- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
To await moderator concensus. Here’s what I PMed sheldon: Quote:Sheldon,
I just wanted to give you a head’s up. This topic has temporarily been moved while moderators discuss things. The issue is whether to allow links to zelphontheshelf, which takes on an “anti” tone.
It’s more of a protection of the mission of the site thing than a desire to avoid the conversation thing
The zelphontheshelf blog is pretty anti.
Glad you did. I just read it and was going to start a rant about Sheldon up here. His NOM post was a nudge, this last one was clickbait. I agree about the Zelph blog, it can be pretty caustic. Some people probably find it helpful, but I’m not sure we should be linking to it. Maybe he should post it over on the new NOM site, they’ll like it more (and I think “Zelph” has posted on the old NOM). I actually think it’s OK Sheldon posted about the new NOM site – I’m sure some of them lurked here because they were homeless and it’s OK with me to spread the word to NOMs, I don’t want the most caustic of them here. Sheldon does sometimes walk that fine line and he knows it. Reining him in a bit every once in a while is good.
FWIW, I think I first heard the falling out of bed analogy from BKP.
And if you’re wondering why I’m up so late, I was watching a very good BYU/Boise State game. (BYU lost by a point, but nearly upset the nationally ranked Broncos.)
I got a curt response, a quote from a LDS leader about ignoring truth because of the source. No other comment from sheldon, just the quote. Sigh. I quoted the rule we have about not linking to anti-Mormon sites and explained how I thought one of the goals of StayLDS was to create a safe place for people that are on the fence and a place where people would feel comfortable telling their believing spouse about.
For people that don’t know me… I don’t like being the disciplinarian. In fact I don’t think that I can be an effective moderator for that very reason. I’m an invertebrate.
Sheldon likely doesn’t know but in his NOM post his link to the new NOM was broken and I fixed it for him.
:angel: NOM was unplugged for nearly 3 months. I didn’t see a rush to create accounts at StayLDS during that period but there were one or two familiar faces that showed up to post that I hadn’t seen in a while. Maybe some NOM people lurked here? If so it might be helpful to those guys to know that NOM is back, a place where they feel more comfortable posting.
Man, you’re a good moderator nibbler…you crack the whip and keep everyone in line. Such a hard-nose! 😆 no, seriously…good call. If Sheldon posted about his recent bout with diarrhea…we would move that too…not because we are hiding truth…simply…doesn’t really belong in these conversations we’re having.
😯 He can start his own “Can’t StayLDS.com” website if he wants. It seems pretty clear his post was against our site rules. You can also quote from the
rules and policiesQuote:This is NOT a site to post anti-Mormon links and to encourage people to leave the LDS Church. That is NOT our purpose; it is not our mission. Posts and comments encouraging that, with NO constructive input into how to “stayLDS” will not be left unchallenged – and those that have the sole intention of posting anti-Mormon stuff will be deleted.
The other strategy we could coach him on is that quoting sections (without links to anti sites, but quotes from them) can be used to discuss how people feel, and then ask how to reconcile that with staying or how to be compassionate or how to do something with those thoughts to understand others….not simply posting anti sites and a quote directly in conflict with our mission and no other support discussion around it that makes it fit in our mission.
With my other hat on, I like opposing views and don’t want to push sheldon or others away…keep them here to discuss and keep views balanced. Just in line with the site.
DO you think he is ticked off and taking his ball and going home…or gonna stay around with an understanding how we moderate?The NOM thing was fine to me because we have discussed them a lot, there was nothing wrong with that update. IMO
You handled it perfectly. Sheldon has been walking a fine line for a long time – and stepping over it regularly. His response to your message is a good indication of his attitude – and it’s not good.
Nibbler – You did fantastic. Seriously. These are the worst. People who know, and Sheldon knows very well, but just want to see how far they can go. Nibbler you a wonderful moderator. None of us will ever get these type right. High fives from me.
I agree Nibbler, you did great! I PM’ed Sheldon with the following:
Quote:Hi Sheldon,
I wanted to let you know that we can copy and paste ideas from sources that might be considered anti-Mormon for the purpose of discussion. Even when StayLDS rules prohibit links to anti-Mormon sources. We are not against discussing ideas in a respectful way.
I did read the Zelph on the Shelf post and found it insightful but limiting. It essentially takes the analogy of not being in the bed far enough and carries it over to the possibility of being so far in that you fall out the other side. They are essentially saying that it is entirely possible to “search, ponder, and pray” oneself out of the church. I validate that and I believe it to be true.
On the other hand, the analogy only allows for 3 outcomes on the spectrum. 1) Not active because of disinterest/laziness. 2) active with interest/curiosity enough to skim the surface. 3) Not active because of too much interest and curiosity. I appreciate that it pushes back against the generalization that people that leave the church are lazy or want to sin. Unfortunately, it does so by generalizing the people that stay as having a ho-hum mediocre level of interest/curiosity.
Perhaps a more reflective grouping would be that there are 4 groups of people: 1) people for whom the church works well for any combination of the positive reasons A through Z, 2) People for whom the church does not work well for any combination of the negative reasons A through Z, 3) people for whom the church works sometimes and in some contexts but not in others for any combination of the negative and positive reasons A through Z, and 4) People that live without giving much thought to the LDS church in any meaningful sense.
Just my impression.
Roy
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.