cwald

[Anonymous]

I will bake some brownies and we can drop them by.

And no more soft landing comments from me. Promise.

[Anonymous]

I’m with you, Hawk. I look at NOM once in a while and almost never post. I have not delved in to the current brouhaha, I have only looked, and then vowed not to look anymore because cwald was badly misrepresenting StayLDS and what happened. I have no problem staying away from NOM for the most part, but I do think some of the people there fit much better than they would here. I agree about the mods, they do seem to be good people and try to stick to their mission – when I visited a few months ago there seemed to be a purge going on. I guess I didn’t see the more cerebral thing, but now that I think about it, it’s probably so – I’ve always thought there was some who open their mouths before they think there.

We like brownies, Mom.

[Anonymous]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

It doesn’t behoove us to get in a war with our nearest neighbor.

Agree. There are some good discussions there and posters who I think would fit in fine here. I think what I’ve seen there the last couple of days is an effort to show us(and maybe themselves) that the criticism of them is not entirely deserved. Seems like they’ve been a little more “cerebral” – or something along those lines. And maybe I’m wrong about this, but it also seems to me that we have been more conscious of how we might appear to a NOM visitor. So maybe the cwald episode wasn’t all bad.

In general, though, I still think it’s mainly StuckLDS there and that colors the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Just to be clear – am I correct that Cwald was never excommunicated? Just released as EQP due to non-payment of tithing and concerns from his family over “middle way Mormonism”, correct?

I remember him posting about going to the branch some time after the fact and being well received.

I personally am not in favor of letting cwald back. I do not believe that he responded well at my attempts to engage him before the banning. I do not know why but I feel that he is looking past me to engage with someone else. Who could that be? Heber? Hawk? Orson or Ray? I assume that he was provoking and wanting to engage with Ray. The very person that he accuses of being autocratic.

So if he were to come back who could moderate him without just reinstating the ban and starting the whole drama over again?

I feel bad about the NOM war stuff but really that was created by cwald. We have been describing NOM as less faith affirming / more cynical / a harder place to land for a long time now (based upon individuals’ personal experience) and it hasn’t caused an uproar. As painful as this is I am of the mind that reinstatement would just draw out the process and the potential for more drama. We can’t control what he says at NOM but that will never change.

If he does come back I will plan to give him a wide birth and a “good luck” to whomever we designate to moderate him. :lolno:

[Anonymous]

I’m inclined to not let him back in at this point. A wise person (me) once said in a work setting, you never try to talk someone out of quitting, and if they quit, you don’t bring them back. There’s a reason people quit. People don’t quit the first time they think about it. They have to be pretty disgruntled or unstable to lose their temper and lash out. Nobody needs that kind of drama. We wish him well, but there’s not much point in continuing. And his subsequent behavior was very erratic.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

What happens if he doesn’t do as we ask?

He is gone without a second thought. Seriously.

Your statements, Roy and Hawkgrrrl, was what I was trying to get at above. This has gone on for quite some time – perhaps years. He’s finally banned (or quits, whichever is your point of view) and then pitches a fit. So we let him back in, he’s already proven he can’t leave us alone, he crosses the line again, and we ban him again. I personally think that’s all just a matter of time and inevitable. What happens then? He goes over to NOM (or somewhere else) and pitches a fit and whines and moans and bitches and kicks dirt over the plate and we have this same discussion again – when it could be all done right now.

Roy, good question about the excommunication. That’s never been clear to me, either. Is he just inactive or is there some formal church discipline in place? I have never sensed he was ex’ed (but my Jedi senses are not always accurate).

[Anonymous]

hawkgrrrl wrote:

So, I suggest we simply drop it (most of you have already done so).

I agree. And I think it is blowing over. It did bring a few eyeballs to StayLDS and a few StayLDS over to NOM to check things out. You never know if that helps some people needing a slight different environment. Not necessarily a bad thing, but dropping the comparisons on the board is good,and I think that thread has run it’s course at NOM.

I’m not so concerned about comments like “NOM isn’t a soft place to land”…because I agree with that. It is an opinion. That statement isn’t an attack like the words cwald was hurling at us. It was just an opinion and some may not appreciate it at NOM, but big whoop.

I’d like to be nice neighbors with them. I check in there from time to time. Don’t find much to keep discussions interesting and I leave, but sometimes check it out. For some reason it makes me feel more negative there, and I don’t like that, which is why I don’t go back for a while.

Perhaps wisdom says we don’t let him back, but this is a discussion forum and not a work place. It is volunteer people adding content. I think it is a little different, IMO.

I lean towards more open to let him back with consensus we don’t spend time on him more…if something comes up and we need to take action…we just ban him at that point. It bugs me he almost dared me and Hawk to “prove” something with this…that totally bugs me and it was an idiotic thing to say. But…that doesn’t sway me one way or another. I’m not doing it to prove anything…it is just what I think.

The problem I have is I will likely not be able to moderate daily…so I don’t mind helping to mod so Ray stays out of it…but I will need help because my involvement is less with my new life changes (I will be remarried in 19 days…yay!). I’m not going away, just not on daily.

I can setup my account to receive a notice when someone PMs me, so if you want my involvement or to take mod action, you can PM me and I’ll get that and respond. But others will need to be involved.

so……

1) Should we tell him June 1 is the time we can reinstate him so the topic between StayLDS and NOM has blown over and time has passed to reinstate him?

2) Go ahead and reinstate him today?

3) Leave him banned?

My vote is #1, with him on a short leash, but I will do whatever the team decides.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

good question about the excommunication. That’s never been clear to me, either.

Me either. But cwald stated it in his comments, so I assumed he was ex’d. But…since he distorts things…who knows if he was specifically ex’d or if he quit and tells people he was ex’d and it was because StayLDS. I don’t care to find out, frankly. But if he told me in his PM:

Quote:

but to be excommunication from the community that “caused” me to get “excommunicated” in the first place is a shitty shitty thing to do.

He is using the excommunication term from our community so who knows how he uses that term about the church too…officially, or just how it made him “feel” or if he thinks “I was basically excommunicated by how the ostracize me”…just hard to tell with him. His credibility is bad on facts.

[Anonymous]

I think he reveals the answer to that question in his PM:

Quote:

but to be excommunication from the community that “caused” me to get “excommunicated” in the first place is a shitty shitty thing to do.

The first mention of excommunication is a reference to him being banned from staylds. The second mention of excommunication is in quotes, which to me says it was figurative, not literal. He feels shunned by members of the church/family. Effectively an “excommunication” in his eyes.

[Anonymous]

It is also in quotes.

Nibbler…what do you vote on options 1, 2, or 3?

Heber13 wrote:

so……

1) Should we tell him June 1 is the time we can reinstate him so the topic between StayLDS and NOM has blown over and time has passed to reinstate him?

2) Go ahead and reinstate him today?

3) Leave him banned?

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

I think he reveals the answer to that question in his PM:

Quote:

but to be excommunication from the community that “caused” me to get “excommunicated” in the first place is a shitty shitty thing to do.

The first mention of excommunication is a reference to him being banned from staylds. The second mention of excommunication is in quotes, which to me says it was figurative, not literal. He feels shunned by members of the church/family. Effectively an “excommunication” in his eyes.

I agree he has friends here – even several of us have said we like him. He also participates on other boards, NOM and Mormon Discussions at least, and has friends there. I went and read some of his old NOM comments this morning – when he first went there he was much less caustic, just like he was here. He also indicates he went there thinking it might be time to move on from here and that he needed someplace where he could say what he really thought – 4 years ago. The bottom line for me as I have thought about it is that he no longer supports the StayLDS mission. I’m sorry he feels shunned but he also holds some responsibility for where he’s at and playing the blame game (i.e. blaming it on bad blood with Ray or over-moderation here) isn’t cutting it for me.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

It is also in quotes.

Nibbler…what do you vote on options 1, 2, or 3?

Heber13 wrote:

so……

1) Should we tell him June 1 is the time we can reinstate him so the topic between StayLDS and NOM has blown over and time has passed to reinstate him?

2) Go ahead and reinstate him today?

3) Leave him banned?

I’m kind of burnt out on all things drama right now so I haven’t given it much thought. I don’t mean to pass the buck but I think I may sit this one out unless I get a bolt of inspiration.

[Anonymous]

I’m tired of drama, too. 80/20 principle says that there are 20% of the people who take 80% of the energy, time and attention. He’s definitely in that 20%, although in fairness, we aren’t having a lot of mod drama aside from him.

[Anonymous]

I have been thinking about this a little bit (since I won’t let myself spend much energy on it), and I want to propose keeping the current ban in place and letting him know that we will reconsider it if he comes to the point where he feels he needs us to find a way to return to activity in the Church and can participate here according to our rules. I know that is not the standard we use for all participants, but I think it is justified in this case – especially since he has another place he can vent his spleen.

In other words, we will consider it if he asks explicitly to be allowed to participate as a new participant would do who is trying to stay involved to some degree with the Church. No special consideration as an old-timer; no rehashing of old grievances that have been hashed out multiple times here already; no calls to boycott the temple (which really is what started all of this drama in the first place); etc. If he will promise to use NOM to vent and StayLDS to seek advice and help and solutions to stay actively involved to some degree, we will reconsider.

I don’t see that happening, since he is completely inactive and disengaged physically, as far as I can tell, but if that changes, we will be here for him.

How does that sound?

Also, fwiw, I am quite certain he has not been excommunicated from the Church. He feels he was driven away as an apostate – but I am not aware of any formal action.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Ray.

I’m fine with that. I can send him a note…I’ll wait until tomorrow to give other mods a chance to express concern on the approach, and then proceed as agreed by everyone or not.

[Author]

Posts