DanieltheDragon wrote:
[
Replying to post 2 by otseng]
Just ask her this question then and I think it puts a perspective on things
Does she think I am being truthful when I say I read the book of mormon the bible and the koran?
Note that I have read only this thread, not the thread it is about.
I can't swear, from reading this, that you've even said that you've read the book of Mormon.
"I have read the book of Mormon," would be saying that you have read it. Mixing something like that into a gibberish non-sentence doesn't quite do it. And when you do that repeatedly, never quite stating in plain English that you've read it, it begins to look suspicious. Like a trick. Like an attempt to make us think you've read it when you really haven't.
Not that I think that's what's really going on. But it's curious that you never put this subject to bed by simply saying clearly that you have read the book.
If you want to put the issue to bed, say, "I have read the book of Mormon."
The fact is she was casting aspersions. She threw in all the right PC words in there to be nice about it the first time. However, the intent was not to be nice it was not to be civil. The intent was to damage my character.
I think her intent was to draw you out. You said that the book was troubling. She presumably wants to know
- what you mean by "troubling"
- which parts are troubling
- why are they troubling
In other words, she's saying, "You've got my attention, so go ahead and make your case."
She was inviting you to do what you wanted to do anyway, which is explain your original claim.
Additionally within the thread at post 53 my first response to her I asked her to take her concerns with my personal claim privately because I felt uncomfortable with her continued public stance on the matter.
I haven't seen that private message, so I can't have much to say.
I will say that I usually refuse to take a conversation private. If it seemed to her that you wanted to continue the original conversation, but do so in private, then that may have been unappealing.
I don't think it is fair for someone to ask that someone else pass a religious test in order to get them to publicly stop harassing them.
I don't see that that happened. You said a book was troublesome, and she wants to know what specific part was troublesome. No religious test there.
when someone claims they have read something who are we to cast aspersions onto them.
I would have been more than content if her first aspersion was it. I can understand her position as a Mormon and why she would feel threatened by someone saying they found the book of Mormon to be troubling.
Now, I believe, you are doing exactly what you accuse her of doing.
I don't think she's threatened at all. One thing we know for sure is that she's good on her feet and can handle disagreement. So, what she probably feels, when reading that you have a problem with her book, is an eagerness to get to grips with specifics. She wants to know precisely what your objection is, so that she can deal with it, so she can straighten you out.
But you won't come across. You'd rather maneuver, posture, stall, change the subject (hence, this thread), anything to avoid answering her question and explaining what it is that you find troubling about her book.
NOTE: I'm not saying that she actually feels this way; rather, I am projecting on to her how I might feel in her situation. I'm also not accusing you of intending to posture, stall, etcetera; rather, I'm explaining how she might feel frustrated, how she might feel provoked to perform below the standard that you (and maybe she) expect of a moderator.
Its not like they have had it easy over the past 150 years. That I get. What I don't get is the need to cast aspersions towards me for saying that I find it troubling.
You made the claim that the book is troubling, so she's asking how it troubles you.
That will probably be over when one of these three events occurs:
- You could elaborate: explain why you think the book is troubling.
- You could withdraw the claim or hedge: "You know it just bugs me personally, subjectively, in a way I can't articulate."
- She could give up, decide that you will never come across with the information that you have implicitly offered.
It should have been over and done with after the first exchange yet she still continued unabated.
Osteng if you said to me that you read the bible how would you feel, if I publicly stated I don't believe you? That you need to prove to me that you have in order for us to consider your opinion valid?
If one has a belief that one has not read something that is fine, what is crossing the line for me is to publicly call someone out on it. That is an assault on ones character. She danced a fine line to do just that. She wanted other people to not believe my statement.
Again, you are now the one impugning her character. I don't think she was calling you a liar, or wanting anyone else to believe that you haven't read the book.
I think she wants to learn why you find the book troubling.
If I state I read X and someone states I believe I did not read X that someone is also inferring I lied about reading X.
So interesting. Impossible to parse, but, like semi-representational art, one is tempted to impute meaning.
Let me ask you this: Did you, in that "sentence," intend to convey that you have indeed read those books?
NOTE: I'm not making fun of your grammar. I'm pointing out that your efforts to communicate aren't working that well in this case, which could be the entire problem here.
And I'm happy to help. We can start a grammar thread. I can teach you better communication skills if you're interested.
She called me a liar without saying I lied when asked to stop she continued for 3 additional public posts.
1. That's not my interpretation of what happened. I think you probably did intend to say that you read those books. I think she probably missed that, or wanted you to state it more clearly.
2. I'm not going to call you a liar for saying that she called you a liar, but you know that she didn't. So what you're doing here is exactly what you're accusing her of doing. Don't demand that she give your posts a close reading, and interpret them generously, unless you are willing to do the same for her posts.
I can understand your desire to keep her on the moderating team, she has been a good moderator in the past. This is the first time I have even seen this type of behavior from her.
This is a well-run site.
Frankly I was a bit shocked even. Her reasoning however leads me to believe that it can cloud her judgment as a moderator.
Which will also be true of you and me and every other moderator on this and every other moderated web site.
The stated reason for casting doubt and throwing aspersions at me was that anyone who read the bible, koran, book of mormon would not find them troubling and that anyone who does find them troubling did not read it cover to cover.
Did you make that up?
Did she say that somewhere?
Because now I'm really starting to sympathize with her.
She didn't say anything like that, did she?
Imagine a conversation like this, in, say, a math class:
Student: "I can't do problem seven."
Teacher: "Oh, where did you get stuck?"
Student: "Are you saying I didn't try? Why are you picking on me? What you're really meaning is that anyone who can't do the problem didn't even try. You're calling me a slacker without using the word "slacker."
That means that she believes that anyone who makes claims about a background in a said religious beliefs is a liar if they don't share the same reverence for scripture as she does.
You made that up, right? You don't have any grounds for that claim, but you're trying to smear her character anyway?
If two people need a moderator to suss something out and it becomes a he said she said. I can't help but feel she has compromised her ability to make a fair and balanced choice.
I don't see that.
That being said I am sure you find it hard to get good moderators. So I can understand your need to keep her on as a moderator. I just want her to stop harassing me about what I stated.
I think, based on what I've seen in this thread, that the harassing comes more from you than her.
All you have to do is
- answer her question,
- decline to answer her question,
- or prove to be so difficult that she gives up on you.
I'd think that, having made a claim, you would welcome the invitation to elaborate.
If not, all you have to do is say so. "No, thanks. I just wanted to call the books troubling. I don't want to say why."
Do either of those things, and I'll bet you instantly find this issue behind you.
As for me having read the book of mormon I have and frankly before I didn't want to put to much attention to mormonism because I think they already catch enough flak as it is. However, since dianiad has submited that I need to pass a religious test I will do so as I don't like being called a liar. I will back up my statement.
1. If you don't want to justify your claim with regards to the Book of Mormon, she may be willing to discuss another. But the Book of Mormon may be where she is best-positioned to help you with your understanding. And it may be where she is most eager to receive enlightenment if in fact it is she who has the misunderstanding.
2. She never (at least in what you've presented here) asked you to pass a religious test. You seem to have just made that up.
3. Backing up your statement is all that she asked for. It should be what you want to do anyway. You can probably roll right past this unpleasantness by focusing on this.
