4 ms·

I disagree with this categorization. Rephrasing to "people constantly come along..." could make that sentence less personal, sure, but is there anything else ab

by sofal 7y ago

I disagree with this categorization. Rephrasing to "people constantly come along..." could make that sentence less personal, sure, but is there anything else about the comment that you would say is not substantive or thoughtful?

dang 7y ago
Yes—the last paragraph, for example, which talks about an entire class of people in a belittling and ultimately ("used car dealer") pejorative way. I'm sure that wasn't your intent, but these effects are always much less obvious to the person making the comment than they are to many outside readers.
- sofal 7y ago
  I don't see how the metaphor was pejorative, and I don't see how that could be worse than "a distillation of disgruntled exmembers", which has been the constant categorization of people who have left the church. That being said, I don't think either the comment I responded to or my own comment was out of bounds, insulting, or crossed into "flamewar territory". Rather, the impression I'm getting is that any disagreement over a topic such as religion will be categorized as a flamewar here simply due to the topic. I have not insulted anyone nor do I ever intend to insult, and I do not take offense either, especially since the growth I've experienced as a result of leaving religion has taught me that taking offense to criticism is an instinct that stunts learning. You are the moderator here, and so ultimately what you say is the law on this forum. I can respect that, and I like that you're active here. Moderation in a discussion community is invaluable. I'm disappointed that you have read into my comment antagonism and anger, and I cannot agree with the assessment.
  - dang 7y ago
    "Used car dealer" is a pejorative metaphor; it connotes self-interested deception of others. I didn't mean to read anger into your comment. What I'm concerned about is how such comments land with other people who happen to be reading the thread. When there are well-known patterns of provocation in a comment which are likely to trigger others and lead to a predictable flamewar, that's flamebait, and it needs to be avoided for fire safety reasons. There are ways to express your views and to disagree without being gratuitously provocative, so it's not the case that any disagreement would get moderated in this way. But to reach that requires being willing to hear where the gratuitous provocations are, learn from that information and adapt.
    - sofal 7y ago
      Using a metaphor of "used care dealer" is gratuitously provocative according to you? Does that standard apply consistently? It's not a flattering comparison, but it is not even remotely gratuitous. Used car dealers are real people earning perfectly acceptable livings. It's also a perfectly apt metaphor. I understand that used car dealers have a job to do and that it involves convincing me to buy a used car. I also understand that they may not see it important or relevant to their situation to tell me the bad along with the good, and that it is in my best interest to have the car inspected by someone with no skin in the game. It's an obvious case of making sure incentives do not align against you. It applies perfectly well to Mormonism. If you had only trusted me to tell you about my religion when I was a missionary for 2 years in South America convincing people to become Mormon, you would have gotten a very whitewashed and carefully selected story. This is not because I intentionally deceived people. It was not out of self-interested deception. It was because I felt it important to my God-sent mission that people learn to love the church so that they can be baptized. There were so many facts that hadn't been taught to me, and in addition there were plenty of facts that I didn't see necessary to teach people. You think I'm demonizing my own people and myself when I use the used car dealer metaphor? That is simply an incorrect and strangely motivated interpretation of what I said.

by sofal 7y ago

dang 7y ago

Yes—the last paragraph, for example, which talks about an entire class of people in a belittling and ultimately ("used car dealer") pejorative way. I'm sure that wasn't your intent, but these effects are always much less obvious to the person making the comment than they are to many outside readers.

sofal 7y ago
I don't see how the metaphor was pejorative, and I don't see how that could be worse than "a distillation of disgruntled exmembers", which has been the constant categorization of people who have left the church. That being said, I don't think either the comment I responded to or my own comment was out of bounds, insulting, or crossed into "flamewar territory". Rather, the impression I'm getting is that any disagreement over a topic such as religion will be categorized as a flamewar here simply due to the topic. I have not insulted anyone nor do I ever intend to insult, and I do not take offense either, especially since the growth I've experienced as a result of leaving religion has taught me that taking offense to criticism is an instinct that stunts learning. You are the moderator here, and so ultimately what you say is the law on this forum. I can respect that, and I like that you're active here. Moderation in a discussion community is invaluable. I'm disappointed that you have read into my comment antagonism and anger, and I cannot agree with the assessment.
- dang 7y ago
  "Used car dealer" is a pejorative metaphor; it connotes self-interested deception of others. I didn't mean to read anger into your comment. What I'm concerned about is how such comments land with other people who happen to be reading the thread. When there are well-known patterns of provocation in a comment which are likely to trigger others and lead to a predictable flamewar, that's flamebait, and it needs to be avoided for fire safety reasons. There are ways to express your views and to disagree without being gratuitously provocative, so it's not the case that any disagreement would get moderated in this way. But to reach that requires being willing to hear where the gratuitous provocations are, learn from that information and adapt.
  - sofal 7y ago
    Using a metaphor of "used care dealer" is gratuitously provocative according to you? Does that standard apply consistently? It's not a flattering comparison, but it is not even remotely gratuitous. Used car dealers are real people earning perfectly acceptable livings. It's also a perfectly apt metaphor. I understand that used car dealers have a job to do and that it involves convincing me to buy a used car. I also understand that they may not see it important or relevant to their situation to tell me the bad along with the good, and that it is in my best interest to have the car inspected by someone with no skin in the game. It's an obvious case of making sure incentives do not align against you. It applies perfectly well to Mormonism. If you had only trusted me to tell you about my religion when I was a missionary for 2 years in South America convincing people to become Mormon, you would have gotten a very whitewashed and carefully selected story. This is not because I intentionally deceived people. It was not out of self-interested deception. It was because I felt it important to my God-sent mission that people learn to love the church so that they can be baptized. There were so many facts that hadn't been taught to me, and in addition there were plenty of facts that I didn't see necessary to teach people. You think I'm demonizing my own people and myself when I use the used car dealer metaphor? That is simply an incorrect and strangely motivated interpretation of what I said.