaiming excitedly over the massive import of them. You are jumping to conclusions on way too limited of info multiple times and you are starting to look like the boy who cried wolf. And your level of excitement...your bias is exposing itself, no balance here, nothing close to it, imo. Edited March 26, 2017 by Calm 5
Calm Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 36 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said: This whole MormonLeak business is so ridiculous. As my students would say, "meh." Really, Johnie Cake, the list of speakers at General Conference is some sort of bombshell? Even if it means that some secretary somewhere is leaking, the best he or she can leak is.... a list of speakers? It was at least cool learning that Bob Marley had been baptized... As I said in another thread, you all gotta lot to learn from Catholicism when it comes to conspiracies and secrets. Read Dan Brown and check out the Vatican Secret Archives and then get back to me People were so excited when they thought Brown's next book was going to be Mormon focused. No such luck though. I think it was his "Lost Symbol" which was Masonic based.
Popular Post probablyHagoth7 Posted March 26, 2017 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: ...This means that there is a highly placed mole in the church... (And we all know that mole's code name.) Edited March 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7 6
probablyHagoth7 Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) What?! I was removed at the last minute from the list of speakers? Again?! Might have to temporarily stop attending Relief Society...in protest. ;0) Edited March 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7
rodheadlee Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 10 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: I think everyone is missing the big picture....more and more insiders are leaking confidential information.. if this is of no concern to believers then I guess I shouldn't care either People only care when it is the Russians leaking info on Hillary. The hypocrisy is astounding. 1
probablyHagoth7 Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) 10 hours ago, Calm said: You do like drama. Edited March 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7
Scott Lloyd Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 9 hours ago, Mystery Meat said: The whole premise of this thread is pretty stupid. If nothing else, this thread shows me how truly desperate some people are. It's a nothing-burger. Like Rachel Maddow's breathless exposure of Trump's 2004 tax return a couple of weeks ago (it revealed -- brace yourself -- that Trump is rich and that he paid a lot of money in taxes that year). Or Geraldo Rivera's opening of Al Capone's vault a generation ago. 2
probablyHagoth7 Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) Just realized that by outing Calm as a mole, I have violated Nemesis' ironclad rule# 2 regarding leaks: "2. Discussions that delve into the speculation will be cut off." But if my speculation about Calm is well founded...by her own avatar pic...will I still be banned from this thread? (Please say yes.) :0) Bonus round question: When is the right time to have a mole checked? Edited March 26, 2017 by probablyHagoth7 4
Tacenda Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 9 hours ago, Calm said: I think Johnnie is assuming the leak is done by a 'mole' because MormonLeaks posted it. He is assuming that it was given to MormonLeaks by someone up high in Church admin. He is ignoring the possibility that it was someone who was a friend or relative who was told by someone who was officially given the info, that it is not a particularly major secret...there is a limited number of women likely to be speaking, so casually sharing the info around the office might happen, his whole premise of a limited number of individuals knowing has been disproven as there is the long list of translators, reporters, probably makeup and dress people, PA people preparing info on speakers for bios if asked as well as new releases, and likely plenty of other tech prep people who get involved in setting things up (do they have practice sessions at the pulpit to test for any adjustments due to voice or just for comfort?) in addition to all those involved in choosing the lineup and maybe proofing the talks for errors, footnoting sources, and helping with preparation of videos and PowerPoint or whatever you call it needed for the talks these days. Probably hundreds of mid and low level employees and their friends and relatives might be the ultimate source. Mormonleaks might have even come across it online or someone pointed out an online site and they just picked it up to promote themselves so it doesn't have to be originally from someone who is supportive of ML's tactics. Like I said before, Johnnie likes drama. All of his 'expose' posts sound much more exciting than when others talk about it. I think he is the most well written alleged bomb dropper we have had so far, though the actual explosions have been rather less than impressive so far. I wonder if he gets into conspiracy theories much. Johnnie, some advice...you want to be taken seriously, present your theory for dissection before exclaiming excitedly over the massive import of them. You are jumping to conclusions on way too limited of info multiple times and you are starting to look like the boy who cried wolf. And your level of excitement...your bias is exposing itself, no balance here, nothing close to it, imo. http://www.mormonstories.org/mormonleaks/ I listened to this recently, in it they mention that there are hundreds of employees in the church that are unbelievers and many leak information. The church should be more focused on this than Ryan and Scott of Mormon leaks. When the church is more transparent, then there is no need for Mormon leaks, John Dehlin and the like are not the problem also. They all go away when the church does it's job and acts like it should. People have a right when they give time, talents and all they have to a church/corporation, to be given transparency. It's on the leaders' shoulders to be honest. When they are, the problems won't exist. And if that is not the case then the church deserves to be harmed. 2
Calm Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 35 minutes ago, Tacenda said: http://www.mormonstories.org/mormonleaks/ I listened to this recently, in it they mention that there are hundreds of employees in the church that are unbelievers and many leak information. The church should be more focused on this than Ryan and Scott of Mormon leaks.. Yeah, nothing like basing one's life on gossip. Tell me, Tacenda, do you believe all gossip or just the stuff you like? 2
Tacenda Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 11 minutes ago, Calm said: Yeah, nothing like basing one's life on gossip. Tell me, Tacenda, do you believe all gossip or just the stuff you like? I don't believe all gossip. I know you don't listen to podcasts. But if you want me to pin point when Ryan mentions the hundreds I can. This doesn't appear to be gossip, it's from the horses mouth, unless you think Ryan is lying. I really hope for a church that can just be and have nothing to hide. Sorry... And one day it will just "be". And the anti info or the leakers will no longer exist. 1
Jeanne Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 Tacenda, I saw that the mormon stories withI Ryan were there last night. No CC's..if you ever get a chance, can you give me an idea of the discussion? Of course, it is at your convenience time wise. In my view, it is not that each leak is extremely important or even vital to the church one way or the other..it is the very fact..and I believe the reason that people leak even the smallest things..that we actually get to know anything from the church that is so hush..hush..and secret all the time.
Popular Post Calm Posted March 26, 2017 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2017 54 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I don't believe all gossip. I know you don't listen to podcasts. But if you want me to pin point when Ryan mentions the hundreds I can. This doesn't appear to be gossip, it's from the horses mouth, unless you think Ryan is lying. I really hope for a church that can just be and have nothing to hide. Sorry... And one day it will just "be". And the anti info or the leakers will no longer exist. I see no reason not to believe Ryan is lying since his morality includes encouraging employees to lie and steal from their employer. 6
Tacenda Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Calm said: I see no reason not to believe Ryan is lying since his morality includes encouraging employees to lie and steal from their employer. If you listen to the podcast, he tells the story of what led up to the leaks. He didn't encourage anyone. The first leak was on the church policy about gays and their children, he read it online from someone that was aware of it. That person didn't want to be known at first but now has a blog, he then relayed it to John Dehlin. So that was how people started sending him things. He said it was because they felt it needed to be known. But I do feel in a round about way it seems that he encourages this. But they've said it has nothing to do with bringing the church down, but to get the church to have transparency.
Calm Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 Why should I believe his story of how it came to be? 1
The Nehor Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 19 hours ago, Gray said: Could they leak the songs ahead of time? That would let us practice singing the harmony parts before-hand They have been "leaked" on this very board. 1
The Nehor Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: I think everyone is missing the big picture....more and more insiders are leaking confidential information.. if this is of no concern to believers then I guess I shouldn't care either Oh please follow through on this......please...... Edited March 27, 2017 by The Nehor 2
Rain Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 8 hours ago, Tacenda said: http://www.mormonstories.org/mormonleaks/ I listened to this recently, in it they mention that there are hundreds of employees in the church that are unbelievers and many leak information. The church should be more focused on this than Ryan and Scott of Mormon leaks. When the church is more transparent, then there is no need for Mormon leaks, John Dehlin and the like are not the problem also. They all go away when the church does it's job and acts like it should. People have a right when they give time, talents and all they have to a church/corporation, to be given transparency. It's on the leaders' shoulders to be honest. When they are, the problems won't exist. And if that is not the case then the church deserves to be harmed. How odd that those who want transparency are not transparent with their beliefs. 4
churchistrue Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 22 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: This is information held by only a few highly placed individuals...not all of them GA...like secretaries, administrators etc This means that there is a highly placed mole in the church who is leaking this information. Plus this is a timely leak of current data, unlike past leaks, meaning leakers are becoming more aggressive and the data leaked more relevant It would have been awesome (from mormonwikileaks perspective) to get GA pay stubs saying they get 750K a year. Instead it was what more like 150K. It would be really condemning if they got internal docs encouraging GA's to continue to lie about believing the church, when everyone inside knows it's not true, they're just in it for the money. Instead, we get a leaked video of Elder Holland inspiring the rest of the GA's with a testimony of Jesus Christ. It could potentially be really condemning if there was a high placed mole IF (big if right there) there were really condemning secret info to leak. If that really condemning info doesn't exist, well it will continue to go for mormonwikileaks the way it's gone the last few months. Interesting for some people. But pretty ho hum for most.
Johnnie Cake Posted March 27, 2017 Author Posted March 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, churchistrue said: It would have been awesome (from mormonwikileaks perspective) to get GA pay stubs saying they get 750K a year. Instead it was what more like 150K. It would be really condemning if they got internal docs encouraging GA's to continue to lie about believing the church, when everyone inside knows it's not true, they're just in it for the money. Instead, we get a leaked video of Elder Holland inspiring the rest of the GA's with a testimony of Jesus Christ. It could potentially be really condemning if there was a high placed mole IF (big if right there) there were really condemning secret info to leak. If that really condemning info doesn't exist, well it will continue to go for mormonwikileaks the way it's gone the last few months. Interesting for some people. But pretty ho hum for most. Your post demonstrates that mormonleaks agenda is for transparency and not to necessarily embarrass the church. That GA's make far less than what was commonly believed by church critics confirms that some leaks can be beneficial to the church's image
ERayR Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 The real question is why is the captioning so terrible. Isn't anybody monitoring it. 1
ERayR Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 19 hours ago, Tacenda said: If you listen to the podcast, he tells the story of what led up to the leaks. He didn't encourage anyone. The first leak was on the church policy about gays and their children, he read it online from someone that was aware of it. That person didn't want to be known at first but now has a blog, he then relayed it to John Dehlin. So that was how people started sending him things. He said it was because they felt it needed to be known. But I do feel in a round about way it seems that he encourages this. But they've said it has nothing to do with bringing the church down, but to get the church to have transparency. Did he mention any bridges he had for sale?
probablyHagoth7 Posted March 27, 2017 Posted March 27, 2017 On 3/26/2017 at 1:00 AM, Calm said: People were so excited when they thought Brown's next book was going to be Mormon focused. No such luck though. I think it was his "Lost Symbol" which was Masonic based. 1 Masonic based? (Which means Nephite origins.) So at least *that* book was [indirectly] Mormon focused. And "Lost Symbol" also focused extensively on theosis - so even there focused on a core Mormon theme. Haven't yet gotten around to seeing Inferno. Has anyone read or seen it? If so, thoughts?
Recommended Posts