- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have just now been reading Watcher’s comments on the following thread https://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10129 Watcher seems to have a very black and white view and that seems to prevent him from having much empathy for individuals in faith crisis.
Maybe he is trying to help, but (if that is the case then) his help seems to be trying to convince individuals about the truthfulness of the church by logic and argument. Maybe he also see’s that as fulfilling the mission of StayLDS by attempting to keep people in a literal framework similar to FARMS. Perhaps that explains why he questioned DJ’s motives for posting if DJ didn’t believe in eternal life (based on an erroneous interpretation of DJ’s beliefs and motives).
Anyway, What do you suggest we do as a moderation team? We can…
Lock the current thread (so far the interaction has been pretty respectful but I worry about it getting out of hand).
Send Watcher a PM explaining why what he is doing isn’t helpful.
Other ideas?
What do you all suggest?
I’m not sure what approach to take. The spirit of his posts are essentially telling people they aren’t understanding scripture or god correctly. Calling people out for not understanding scripture because they don’t have the complete picture but showing no self-awareness. There’s no recognition that he himself is operating under the same limitations that he sees in others.
From the Rules of Etiquette thread under list of don’ts:
Quote:Please do not start discussions that lead to a debate with the results of finding the one correct answer to a problem. Topics like this will probably be moderated.
I don’t know whether he’s crossed that line.
I just see it as run-of-the-mill orthodoxy and orthodoxy is on the belief spectrum. I don’t know whether they came here seeking support in some way. It appears as though they’ve only come to set the record straight.
I was thinking that they’d probably be short lived and leave of their own accord. In other words, my plan was to ignore them. Maybe not the best plan. We should definitely do something if they start branching out to other threads just to tell people they’re beguiled by Satan or whatever.
They’ve posted several times since my previous post in this thread. They feel like they’re more out for a debate than anything.
I just responded, then came here to start a discussion. We will see how they respond and go from there. My two cents worth, and I did not look here before my most recent response. I was reticent to respond to them in the beginning but couldn’t help myself 🙄 (Apparently Jedi are like that)I agree, they do seem to be orthodox black/white thinkers and do seem to be judgmental of those who paint with all the colors of the wind.
My last response referenced Ray’s and more or less shut things down. I did notice they logged on since then and did not respond. My vote is wait and see if the message got through and maybe they’ll go away like most of their type. If not I’m open to being stronger.
Update on Watcher. I think we have been able to soften his rough edges somewhat. Specifically, we pointed out that he is not allowed to diminish or discredit the perspectives of others as per the rules of StayLDS.
He continues to post from a traditional LDS point of view and that is fine as long as he can understand that his traditional viewpoint must make room for being one viewpoint among several here at StayLDS.
We will continue to monitor the situation.
Roy
In addition to the caution I placed on the sifting thread I did send a PM to Minyan Man letting him know that we keep a close eye on Watcher. At the same time I expressed my appreciation to Minyan Man as a poster/member and assured him the post was much more about Watcher than him and that he is not in any trouble or on the naughty list. Thank you DJ. I appreciate your quick intervention.
:thumbup: Good moderation work. Seems like it is better to let the rough edges get smoothed a bit for self-moderation rather than limit the conversations when we can within limits.
Excellent, DJ. Thank you. I deleted Watcher’s recent post in response to the Arizona sex abuse story. Quote:I personally think this is an important subject. Thank you for bringing it up. It is my belief that sex crimes are an old problem that very few know much about – and especially how to deal with them. I do not want to present myself as someone that knows a solution. For myself, I did not know much about sex crimes until I was in the military. I had heard stories about such things but thought they were like witches and goblins – made up stories mostly to scare children. I joined the army when I was 17. But I was barely over 5 feet, weighed 110 and looked 13. I became aware of the LBGTQ+ movement is a most unfortunate way that on occasions became violent.
I became most prejudice to individuals with sexual diversions (for lack of a better term). However, I have also learned that such things are more of a spectrum than a line that separates the good from the bad. I have struggled greatly with the concept of “Agency” and what to do (especially with members) that struggle with the law of chastity. I am aware that there is a problem if someone is burdened with the label of “sex offender”. Certainly, being a sex offender is a crisis of faith regardless of the more minor offenses such as pornography or the worse kinds of sexual child abuse. But I do not think that sex offender is a title of one size that fits all.
I honestly do not know what is best for the church and its leaders. Is it better to attempt to protect and help those having such faith crisis or is it better to punish and take legal action? I do not know what is better, but I am sure that some cases are better off with severer punitive action and others with discretion and quiet repentance. Though it does seem to me that the more one knows and cares for an offender the more lenient – which seem always to do more harm to the victims. Personally, I tend towards care and protection of victims above anything else.
And yet we seem to live in a society, at least in my personal view, that is going through great lengths to redefine victims and the grooming of victims as something all children should be taught and experienced so they can decide for themselves – their preferences.
I will PM him and explain point by point why I removed it.
Hi Watcher, I had to delete your post and I wanted to explain why.
Quote:I personally think this is an important subject. Thank you for bringing it up. It is my belief that sex crimes are an old problem that very few know much about – and especially how to deal with them. I do not want to present myself as someone that knows a solution. For myself, I did not know much about sex crimes until I was in the military. I had heard stories about such things but thought they were like witches and goblins – made up stories mostly to scare children. I joined the army when I was 17. But I was barely over 5 feet, weighed 110 and looked 13. I became aware of the LBGTQ+ movement is a most unfortunate way that on occasions became violent.
Ok, what do you mean became violent? Do you suggest that Gay people violently attacked you or that you and/or others attacked them. Either way that is a horrible thing to throw out in such an offhand way.
Quote:I became most prejudice to individuals with sexual diversions (for lack of a better term). However, I have also learned that such things are more of a spectrum than a line that separates the good from the bad. I have struggled greatly with the concept of “Agency” and what to do (especially with members) that struggle with the law of chastity. I am aware that there is a problem if someone is burdened with the label of “sex offender”. Certainly, being a sex offender is a crisis of faith regardless of the more minor offenses such as pornography or the worse kinds of sexual child abuse. But I do not think that sex offender is a title of one size that fits all.
I think that there is value to a discussion of the pros/cons of the sex offender registry program, although it is probably outside of the scope of our mission at StayLDS. However, to characterize being a sex offender as a crisis of faith makes me think that you are using the term crisis of faith in a very different way than I understand it. StayLDS exists to bring support to individuals experiencing a crisis of faith. To suggest that there is some sort of equivalency between those having a crisis of faith and sex offenders is offensive. I speculate that some sex offenders might have experienced a crisis of faith and some others might believe more fervently than most. I do not feel them to be related.
Quote:I honestly do not know what is best for the church and its leaders. Is it better to attempt to protect and help those having such faith crisis or is it better to punish and take legal action? I do not know what is better, but I am sure that some cases are better off with severer punitive action and others with discretion and quiet repentance. Though it does seem to me that the more one knows and cares for an offender the more lenient – which seem always to do more harm to the victims. Personally, I tend towards care and protection of victims above anything else.
Again, by conflating sex offenders with people in faith crisis you ask if the church might punish and take legal action against “those having such faith crisis.” This is not helpful.
I do agree that bishops might be reluctant to report such sexual crimes to authorities for fear of destroying a family.
Quote:And yet we seem to live in a society, at least in my personal view, that is going through great lengths to redefine victims and the grooming of victims as something all children should be taught and experienced so they can decide for themselves – their preferences.
Lots to unpack here. Society is not teaching or encouraging children to be groomed as victims. What I believe you are referring to is the effort to educate children that some people are gay and some people are transgender and that is ok. Being gay or being transgender is not the same thing as being a pedophile and I believe the conflation of the two to be further offensive.
We do not often take the step of deleting a post but I feel that to leave this up would only serve to inflame responses and be a great distraction to the points made by the original poster.
Thanks Roy. Good call. With how he’s throwing the term around, I don’t think Watcher understands what a faith crisis means. From the way he used it in the deleted post I think when he says “faith crisis” he really means people that have committed serious sin, that if they had faith they wouldn’t sin but since they’re sinning their faith is in “crisis.” That’s my best guess. Regardless, it’s not cool to talk about LGBT people and sexual abusers as if they are one and the same thing.
DJ, I liked your response in the is a sifting coming thread where he was doing his people that don’t agree with my POV just haven’t put in the work to understand schtick, complete with a lack of any self awareness. It’s hard to support people with differing views when that’s your approach. It’s getting tiring.
His main goal seems to be to find flaws in people’s logic. Again, it’s hard to support people when that’s your aim.
I don’t think he’s a good fit.
Good call. I added a note in the sifting thread about not insulting people – from both sides – and that the thread was close to being closed.
Thank you Old-Timer, I think the sifting thread has run its course and is now far afield from the OP.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.