- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
How do we ask him to focus on the topics being discussed in each thread and not shotgun the threads to oblivion? I don’t want to even appear to disapprove of him or give the impression we are trying to suppress him in any way, but I can see lots of broad-based rants getting posted on multiple threads if we aren’t careful. For example, there are at least a half dozen topics within his comments on the Mormon Apologetics Board post – what has become the missionary work/GA thread.
I’d let it ride for a little bit. I wonder who s/he is. Myabe they need to let it out. If it becomes a trend, we can say something to them. They might need some coaching. I like that approach, Brian – and Angie. I know it’s hard sometimes to leave behind a style that is fed by many of the other sites and re-learn to discuss things again. That might have been a mistake. He has totally derailed. Maybe he should be kicked out. HiJolly just sent me the following private message. He is fine with me sharing it with everyone who has access to this thread. Quote:Ray,
I think I’m done with “Frederick”. I appreciate your posts in the thread.
I have come to the considered and prayerful judgment that “Fred” is in the gall of bitterness, with all that comes with it. But I really don’t think that anything else I say will help him, so I’m bowing out. Unless of course you want me to do more — I would if you wanted me to.
I can tell him what he needs. I can tell him why.
I know Heavenly Father wants to help us, and too many times we’re just like “Fred”. Self-blinded, angry, sad, hurt and not able to receive help until we sort things out a bit. But oh, the damage we cause in the meantime. Makes me love and respect God all the more; makes Him SO real to me.
It also helps me appreciate this site, and what you are trying to do here. God bless you & those others involved here. Feel free to pass this note on to whomever is running/behind the board.
HiJolly
Given his latest tirade, I have placed a temporary (7 day) ban on Shederlaomach. I would have made it 1 day, but I want to make sure we all have a chance to discuss what to do – and I’m not sure I will be able to log on again until at least late tomorrow night. I also locked the topic until we decide what to do.
Please weigh in on what you each want to do.
Someone should send him an email. He wrote to John D. asking why he was banned. John D. said he didn’t know and asked if he was keeping in the spirit of the site. His name is Kent B Wallace. Here’s the email exchange with John: Kent: “John, What is going on here? I don’t see what I have done to deserve being banned. I really hope you will take the time to explain this. I was not rude or profane? I don’t think I deserve this. I hope you will give me some clarification very quickly. Thanks, Kent”
John: “Kent, I don’t run StayLDS. I didn’t ban you. I didn’t even know you were banned. I’m out of the loop. But I can find out why. Were you really keeping in the spirit of the site? Sincere inquiry w/an intent to stay? Let me know, and I’ll find out the scoop. John”
I would also suggest giving John the scoop in case he is called upon to defend again.
I will send the email since I was not involved in the argument. Sheder has too much anger for this site. StayLDS is for people that are mostly done with that phase. Sheder seems to be deep into that stage. There are other sites to vent. He needs to let it out and find peace. I unlocked the topic to add reasons for locking it. The spirit of the discussion was off track. Shederlaomach was either using profanity directly, or implying it while mocking someone else for calling him on it. Both are violations of the rules.
I’ll send the email, explain that it is a 7-day ban to allow him to cool off, and then we can try one more time to see. I want to be able to help people. We have to make difficult calls sometimes to keep this site a healthy place, and on target.
Let me be clear. I trust you guys 110%. More than I trust myself even. Ya’ll have my complete confidence. Complete.
To keep all the moderators in the loop, here is the email I sent to Shederlaomach about his 7-day cooldown ban: ***********************************************************************************************************************
Hi Shederloamach,
I wanted to contact you so that you know what is going on. The thread about MADB was getting way off track, and it was turning into a debate that did not have a positive spirit about it. The moderators discussed it, and we decided to have you cool down for a few days. We are specifically citing two parts of our board rules and ettiquette:
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=21 *Please feel free to disagree with anyone. Nobody here has all the answers. We can all benefit from being challenged. This is not a debate club though. There is no winning or losing. Please try to stay supportive and positive with those who might not believe the same way.
*No profanity please (to include derogatory words associated with racism, sexual orientation, etc.).
The profanity in particular, and mocking another forum member by implying profanity (to appease them), is not in the spirit of the site. Also as a judgment call, we don’t feel that your discussion was in the framework of a positive engagement with the Church, or trying to find one. The site is here because we all acknowledge problems.
We know. There are many problems in the Church. There are other sites to vent about those problems. They are fantastic resources!
There is a time to vent and let out all that negative energy. It needs to be done in order to be healthy and happy.
StayLDS is focused on the segment of disaffected members that are mostly at peace (not completely, but mostly), and who want to explore strategies for reconciliation and integration back into the faith.
Take this week to think about where you are in your personal journey.
Are we the right group for you? We will gladly welcome you back to talk about problems and strategies for finding peace. It has to stay within the scope and rules of the board though.
Best Regards,
Valoel
Reply from Shederloamach (he is still trying to win some imaginary fight): ******************************************************************************************
Valoel,
I appreciate you writing. I am sure that you are siding with Ray against me, but, if you read the thread, I think it is pretty clear that he was accusing me of things I wasn’t doing.
Ray was bent on finding a reason to ban me because he didn’t like what I was saying. That said, I think you should reevaluate the way I was treated. I would also like to know how to avoid problems like this in the future.
Ray claimed that the reason he was banning me was for derailing the thread, for refusing to accept instruction, and for accusing him personally of “unrighteous dominion.” If you reread the thread, you will see that you personally suggested that I should “feel free” to start other threads. Feel free doesn’t sound like a warning that failure to do so will get me banned. I further explained that I was new to blogging and would be more careful in the future. I also said I would be glad to start a new thread, but Ray’s response was to ban me. Ray was the main problem. He kept writing about some facts I presented, and I kept answering him. Shouldn’t or couldn’t he have started a new thread or moved that part of the conversation to another thread instead of hammering at me? After all, he has the authority and experience on the site.
What I see here is that you guys are backfilling to find a reason to justify the ban. In this email you assert that the reason I am being banned is for the profanity. I admit I used the word bullshit in a posting. I slipped. I often do. We both used the word pissed–although I don’t know if that is actual profanity. In any case, Tom asked me to edit out two words he objected to and alluded that you had also used one of them. I immediately did so and wrote Tom and sincerely thanked him for his polite request. This was done some time before you guys banned me, so it would seem the problem, if there was one, was already solved. You further assert that my attempt at at a little humor by “implying profanity” was me mocking Tom. I don’t think the evidence supports that claim. As stated, I politely thanked Tom for the way he asked me to change the words he found offensive and did as he requested. I was not mocking Tom and will edit out those comments that you are referring to when I can.
I think the problem here is with me and Ray. I think it might be useful to see if this can be resolved. I want to participate on this forum, but I don’t want Ray acting like he has been. If anyone was out of line, I think the error lies with Ray. He is the one who has misundertsood much of what I had written and explained to him. That is not my fault. I realize, for looking in his profile, that Ray is a Harvard man, but he might wish to attend a reading comprehension course at his local community college.
I need to know how to avoid situations like this in the future. Your help would be appreciated.
Kent
My response, trying to coach him and explain how discussion boards work *************************************************************************************************
The StayLDS forums are an actively moderated discussion board. Ray is
one of the moderators. So is Orson and Hawkgrrrl. We have to make
judgment calls from time to time about the content and direction of
discussions at the board. We are all volunteers working on this here
and there in our spare time. I for one do not end up paying much
attention during the weekends. I didn’t see what was happening until
earlier this morning.
We are not banning you permanently from the site. Seven days is a
short time. It gives us some breathing room to think about it all (in
between taking care of our normal everyday lives). The thread was
locked so that nobody else can continue the discussion either.
Your presence immediately “popped up on the radar” when you made your
initial posts. This is a gut reaction based on long experience
running forums. Here are some factors that cause us concern:
1. You are brand new to the site. We don’t know you very well yet.
We don’t know you from other sites either [You might be surprised how
much various site operators communicate with each other.] There are
“trouble makers” out there. Their only purpose is to disrupt normal
conversations and get attention. I’m not saying you are a troll (the
term for these people). We just don’t know you yet. We can’t watch
the board 24/7, so we have to make a judgment call to limit your
access until we know you better.
2. You recently had a problem at another well-established site and
got banned. That might have been right or wrong on their part, but it
took action from them. You caused someone else to have concerns about
your participation. Will you be a problem at our site? We don’t
know. We don’t want to jump to conclusions, but we DO actively
moderate our discussion board.
3. Very long posts. These are called “walls of text.” They are hard
to read and follow. People who cause problems at discussion boards
are known for this. Sharing life stories are fine. Those might take
some space. Don’t copy large amounts of statistics and source
materials into the discussion. The speed at which it was all
happening was also a concern. You may not intend this. You said you
are new to this type of thing. It comes across sort of like bullying,
like you are going to beat someone with facts.
4. Your tone comes across as agitated and upset. You have a lot to
be upset about. We understand that. BUT … we have to run a
discussion board. You are flailing around and getting into debates
with people you just met. Imagine in the real world if I burst into
your living room while your family was having a quiet discussion about
favorite vacation spots. You were all talking about nice bed and
breakfasts on the East Coast. I immediately get into a debate with
your wife about why Disney World sucks! (not what you were talking
about) I am loud and shake my fists. I bring in an overhead
projector and full PowerPoint presentation on the scientifically
verifiable suck-factors of Disney vacations. And I make long speeches
against the evils of Walt Disney. Nobody else can get a word in.
We aren’t saying you are this type of person, but we are worried.
Let’s give it a couple of days off and try again. Maybe we are wrong.
I hope so. The world will move on.
You are sending me back email to argue you are right and Ray is wrong.
My response to you is this – it doesn’t matter. We are not trying to
figure that out. Ray is a moderator. He made a judgment call. He
can do that. We talked about it after the fact, and everyone that
runs the site agrees with the decision.
I am defending your access to the board. I told the other moderators
we should give you some time to figure out if our group is right for
you. We should also give you a chance to come back and join the group
in a few days. They agreed. There will not be any hard feelings from
us towards you. We really do empathize with why you are upset about
the Church. But like I said, we have to run a discussion board. For
better or worse, we have to make these judgment calls in moderating
the content. Moderating is controlling the type of content AND the
speed at which it is posted. It has to be slow enough for us to
handle.
On a personal note, your story about your MP and the GA is very
difficult. I feel for you. I had an extreme MP too. He wasn’t as
bad as yours, but people from my mission also went inactive and/or
needed counseling to overcome their guilt for not living up to the
numbers crunch. The members hated him and tried to stop baptisms
sometimes. You have to exorcise the demon of those leaders from your
heart. Those people are still tormenting you, and I am sure that was
many years ago. You have to find a way to dump that baggage. Don’t
let them have power over you still, to make you angry.
-Valoel
That was an excellent response, Brian. My only concern is that he apparently still feels absolutely no responsibility for what happened – that there isn’t even a hint of remorse or understanding in his message. I’m fine being the bad guy in his mind, but even his responses are totally one-sided and bitter. The following sentence sums up his attitude extremely well, especially in a message where he is asking for understanding and stating that he isn’t really the problem: Quote:I realize, for looking in his profile, that Ray is a Harvard man, but he might wish to attend a reading comprehension course at his local community college.
That quote, in that context, says a LOT about his outlook and willingness to admit a degree of culpability, and the very first step in the classic process of change is recognizing one’s incorrect actions. I just don’t see that in what he has written.
I agree completely with the decision to let him come back after 7 days if he wants to return, and I personally won’t moderate him if he does return. Frankly, I will stay out of any similar thread he starts. Any attempt to talk openly about our differing views only would solidify his perception, and I don’t want that. If we can help, that will be wonderful; if we can’t, he needs to know it’s not coming from me.
He sent another response. It was pretty much the same thing, but he said he probably won’t come back. There’s too much control and unrighteous dominion at the site (according to his world view). So we are at least the second group in short order that decided to boot him. You know what they say when someone is sure they are the only sane person left on the planet … Like you said Ray, it is up to him to change (or not change). His interaction with the world is still poisoned by his anger and resentment. He now sees it everywhere. The Harvard comments reduce my patience level with him. They are very dismissive and dodge the issue, no better than name-calling.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.