Cadence

[Anonymous]

I didn’t see the deleted response, but I know you wouldn’t exaggerate or embellish it, Ray. I agree that is over the top, especially if you can describe it as possibly the most blatant attack ever and recognizing that you have likely read every one of the thousands of posts here. I think that this does have some extra seriousness because he commented to a new member who is struggling.

I am willing to reach out to him, but I am not sure there would be a benefit in doing so. He knows the rules and he knows our customs, and he knows he has been give leeway and has taken too much liberty with it. As we “sit in council” (so to speak), my input is that I would support a ban, albeit with sadness in my heart.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

someone wants to reach out and talk with him privately.

Not me, but I hope someone does. If it were me I’d say, Hey, you must know why Ray deleted that post. Hope you can walk the fine line and stay because we want you here.

I don’t know him at all, but I can feel for whatever pickle he finds himself in with the church and his family. Maybe someone could invite him to PM them if he needs to blow off steam.

Two cents from the backseat driver…..

[Anonymous]

I sent him a PM…told him to stop encouraging people to leave the church, which is against our mission, and not keep being so direct about “Joseph made it all up” and “the church is not good to raise kids in”.

I’ll let you know if he responds.

Clearly, he is on notice. Let’s keep a close eye and moderate and all jump in so it is not all Ray to Cadence, but he knows we’re all moderating him now.

[Anonymous]

Thanks, everyone.

This has been a burden on my heart, so to speak, for a long time. I know his situation and that he feels trapped and unable to leave. I know he would leave tomorrow if he felt it wouldn’t cause more harm than good. I also know the deep irony of him staying for the benefit of wife and kids and then saying participating in the Church is damaging for everyone – and there is a decent chance he recognizes that irony, as well.

He fits really well at a place like NOM, and he would fit really well here IF he would stop the insults and condescension and truly embrace the search for peace and proactive, individual faith building. He just can’t do that, apparently, and it saddens me greatly – almost as much as watching cwald sink into bitterness due to his family being unable to leave him alone. This role brings a different kind of pain than an active faith crisis, but it is real pain, nonetheless.

Let us know how he responds to the PM. We can make a collective decision at that point.

[Anonymous]

I had thoughts comparing cwald and cadence as well. I understand the feelings of hurt and anger, I deal with them myself.

[Anonymous]

The part that hurts the most with cwald is that we were making a difference – a real and visible difference – in his life, but his family destroyed it all with their insistence on orthodoxy.

[Anonymous]

Yes. But cwald always respected the mission. He didn’t see things the same way, and hinted at his feelings he had, but would listen to Ray’s moderating points and respect it and save the more bitter stuff for NOM.

He has opened my PM. But no response yet. Will keep you posted.

[Anonymous]

I would be hesitant to do a ban.

I would be more inclined to a direct PM about the mission of the site and how what he feels/says fits in with that mission. OON is an athiest and he doesn’t seem to have these issues.

Perhaps the bitterness is the result of the double life. Maybe he has to play the part for everyone in his life and that causes discord.

At any rate, I imagine a private and direct discussion about it would be helpful. I would let him know that I need him to engage with me in the conversation as his response will set the tone for what direction to take this. If he is willing to self moderate then fine. If he becomes beligerent or disrespectful towards the mission, the site, and the MODs then banning him is inevitable. If he is unresponsive then i might give him a predetermined amount of time (two weeks) for him to cool off and re-engage with me in conversation. If he doesn’t respond after the timetable then banning could be appropriate.

Essentially, I would try to know his story and then be firm about guidelines. If he knowingly violates the guidelines after he is on personal notice then he is making the decision himself. suicide by moderator.

I am not implying that this has not been done already. I hope that Heber’s PM dialogue with him can provide this in a clear and unequivical fashion.

[Anonymous]

Complete agreement Roy. Good approach. Let’s see what he replies with. He may even respond better to you than me…we’ll see what our next steps are.

[Anonymous]

The ironic thing is that I can imagine a conversation such as this one going on behind the scenes for John Dehlin’s church discipline.

It can certainly change the perspective to be on the other side of the fence and trying to do the best thing for both the individual and the organization. :crazy:

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

The ironic thing is that I can imagine a conversation such as this one going on behind the scenes for John Dehlin’s church discipline.

It can certainly change the perspective to be on the other side of the fence and trying to do the best thing for both the individual and the organization. :crazy:

He shoots, he scores with the perspective drop I needed.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

The ironic thing is that I can imagine a conversation such as this one going on behind the scenes for John Dehlin’s church discipline.

It can certainly change the perspective to be on the other side of the fence and trying to do the best thing for both the individual and the organization. :crazy:

And thus the allusion I made to sitting in council. Having sat on real disciplinary councils, in my experience it works just like what we’re doing here (except faster because we’re actually sitting in the same room). :thumbup:

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

And thus the allusion I made to sitting in council. Having sat on real disciplinary councils, in my experience it works just like what we’re doing here (except faster because we’re actually sitting in the same room). :thumbup:

And…I’m not sure how much God is involved, right? That is something to remember with these church councils.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

And thus the allusion I made to sitting in council. Having sat on real disciplinary councils, in my experience it works just like what we’re doing here (except faster because we’re actually sitting in the same room). :thumbup:

And…I’m not sure how much God is involved, right? That is something to remember with these church councils.

Sokay. Just shoot me a PM when you need me to jump in on the discussion. 😆

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

And thus the allusion I made to sitting in council. Having sat on real disciplinary councils, in my experience it works just like what we’re doing here (except faster because we’re actually sitting in the same room). :thumbup:

And…I’m not sure how much God is involved, right? That is something to remember with these church councils.

Right. I was (and am) never sure when God is really involved. There are times when I have felt more at peace with a decision than others, but I don’t know if that’s really a sign of God’s involvement. I can the same about callings – sometimes I hear a name and it’s like “Yeah, that’s really good.” Most of the time I don’t feel anything one way or the other. Sometimes the SP will ask us for input on names to consider for a calling, and sometimes a name just pops into my head (and sometimes the same name into other heads) and sometimes I sit there with what I’m sure is a blank stare and I’ve got nothing.

I know this council thing is sort of being emphasized throughout the church at the moment (had stake conference yet this year?) I think there’s some wisdom and perhaps some inspiration behind the idea. Coming to a consensus is no easy task, but I see it happen all the time, despite varied opinions and diverse discussion – in the end we can all agree.

[Author]

Posts