The Dude is suspended from MAD. Is this "goading"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
It occurs to me . . .
Sunbeam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:06 am

The Dude is suspended from MAD. Is this "goading"

Post by It occurs to me . . . »

I don't know if it's appropriate for me to bring this up, but I was enjoying the thread http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=22510 on MAD that D. Peterson started about a review of Dawkins' The God Delusion, The Dude asked if Dr. Peterson had read the book himself:
Daniel, have you read The God Delusion? Yes/No.

If yes, then we will likely have an interesting and potentially useful discussion.

For which he was immediately suspended:
Goad posters on another board. Two days and two ignored warnings and you are suspended. ~ Mods


I'm just having a hard time figuring out how this is "goading". It sounds like a logical request for information. It is pretty difficult to discuss a book, or even a review of a book if one of you haven't read it. This seems like a reasonable question to which a suspension is a huge over reaction.

By the way, how do you put in a link here? Haven't quite figured it out yet. Color me green!!
Last edited by It occurs to me . . . on Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:13 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

Be careful or you'll be next it occurs to me... and your suspension will contain the words "take it to another board".

The easiest way to add a link is to copy the address and paste it into the message. You can also highlight the address and click the "URL" button in the reply window.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
It occurs to me . . .
Sunbeam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:06 am

Post by It occurs to me . . . »

Bond...James Bond wrote:Be careful or you'll be next it occurs to me... and your suspension will contain the words "take it to another board".

The easiest way to add a link is to copy the address and paste it into the message. You can also highlight the address and click the "URL" button in the reply window.


I know how to paste the link in, but I can't figure out how to change the link into one of the words in my message (is there a technical term for that?)

As far as being next to go, HEY, I like living on the edge:)

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

It occurs to me . . . wrote:
I know how to paste the link in, but I can't figure out how to change into one of the words in my message (is there a technical term for that?)

As far as being next to go, HEY, I like living on the edge:)


I guess the word would be hyperlink. We're too lazy to do much of that stuff here though. Just throw the link up and we'll live with it :)
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

This week on the soap opera that is "As Kolob Turns..."

Apparently DCP thought he was being goaded...check out this response:

Krispy Kreme King wrote:I haven't read it yet, but I've read other things by Dawkins and I have a copy of it.

And, anyway, I'm not sticking around for a discussion here. Not interested. I simply wanted to call attention to Plantinga's review. (As I said on 14 February 2007, "from here on out, I'll limit my participation on this board to occasionally announcing publications that I think people ought to know about.")

So I fail your test (for the nonce, at least), but your test is both moot and irrelevant.

Still, since we're barking out demands for yes/no answers, I might as well bark one out to you: Have you read Plantinga's three volumes on epistemological warrant? Yes or no! Now!


My bet is that ole DCP ran to Mommy and Daddy and said "get that nasty Dude off my back for a few days".

------------------------

As to the this suspension incident, I think it's definitely making a mountain range out of the first specks of dirt in an ant hill. The Mods should realize that The Dude isn't the run-of-the-mill critic (such as myself) and his long presence on the MAD board should earn him a little leeway. Sadly it appears that the thumbscrews are being used equally, and The Dude is just a little too much of a maverick (a definite plus in my book) for this new style of board they're trying to create.

It would be a great loss to them if they ban him or he leaves, but then again they believe the Book of Mormon is history, so I don't have much faith in their critical thinking skills. Hopefully they realize that he's an excellent critic and ostrocizing (spelling? I don't care at this time of the morning) him is not in the best interest of MAD.

--------------------------

The fun continues:

Orpheus wrote:My guess is that Mr. Dude and you had a bad day yesterday and it didn't take much more blazing past mod warnings to get a reaction. Maybe that was the point but who knows and there are other boards if demanding respect for our LDS posters is too overwheleming. You can bet your britches that certain posters will get the respect that we expect for all our LDS posters no matter how "mild" the unnecesary goads are. What do we have to do to make that more plain?


Notice the use of "there are other boards". Obviously this is nicespeak for "get thyself to another board apostate".
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
The Dude
God
Posts: 2976
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:16 pm

Re: The Dude is suspended from MAD. Is this "goading&a

Post by The Dude »

When I try to log in it says I'm suspended until Mar 16 at 11:50-something PM. So that's one week.

Goad posters on another board. Two days and two ignored warnings and you are suspended. ~ Mods


It's hard to tell what this murky moderator is trying to say. Maybe another mod will come along and rewrite it for him/her.

It says "Two days and two ignored warnings"... hey, at least I get some warnings. I saw the warning in that particular thread about "ad hominens" in Dr. Petersons thread, but nothing else in the last two days.

Anyone else see anything? I noticed the lovely "Global Warming" thread was heavily edited this morning. I'm guessing the first warning was taken down before I even saw it. I noticed that one of my posts in that thread was gone.

But I didn't see no first warning.

User avatar
Bryan Inks
Elder
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:03 am

Post by Bryan Inks »

To hyperlink a url using the BBCode you will need to do the following. *Make Sure that BBCode is enabled in your profile*

[url=http://www.webaddress.com]Word or Words you want linked[/url]

I always add a single color and an underline so that people know that it is a link (pretty common courtesy for those that spend lots of time on the web).

This would look like: [url=http://www.webaddress.com][color=red][u]Word[/u][/color][/url]

I always use red, but you could insert any of the base color words in there.

Hope it helps.

User avatar
dartagnan
God
Posts: 2750
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am

Post by dartagnan »

I'm just having a hard time figuring out how this is "goading".


Come on.

Does this really surprise anyone here?

When Dan walks into the forum MAD becomes something like the twilight zone where insults are defined as anything that could possibly be understood as a challenge to Dan. Mods act preemptively so Dan doesn't have to risk embarrassing himself. And to be sure, it is an embarrassment to speak negatively about a book you haven't even read. How many times do LDS apologists criticize others for criticizng LDS books they haven't read, especially the Book of Mormon? He pulled this stunt on me in the past , making his snide remark before hearing my response, by saying, "Have you read (some book on Islam)? Probably not." So virtually anything you say to Dan that doesn't follow a huge waving white flag that says, "I would never dare intentionally offend you oh mighty one," will be monitored with suspicion by the mods.

On the other hand, is Dan spits in your face and you do not immediately respond with "thank you sir may I have another?" the mods will view this as disrespecting a "world-renown" scholar.

They really do lay the red carpet out for this guy.

Dan insists he never requests this royal treatment, but we'd be foolish to think he doesn't see it and that he actually loves it. You have to either love it or hate it, and if he hated it he would have told the mods by now to ease up with the royal treatment.

User avatar
It occurs to me . . .
Sunbeam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:06 am

Post by It occurs to me . . . »

Bryan Inks wrote:To hyperlink a url using the BBCode you will need to do the following. *Make Sure that BBCode is enabled in your profile*

Word or Words you want linked

I always add a single color and an underline so that people know that it is a link (pretty common courtesy for those that spend lots of time on the web).

This would look like: Word

I always use red, but you could insert any of the base color words in there.

Hope it helps.


Hey, thanks! I edited my OP as per your instructions. Now, all I have to do is remember how to do it :)

. . . . . nevermind . . .my link doesn't seem to be working. Not quite sure why. Here's the link I posted:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=22510

User avatar
Bryan Inks
Elder
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:03 am

Post by Bryan Inks »

It occurs to me . . . wrote:
Bryan Inks wrote:To hyperlink a url using the BBCode you will need to do the following. *Make Sure that BBCode is enabled in your profile*

Word or Words you want linked

I always add a single color and an underline so that people know that it is a link (pretty common courtesy for those that spend lots of time on the web).

This would look like: Word

I always use red, but you could insert any of the base color words in there.

Hope it helps.


Hey, thanks! I edited my OP as per your instructions. Now, all I have to do is remember how to do it :)

. . . . . nevermind . . .my link doesn't seem to be working. Not quite sure why. Here's the link I posted:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=22510


Part of the problem with linking to MA&D is that they have a redirect/some other techno wizardry that doesn't allow links clicked from this site to their's to function.

The hyperlinking that I showed you would probably be best used for sources, search results or if you are feeling particularly ventursome, links to scriptural verses.

User avatar
It occurs to me . . .
Sunbeam
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:06 am

Post by It occurs to me . . . »

Bryan Inks wrote:
It occurs to me . . . wrote:
Bryan Inks wrote:To hyperlink a url using the BBCode you will need to do the following. *Make Sure that BBCode is enabled in your profile*

Word or Words you want linked

I always add a single color and an underline so that people know that it is a link (pretty common courtesy for those that spend lots of time on the web).

This would look like: Word

I always use red, but you could insert any of the base color words in there.

Hope it helps.


Hey, thanks! I edited my OP as per your instructions. Now, all I have to do is remember how to do it :)

. . . . . nevermind . . .my link doesn't seem to be working. Not quite sure why. Here's the link I posted:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=22510


Part of the problem with linking to MA&D is that they have a redirect/some other techno wizardry that doesn't allow links clicked from this site to their's to function.

The hyperlinking that I showed you would probably be best used for sources, search results or if you are feeling particularly ventursome, links to scriptural verses.


Okay, I was thinking that maybe MAD had it set up like this. And other links do seem to work. So thanks for the help!

harmony
God
Posts: 18195
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm

Re: The Dude is suspended from MAD. Is this "goading&q

Post by harmony »

It occurs to me . . . wrote:I don't know if it's appropriate for me to bring this up, but I was enjoying the thread http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=22510 on MAD that D. Peterson started about a review of Dawkins' The God Delusion, The Dude asked if Dr. Peterson had read the book himself:
Daniel, have you read The God Delusion? Yes/No.

If yes, then we will likely have an interesting and potentially useful discussion.

For which he was immediately suspended:
Goad posters on another board. Two days and two ignored warnings and you are suspended. ~ Mods


I'm just having a hard time figuring out how this is "goading". It sounds like a logical request for information. It is pretty difficult to discuss a book, or even a review of a book if one of you haven't read it. This seems like a reasonable question to which a suspension is a huge over reaction.


Of course that is goading. Daniel doesn't have to read a book in order to know exactly what's in it. He just goes into Joseph Smith mode and knows what it says without ever opening it. Heck, the book doesn't even have to be in the same room with him, and he knows what's in it. He could probably quote paragraph after paragraph of that book, and he's never even opened the spine. It's amazing really, and The Dude is lacking in inspiration if he doubts Daniel's abilities.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22055
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

While it seems nonsensical, I suspect the moderators have been given the word to make sure Dr. Peterson is treated with kid gloves. To be safe, everyone should avoid discussing things with him at MAD, for fear whatever is said could be misinterpreted by the moderators.

Asking if Dr. Peterson has read a book is just begging for suspension. Imagine all the implications that could be drawn from that question. They may well have concluded that The Dude was questioning his literacy or his Priesthood. Dr. Peterson could have gone into another depression and refused to frequent the board for at least a week. Can't have that.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by beastie »

Perhaps he could have gotten away with it had he phrased it thusly:

"I beg in advance the indulgence of the moderators on this matter. They are welcome to delete this post if need be. I ask this question not to imply anything negative at all about the esteemed Dr. Peterson, and I intend to show the utmost respect to him, as well as to all LDS posters. My question, of course, has nothing to do with the merits of any argument, and is simply prompted by curiosity.

In other words, Mother May I ask Dr. Peterson a direct question?

Dr. Peterson,

I thank you in advance for taking time from your very busy schedule to even consider answering my question. I also hasten to add that while I personally do not believe in the LDS church, it is admirable in many important elements, and is indeed a rolling stone that no one can stop. I also concede that, despite my disbelief, Mormonism contains many claims that are hard to refute. Just where did the miraculous Book of Mormon come from, for example? So with all that understood, Dr. Peterson, did you ever have the time to read the book in question?

Thanks in advance for your tolerance,
The Dude"
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com

User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by beastie »

Dr. Peterson's latest contribution to the thread in question:

Over on a board that appears to be largely dedicated to obsessive-compulsive derision of this board and where accurate reading seems to be in short supply, there has been some cackling about my purportedly miraculous ability, in this thread, to comment negatively on Richard Dawkins's book without yet having read it. Of course, I've made precisely no comments directly about Dawkins's book. I simply called attention to a review of Dawkins by Alvin Plantinga, and summarily mentioned one or two of Plantinga's arguments.

I much prefer it when people respond to what I've written rather than to what they imagine me to have written. Unfortunately, that's surprisingly rare -- and particularly so on the board where these folks are making their remarks. (I'll pass over in charitable silence their latest conspiratorial speculations about me.)


Dr. Peterson,

Thank you in advance for your willingness to, no doubt due to some noble impulse, follow this board so obsessively. We are certainly not worthy of your attention, just as The Dude was quite impertinent in his question. So I beg your liege's nobler impulses to educate the less able and, as you request of others, actually respond to what we've written instead of what you imagined we wrote. The topic is whether or not The Dude "goaded" you and deserved a temporary banning by asking you whether or not you had read Dawkin's book.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com

User avatar
asbestosman
God
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by asbestosman »

moksha wrote:While it seems nonsensical, I suspect the moderators have been given the word to make sure Dr. Peterson is treated with kid gloves. To be safe, everyone should avoid discussing things with him at MAD, for fear whatever is said could be misinterpreted by the moderators.


I asked Dr. Peterson two questions and he politely answered both. I think you guys are stretching it a bit too far.

---------------

When did Dr. Peterson say he didn't need to read the book to know it was trash? All he did was offer information about a critical review on it. He also mentioned that FARMS will be doing a review of it as well. I think his biggest point was that according to the review of a scholar he appears to respect, Dawkins made some fundamental logical errors in his book.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22055
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

beastie wrote:Thanks in advance for your tolerance,
The Dude"

In their new smilies, is there one for bowing? If so, perhaps The Dude could have included it.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22055
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

asbestosman wrote:
moksha wrote:While it seems nonsensical, I suspect the moderators have been given the word to make sure Dr. Peterson is treated with kid gloves. To be safe, everyone should avoid discussing things with him at MAD, for fear whatever is said could be misinterpreted by the moderators.


I asked Dr. Peterson two questions and he politely answered both. I think you guys are stretching it a bit too far.

Perhaps we are overreacting. Still, it is comforting in life to understand the reason for seemingly inexplicable actions and this is one of those times. Surely the accusation of goading must have had some underlying basis, since on the surface the reason is not apparent.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Post by beastie »

I asked Dr. Peterson two questions and he politely answered both. I think you guys are stretching it a bit too far.


The question is whether or the mods were justified in punishing the Dude for asking Peterson the question. Under what world view is that viewed as "goading"???

There are other issues that can be discussed, but this is the primary one. Whether or not it was justifiable for Peterson to start a thread featuring a review of a book he hasn't read is an interesting discussion, but not the primary topic here, as far as I've understood the comments.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com

User avatar
Jersey Girl
God
Posts: 33484
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:16 pm

Post by Jersey Girl »

Here are the only choices I can think of:

1. The Mod's are mentally ill and unable to interpret what they read.

2. The Mod's are control freaks who want to "own" their posters and the words they publish on that board.

3. The Mod's are afraid their apologetic posters can't hold their own in even a series of simple exchanges such as "did you read a book?" and choose pre-emptive strikes to avoid potential embarrassment at all costs.

4. The Mod's are crafty little wizards who think that no matter how false the picture is that they present...they're okay with it so long as it makes them "look good". In other words...window dressing is the thing.

My 2 cents, probably not worth much more than that.

Jersey Girl
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb

User avatar
asbestosman
God
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by asbestosman »

Dr. Peterson already answered on that thread. It appears I was right. Dr. Peterson did not intend to do a review in that thread. He only offered information about someone else who had and who he seems to hold some degree of respect for.

In other words, Dr. Peterson didn't just pull down a review from the internet. Dr. Peterson has reason to believe that the reviewer knows what he's talking about.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Fifth Columnist, Grant Hardy, msnobody and 28 guests