- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
They are different IP’s and ISP’s. I just read george’s intro message, and to say that the “SLC kissing incident” is telling you to “get out of Dodge” . . . when the official version makes it clear that the couple involved intentionally picked a fight by making out, swearing, etc. . . . It just feels like an excuse to post here, and I’m not sure I believe any of it. Old-Timer wrote:They are different IP’s and ISP’s. I just read george’s intro message, and to say that the “SLC kissing incident” is telling you to “get out of Dodge” . . . when the official version makes it clear that the couple involved intentionally picked a fight by making out, swearing, etc. . . . It just feels like an excuse to post here, and I’m not sure I believe any of it.
I looked at that too. I think the technicals and the stories are different enough that they are not the same person (unless a genius troll, I suppose).
I’m not really buying it from George anymore.
George just posted another thread that, essentially, is a simple attack against the Church. What do you think?
Old-Timer wrote:George just posted another thread that, essentially, is a simple attack against the Church.
What do you think?
Could you tell us which post, or provide a link. I saw the one about Grandfathering… but that’s it. That one didn’t seem to me to be a big deal, but maybe that’s not the one you meant.Look at how he changed the description of the grandfathering post after my comment. I just get a very uneasy feeling almost every time he posts, since it seems to be a pattern. He posts something that always mentions “a dark underbelly of the Church” (or something similar), then, when asked for detail or challenged in any way, he shifts the conversation and description of the issue.
I’m probably over-sensitive, but I’ve never felt good about him.
I don’t know if he edited the post or I just missed it but I didn’t see anything. I left him a reply.
To me he just sounds like he’s looking for a little direction.
Yes, maybe he deleted it. I didn’t notice any comment about the underbelly of the church or anything. However, I think I understand what you’re saying. He tends to ask a question and then shift the conversation to controversy even where none was intended. Some people are just that way I think. Some people are always looking for a fight, something over which they can nitpick. If George is who he says he is (I have some doubts) he is doing remarkably well just to be on a forum discussing anything at all. I think it is good to keep an eye on him because I have some reservation about a grandfather of his age joining a New Order Mormon style forum and debating over talking to his grandkids. I know my dad (also a grandfather) has no interest in talking about any of this with me at all. He just doesn’t care. He’s just happy with the way things are and wants them to continue until the end of his days.
From this particular post: Quote:To me, the church is a fairy tale. Like a beautiful mansion, it has a strong visual effect, but there are dark foundational cracks if you look closely.
Quote:As my well-meaning aunt cried out, fifty-one years ago, upon learning I’d joined the LDS church, “You’ve ruined your life.” Ruined NO, but made very spiritually complex, YES. I kinda wish I’d never met those Mormon missionaries.
I just get a trollish feeling in his actual posts. I think he’s looking for someone to say it’s OK to leave – which I would say (and have), but he also seems to be trying to convince others to leave. I just don’t believe what he says.
If he is trying to convince people to leave, and tries to have “civil” conversations with us — I bet in the end he’ll realize how futile his attempts are here …and he may just find some reasons for STAYING! 
😆 George is very borderline to me — still too angry. I agree he seems to want a fight. I have a feeling he is very passive in real life. He may be more comfortable expressing it here with the mask of anonymity and an audience that listens. Quote:I confess that I suffer guilt over leading my posterity into Mormonism.
This is beginning to get to be too much for me – but I really shouldn’t be the one to ask him about his purpose here, since I’ve already done it privately.
I haven’t been following his posts at all, but from what Ray has said, I think something should be done. If he’s not responding to PM’s then what’s the next step? (I’m new to moderating, and don’t know how you’ve handled it in the past.) I sent him a PM a while ago, and he responded with a quasi-apology – that he didn’t understand the purpose of the site at the time. I think someone else needs to tell him privately that he needs to commit one way or the other – to this site and/or the Church. If he stays here, he can discuss issues, but he has to stop launching broadsides against the Church. It’s just not what we are about. I couldn’t let his last comment on the “Sorry, Charlie” thread stand unchallenged, so I posted a very direct response. We’ll see what he says. Which reminds me:
primarycolor has been straight negative, as well. We need to pay attention – not to moderate right now, but to give extra attention to the posts.
Yes, we need to pay close attention – but there can be a fine line between their personal expression and outward attacks on the church. For example I don’t necessarily see George’s statement “I confess that I suffer guilt over leading my posterity into Mormonism” as an outward attack on the church. I see it as where he is right now, within himself. If he were giving reasons or attempting to convince others how evil the church is that is something different. I see this statement as acknowledging his current view – and (my) being optimistic, knowing he’s here at this forum, I hope he is looking for ways to become more positive.
In the end if he doesn’t want to try to be more positive we are not a good match for him. I just don’t want to project his intention for him.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.