Alaris' Comment - Brotherly Love

[shadow]

I'll tell you what, I started to thread because I though what Alaris wrote was beautiful. I thought we could all use some more charity. I felt like the forum was becoming rather aggressive, and it wasn't being as productive as it could be. I learned a long time ago there's nothing I could ever say that will change someone's spirit. Only God can do that through Christ and the HG. I was just reminding everyone to be kind. That's all.

So I apologize to Brlenox for using him as an example. I can't apologize for saying he's a narcissist. But I will apologize for supposing that he is one. Maybe he's not. I've been pigeon holed into some idea that most of you have of me. And it isn't true. In real life, most people can feel the spirit when they're near me. They know I'm sincere and I do my best to love and help others. Perhaps I've pegged Brlenox wrong as well. Maybe in real life he doesn't behave like a narcissist. I'm certainly not the idiot Brlenox implies that I am. Maybe we both have each other wrongly identified. If I am right, maybe he will secretly ponder it in his heart. God knows I've reviewed my statements on here and wondered if I am as stupid as Brlenox makes me feel.

So you didn't start the thread to hammer Brlenox because you "feel" he's a meanie and you want him to show more charity? Ok. And you apologize for calling him a narcissist but then make sure you mention that you're not apologizing for saying he's one #-o Honestly, narcissism is the last thing I think of when reading his posts.

The best thing is to do what I do (narcissism alert!) and ignore those you don't want to deal with. Like you mentioned, you can't change anyone. Try some charity yourself and apply a nice thick coat of it over Brlenox, then ignore him if you must.

So.... the teacher comment WAS sarcasm. Was that really necessary?

No, it wasn't necessary.

Is this thread a form of passive-aggressiveness? I think it is.

[Red]

I heard a psychologist say the other day, and it really stuck with me, anyone who has worried if they're a narcissist, generally isn't one. Only narcissists don't consider the possibility.

I don't have but a moment as today is a busy one...however, the offense you have taken was never intended to be. I have obviously hit a chord with you and for that I apologize. I will do as you ask and limit my responses directly with you. You absolutely do not owe me any apology at all. I am near impossible to offend and even that can be hard to adjust to. My your day and life go well I sincerely hope.

Brock

Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I'm still sorry that I called you out. And I'm sorry for calling you a narcissist in any fashion.

[Red]

I'll tell you what, I started to thread because I though what Alaris wrote was beautiful. I thought we could all use some more charity. I felt like the forum was becoming rather aggressive, and it wasn't being as productive as it could be. I learned a long time ago there's nothing I could ever say that will change someone's spirit. Only God can do that through Christ and the HG. I was just reminding everyone to be kind. That's all.

So I apologize to Brlenox for using him as an example. I can't apologize for saying he's a narcissist. But I will apologize for supposing that he is one. Maybe he's not. I've been pigeon holed into some idea that most of you have of me. And it isn't true. In real life, most people can feel the spirit when they're near me. They know I'm sincere and I do my best to love and help others. Perhaps I've pegged Brlenox wrong as well. Maybe in real life he doesn't behave like a narcissist. I'm certainly not the idiot Brlenox implies that I am. Maybe we both have each other wrongly identified. If I am right, maybe he will secretly ponder it in his heart. God knows I've reviewed my statements on here and wondered if I am as stupid as Brlenox makes me feel.

So you didn't start the thread to hammer Brlenox because you "feel" he's a meanie and you want him to show more charity? Ok. And you apologize for calling him a narcissist but then make sure you mention that you're not apologizing for saying he's one #-o Honestly, narcissism is the last thing I think of when reading his posts.

The best thing is to do what I do (narcissism alert!) and ignore those you don't want to deal with. Like you mentioned, you can't change anyone. Try some charity yourself and apply a nice thick coat of it over Brlenox, then ignore him if you must.

So.... the teacher comment WAS sarcasm. Was that really necessary?

No, it wasn't necessary.

Is this thread a form of passive-aggressiveness? I think it is.

Thank you.

[brlenox]

I am sorry that you discovered what I said. Not because I feel guilt for anything I've said, but because I have to slog through your insufferable responses.

You have a hard road, my friend, I don't envy the obstacles you need to overcome before you reach the other side.

Careful, that almost sounds like something a narcissist would say
See, you've placed yourself high above Brlenox. You look down on him. You do what you accuse him of doing.


Brlenox is almost always right. I for one appreciate him and his well thought-out posts. I hope he keeps it up despite the snowflakes.

This is high praise and I appreciate it. I just feel the need to make the distinction that the only reason I am ever right is simply because I make every effort to have no opinion but that which is predicted upon the words of scripture and the apostles and prophets. If people only understood the magnificent example that we have to learn by from the example the servants of God ancient and living, so much personal suffering and otherwise would be eliminated.

Yep, you do deserve high praise and you ARE almost always right. I am always impressed with the time you will take with those who mis-understand the gospel or have had hurtful experiences. I actually feel very blessed to be here and read your words, as I do many others on this forum.
Yes, you can be abrupt, but the more I read the more I see you are just, well, being abrupt!
I have often wondered, " Who is this person with such knowledge and understanding?" Thanks for sharing your knowledge and spirit with us! Obviously the forum members appreciate you!! ( If you could just tone down the abruptness) hahaha!
( No pun intended on the big head smiley face!)

Thank you Eddie. I will admit that there are times, limited occasions, moments, brief interludes where I actually note that on those rare seconds of introspection that I maybe, possibly, ever so slightly aware that I am being abrupt. I suppose that on those occasions I should pay greater heed to the fact that I am noticing and moderate my approach. I've always said that you cannot do the Lord's work using the Devils tools. However sometimes the abruptness is a calculated effort to get someones attention. I am never one to think it wrong to be direct but sometimes I believe I might be direct when I know it is wrong. I'll work on it but as there will always be sometimes where I think it appropriate I suspect it may not seem like much of a change.

[brlenox]

Sometimes when I am considering something I look for patterns, in fact practically always I am looking for patterns. Patterns tell you things that nothing else can express so clearly. As I consider upon this one relative to the OP there are several things I think to comment and I may develop over the next couple of days. For the most part, as I see this expectation on LDSFF, I consider it an abusive interpretation of scripture and a mistaken notion of the supposed example of Christ and his followers that that would be benefited by a proper treatment to understand the full spectrum, as opposed to a hyper emphasized element.

However, before I go to that trouble, the first observation I will make is to notice who it is that constantly clamors for this special treatment. There are several of us on LDSFF who have been inclined to speak candidly. We are received with every sort of response. We are subjected to ad hominem, we are castigated, and we are charged before the masses for supposed crimes unintended and in the very process subjected to the crimes for which we are accused; indeed we take all manner of abuse. However, what is interesting is that for every attempt to paint us ignorant or lacking in intellectual capacity, or sorely bereft of charity and compassion, for every effort to discredit by force of sophistry or subtlety of insinuation for every baseless opinion rejoindered as if in its expression the opinion holder dispels all darkness, we do not ever demand different treatment than we receive. (I reserve the right to expand on this thought for clarity should it be required) To a Tee this group (I'll just use the term TBM) takes the brunt of the accusations around here for being contentious and yet this group never even pauses to note how the other group abuses because there is a distinct nature of the TBM demeanor that is remarkably different than what is noted on the other side of a nearly perfectly straight line dividing from the two distinct personalities.

Without making a list at this time, the TBM group and I am one of them and there are several, has a very clear sense of strength in their points of discussion. We do not feel threatened, we only feel right. We do not feel disabused or typically sense the need to borrow upon the authority of sophistic points to shut the other side up and manipulate the conversation. It would never occur to any one of us to rattle the sabers of intimidation, to threaten to notify the moderators, to seek to quell any aspect of any ones response be it ad hominem, or whatever daggers are thrown for the simple aspects of a varied debate. We might on rare occasions if we genuinely observe dangerous behavior but that is very rare. The difference is we feel comfortable in the truths we sustain. We know the implications of our efforts and how it distresses, as AI2.0 put it “Satans efforts”. We do not feel threatened because truth needs no such mechanisms to defend it. It stands alone quite defiant of deceptions that attempt to depose it.

Many of us made it through the pre-Snuffer excommunication years when the taint was heavy on this board from his influence. When even the owner of the site was fully supportive of Denver, actually quoting his guidance in private PM’s, as cause for the censure of our voices, and we trudged on. In those days the same behavior of calling out people, not for the content of their message but for the accused weakness in their tone, or failure to “be nice” was beyond abusive. It was though, beyond doubt, the voice of censure. Perhaps a couple of genuinely gentle souls signed on who had a mistaken notion of what discussion and debate is and simply wanted to not have to be tried for their opinions but for the most part I saw it, and for the most part still do, as a means that is employed by the adversary to quell the right and swell the blight of his influence.

I consider it a remarkable pattern that bears noting and consideration as a premise of this discussion that there are two distinct groups here on LDSFF and for the most part the lines are pretty clearly drawn.

I observe on one side, a side that has tendencies to undermine the church and its leaders a common pattern of calling forth the “be nice” mantra. There seems excessive avoidance for spirited discussion often prompted by their inability to defend with credibility their positions or their borrowed doctrines. Often, holding their feet to the discussion to substantiate their claims by a standard of the religious tenants of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to which the forum’s name pays homage, finds them claiming “ad hominem attacks” or other such rhetoric to silence the other side or justify a hasty retreat from further discomfort in defense of the indefensible.

Meanwhile, the other side, the TBM side, which endures its share of the same treatments and behaviors to which the other side takes such umbrage, we, more often than not let our message defend our position. We let our testimonies stand as shields to the barrage of condemnations we receive and it never even occurs to us that we need any more defense than the truth.

In a day and age such as this were everyone is wary to be made an offender for a word, were a culture, a genuine social expectation exists that we can't say this or that because someone might get offended. During a time when a concept such as political correctness is even a reality in defiance of all common sense and adult maturity and the ideology that the minority voice should be the voice of the people at large. (A shadow of Mosiah 29) In a day such as this, is this "be nice" mantra and its specific application to the quelling of a particular groups voice perhaps the religious equivalent of political correctness? A seemingly sensible expectation of a hyper emphasized "ideal behavior" used to manage the undesired voices that attempt to speak to correct principles? Hmmm?

Now the question. Are these thoughts sustainable by scripture and prophetic observation? Can we illustrate that there is an appropriate time to stand for right against wrong. Can we show that there is another time to walk gently as is requested? Can we illustrate that they are two different states and different situations beg to one response while another state demands its opposite?

Is it sustainable, by the environment of a forum where individuals from all walks of life and experience share material? Especially a forum which has chosen as its subjects of interest, politics and religion. Is there truly anything wrong with a passionate discussion? Are there behaviors that may come out in a passionate discussion that would be best tempered? I think all of these angles would be wisely developed before I can sign this petition to absolve myself of the right to speak freely and honestly but with decorum as well. Let’s see where this goes and I may take the time to develop a scripturally based discussion. Each of these angles are quite well defined in scripture and prophetic discussion and upon those standards I am most willing to conform.

P.S. I hope I have not been too direct and I hope that speaking clearly is not perceived as contentious. It is simply my perspective on aspects of this discussion that I feel are germane to correct understanding. Please accept my apologies in advance should any feel, somehow, against all intent, offended.

As well someone suggested that if if I use emojis, I might be more palatable... , :)) , :ymdevil: , :ymsick: , :-w , :ymparty: , :(|) , ;;) :ymhug: ...take your pick.

[Alaris]

Moroni 7 is a great scripture on charity that includes both kindness and not easily provoked, something both your groups could benefit from.

"By this shall all men know ye are my disciples if ye have love one to another" is a scripture that could mean how the disciples love each other is how all men know we are disciples of Jesus Christ. I do not know that is "the" definition but it is certainly one of them and is absolutely true.

In Texas my favorite way to have the door slammed in my face was, "well I'm a Christian!" SLAM!! "Methinks perhaps thou doth not know the term, " I would think to myself.

I have seen some people cry foul rediculously to me who am usually very careful not to insult or give anyone any reason to esteem enmity from me. Am I perfect at it? Certainly not. However I have seen the tactic you mentioned when someone cries meanie when they seemingly can't abide the torrent of truth ( )

All the more reason to be not only blameless in how we treat each other but to have charity. I've contended with forum regulars who have had beloved pets perish or perhaps were going through a rough divorce. I dropped my crusade to prove a point to show charity.

I too have had my crotchety days and come here with bent words unintentionally. Yet below it all most of us I daresay are here to build rather than destroy.

Which is why we are commanded to forgive...seventy times seven even. Can there be love with no forgiveness?

One last point. It is easier to be rude here than it is in person. I've fallen to this truth... It just is. This is all the more reason for us to hold ourselves to a higher standard. I am glad you both took the higher ground and apologized to each other. You are both a great example to us all, and I for one appreciate both of you.

[Alaris]

:ymhug:

Moroni 7:46 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail

Imagine the Lord welcoming the children of Jerusalem into His arms... The smile on His face. The perfect, endless love that He shows with a look, a soft spoken word, or His touch. This is charity. When you feel the need to contend imagine the other person is your mother, or your brother, or your sister.

On my mission we were taught early to avoid Bible bashing as conversion is impossible with the spirit of contention. The spirit converts. Anyone who has served in the Bible belt can attest to this truth. I was good at avoiding these contests, though there were a few times I could not help myself.

Are we here to convince or convert? Convincing is fine in many cases, but the spirit of contention will do neither.

[brlenox]

:ymhug:

Moroni 7:46 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail

Imagine the Lord welcoming the children of Jerusalem into His arms... The smile on His face. The perfect, endless love that He shows with a look, a soft spoken word, or His touch. This is charity. When you feel the need to contend imagine the other person is your mother, or your brother, or your sister.

On my mission we were taught early to avoid Bible bashing as conversion is impossible with the spirit of contention. The spirit converts. Anyone who has served in the Bible belt can attest to this truth. I was good at avoiding these contests, though there were a few times I could not help myself.

Are we here to convince or convert? Convincing is fine in many cases, but the spirit of contention will do neither.

I ever so politely submit that you are not thinking about the subject of my post, presuming of course that is the one you're responding to. You are pushing a preconceived notion of a utopian society without being willing to consider the potential flaws. Or you still favor the potential misapplication of a spiritual concept with a single dimensional perspective without considering the multitude of facets that create a multidimensional reality....and if this doggone incubator would hold the correct temperature...I could get to bed.

[Alaris]

:ymhug:

Moroni 7:46 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail

Imagine the Lord welcoming the children of Jerusalem into His arms... The smile on His face. The perfect, endless love that He shows with a look, a soft spoken word, or His touch. This is charity. When you feel the need to contend imagine the other person is your mother, or your brother, or your sister.

On my mission we were taught early to avoid Bible bashing as conversion is impossible with the spirit of contention. The spirit converts. Anyone who has served in the Bible belt can attest to this truth. I was good at avoiding these contests, though there were a few times I could not help myself.

Are we here to convince or convert? Convincing is fine in many cases, but the spirit of contention will do neither.

I ever so politely submit that you are not thinking about the subject of my post, presuming of course that is the one you're responding to. You are pushing a preconceived notion of a utopian society without being willing to consider the potential flaws. Or you still favor the potential misapplication of a spiritual concept with a single dimensional perspective without considering the multitude of facets that create a multidimensional reality....and if this doggone incubator would hold the correct temperature...I could get to bed.

I was partially addressing your post. I also do ever politely submit that you may be overcomplicating the multitude of facets that create a multidimensional reality. You have agreed with me elsewhere that the effort to be kinder in our interactions is a worthy one.

How we treat each other is more important than being correct. That last sentence is rather humorous considering the fact if we know our doctrine we would ever be working to improve ourselves by putting charity into practice. Being kind to each other is being correct! (Moroni 7:45)

Alma 34:29 Therefore, if ye do not remember to be charitable, ye are as dross, which the refiners do cast out, (it being of no worth) and is trodden under foot of men.
30 And now, my brethren, I would that, after ye have received so many witnesses, seeing that the holy scriptures testify of these things, ye come forth and bring fruit unto repentance.
31 Yea, I would that ye would come forth and harden not your hearts any longer; for behold, now is the time and the day of your salvation; and therefore, if ye will repent and harden not your hearts, immediately shall the great plan of redemption be brought about unto you.
32 For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.
33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

As for the utopian society I'm pushing its called ZION. I am gathering as many as will come for I believe when the time of the gentiles is over we will be held to an even higher standard and would like to see all of us standing together on the right hand of the Lord. There is and has been a considerable dearth of charity here. Many in this thread seem to trying to justify the lack of charity. If we believe our own doctrine then we should all embrace the fact that we have all been commanded to be perfect and should be working toward that goal rather than excuse our treatment of each other because "that's how I am" or because "it's complicated." Being kind is about the least complicated thing which you so tremendously demonstrated in your opening line.

[brlenox]

As for the utopian society I'm pushing its called ZION. I am gathering as many as will come for I believe when the time of the gentiles is over we will be held to an even higher standard and would like to see all of us standing together on the right hand of the Lord. There is and has been a considerable dearth of charity here. Many in this thread seem to trying to justify the lack of charity. If we believe our own doctrine then we should all embrace the fact that we have all been commanded to be perfect and should be working toward that goal rather than excuse our treatment of each other because "that's how I am" or because "it's complicated." Being kind is about the least complicated thing which you so tremendously demonstrated in your opening lines.

Well, I can work with this as it provides a point for perspective. I whole hardily agree that we should be kind to one another. I hardily agree that establishing Zion is a worthy cause. I hardily agree that Enoch, the Father of Zion, was valiant in protecting the conditions that sustained Zion.

...and there's the point. If you focus so much on being nice and agreeable, if that is the priority at all times, if you can't decry the practices that defy Zion, if you can for the sake of the veneer of a righteous facade ignore the conditions that undermine Zion in every way, if you can see Korihor carried about working devices to destroy the children of men and not as Alma stand to protect the saints, if you cannot stand as Moroni and rattle the gates of hell when required, then you must forever seek an elusive goal for the misunderstanding of the principles upon which it is achieved.

Nobody is trying to defend meanness, rudeness, or insensitively but I do defend the privilege of this sojourn in mortality to learn to overcome such tendencies and that each is entitled to their place on the path to conquer without hypocritical judgment. If you are observant, you will note that at least for my part and several others here we defend the cause of Zion not only for ourselves but also for those who are...I do mean ARE being led astray by those who have no interest in Zion whatsoever and who undermine and demean and create doubt in the very vehicle that Jesus Christ established to see to the building up of Zion. We are far more concerned for the fact that ravenous wolves feed upon the weak of testimony who will never enjoy Zion because they were deceived by those who discredit the prophets and apostles.

It has been observed here in times past where these ravenous wolves created a collective, a pack if you will of like minded sorts and we now witness their harm and damage and destruction in a movement called the Remnant. All ostensibly claiming to seek Zion, calling and election, second comforter and other veneers of righteous attainment when underneath they are the cancer which will ensure that those they lead astray shall never, ever see Zion nor attain to any of the laudable goals of true righteous attainment.

When the points of polite conversation are subverted to provide venue for Satan's efforts to deceive, somebody must stand and call out the darkness. To a fault every one of those who participated here who have left and become The Remnant group were always calling out the TBM's, claiming they were contentious, not nice, mean, rude and needed to repent. To a fault everyone who have left and become the Remnant wanted protection from those nasty TBM's whose primary objective was to defend the prophets, sustain the church and slow the flow of those being tempted by flattery to join a cause that will never see Zion. That same spirit is still to be found on LDSFF.

What's more is on occasion several of us have received thanks for our efforts from those who were sliding away for the fact that we presented sound doctrine to counter the carefully woven deceptions that lulled them into a stupor of thought.

I am only here for this purpose. I let so many of the threads go by because they do not interest me or they are simply conversations that I do not see as destructive and threatening to the true cause of Zion. The day in and day out common conversations on LDSFF should be engaged in exactly as you seek. Nothing but polite and pleasant debate procedure should prevail. However, LDSFF is a unique venue where there is potential for more than just breezy conversations of polite society. On occasion weighty matters of great and eternal ramifications are discussed.

I seldom participate in any thread to any great degree unless I am defending the cause of Zion and striving to protect those who are suffering from a crisis of faith or disillusionment. When I see evil, or that which has moved beyond the veil of common interaction to the platform of deception or creating doubt in the Gospel cause then I become a defender of the faith as do others. When I see "LDS" breed deceptive doctrines of no requirement for baptism or ordinances are not needed for celestialization etc. these are too egregious to step over and ignore for their potential to destroy the very gate to Zion and so we address these efforts by doing our best to provide a correct perspective - so that maybe Zion can be brought to bear for some that might be lead astray.

So you and I are in perfect agreement that the cause of Zion should prevail but I do not recommend the degree of naivety that thinks that Zion will be established without a fight - Korihor must be bound.

[Alaris]

As for the utopian society I'm pushing its called ZION. I am gathering as many as will come for I believe when the time of the gentiles is over we will be held to an even higher standard and would like to see all of us standing together on the right hand of the Lord. There is and has been a considerable dearth of charity here. Many in this thread seem to trying to justify the lack of charity. If we believe our own doctrine then we should all embrace the fact that we have all been commanded to be perfect and should be working toward that goal rather than excuse our treatment of each other because "that's how I am" or because "it's complicated." Being kind is about the least complicated thing which you so tremendously demonstrated in your opening lines.

Well, I can work with this as it provides a point for perspective. I whole hardily agree that we should be kind to one another. I hardily agree that establishing Zion is a worthy cause. I hardily agree that Enoch, the Father of Zion, was valiant in protecting the conditions that sustained Zion.

...and there's the point. If you focus so much on being nice and agreeable, if that is the priority at all times, if you can't decry the practices that defy Zion, if you can for the sake of the veneer of a righteous facade ignore the conditions that undermine Zion in every way, if you can see Korihor carried about working devices to destroy the children of men and not as Alma stand to protect the saints, if you cannot stand as Moroni and rattle the gates of hell when required, then you must forever seek an elusive goal for the misunderstanding of the principles upon which it is achieved.

Nobody is trying to defend meanness, rudeness, or insensitively but I do defend the privilege of this sojourn in mortality to learn to overcome such tendencies and that each is entitled to their place on the path to conquer without hypocritical judgment. If you are observant, you will note that at least for my part and several others here we defend the cause of Zion not only for ourselves but also for those who are...I do mean ARE being led astray by those who have no interest in Zion whatsoever and who undermine and demean and create doubt in the very vehicle that Jesus Christ established to see to the building up of Zion. We are far more concerned for the fact that ravenous wolves feed upon the weak of testimony who will never enjoy Zion because they were deceived by those who discredit the prophets and apostles.

It has been observed here in times past where these ravenous wolves created a collective, a pack if you will of like minded sorts and we now witness their harm and damage and destruction in a movement called the Remnant. All ostensibly claiming to seek Zion, calling and election, second comforter and other veneers of righteous attainment when underneath they are the cancer which will ensure that those they lead astray shall never, ever see Zion nor attain to any of the laudable goals of true righteous attainment.

When the points of polite conversation are subverted to provide venue for Satan's efforts to deceive, somebody must stand and call out the darkness. To a fault every one of those who participated here who have left and become The Remnant group were always calling out the TBM's, claiming they were contentious, not nice, mean, rude and needed to repent. To a fault everyone who have left and become the Remnant wanted protection from those nasty TBM's whose primary objective was to defend the prophets, sustain the church and slow the flow of those being tempted by flattery to join a cause that will never see Zion. That same spirit is still to be found on LDSFF.

What's more is on occasion several of us have received thanks for our efforts from those who were sliding away for the fact that we presented sound doctrine to counter the carefully woven deceptions that lulled them into a stupor of thought.

I am only here for this purpose. I let so many of the threads go by because they do not interest me or they are simply conversations that I do not see as destructive and threatening to the true cause of Zion. The day in and day out common conversations on LDSFF should be engaged in exactly as you seek. Nothing but polite and pleasant debate procedure should prevail. However, LDSFF is a unique venue where there is potential for more than just breezy conversations of polite society. On occasion weighty matters of great and eternal ramifications are discussed.

I seldom participate in any thread to any great degree unless I am defending the cause of Zion and striving to protect those who are suffering from a crisis of faith or disillusionment. When I see evil, or that which has moved beyond the veil of common interaction to the platform of deception or creating doubt in the Gospel cause then I become a defender of the faith as do others. When I see "LDS" breed deceptive doctrines of no requirement for baptism or ordinances are not needed for celestialization etc. these are too egregious to step over and ignore for their potential to destroy the very gate to Zion and so we address these efforts by doing our best to provide a correct perspective - so that maybe Zion can be brought to bear for some that might be lead astray.

So you and I are in perfect agreement that the cause of Zion should prevail but I do not recommend the degree of naivety that thinks that Zion will be established without a fight - Korihor must be bound.

Well stated! I believe "by their fruits" is a principle that builds off what you are saying. Those who come here to subvert the work of God are revealed by their fruits because the same spirit that they have listed to obey will reveal itself by the fruits that are produced by the puppet from the puppeteer. Absolutely we should be sharp when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. I have felt prompted in threads to be sharp with those who were embracing false doctrine, error, or fighting against the prophets. We should also be sharp with each other when moved upon, but always show an increase of love after for by our fruits shall all men know we are His disciples.

[passionflower]

Alaris, everything you said frustrates me.

The common fault I see here is the assumption that everyone on the planet sees things like this exactly the same. With how you describe Zion, I would have to conclude you think I am "bad", my culture is "bad", my family is "bad", and my personal adjustment to the world is "bad", and I had just better get an Alaris style make over so I can go to Zion.

I am dutch. The Dutch are known for being blunt and honest to the point of absolute brutality. In my world, this is just ordinary conversation and is not considered unkind or uncharitable, But you would say it was awful, and we could not be a "zion" people and insist something is "wrong" with us. Also, we do NOT hug. Yet you paint a picture of Jesus embracing us. I would not like this. I do not want to be welcomed into the arms of Jesus. Dutch people kiss each other to show affection, we do not embrace. Do you insist I must desired to be embraced or I am not a Zion person? That would be uncomfortable and mean nothing to me. Looks like I do not "fit" into your Zion, and I must be excluded as defective.

Where I come from, no one has a meltdown because someone said their haircut wasn't good, their clothes don't fit, their kids are complete monsters, their yard is a mess, their talk in church was boring, or heaven forbid, their tattoos are ugly and incongruent to a church member. No one goes on Facebook crying about the horrible judgmental person who fat shamed them, etc. demanding sympathy and validation for their personal weaknesses. To me, acting this way is just too hilarious.

Dutch people do not take everything said to them personally, as every american does and to the max. Are you insisting that we should? We do not personally identify with being fat, old, our political persuasions, our country, tattoos, body jewelry, our sexual orientation, or even our religion. I do not personally identify as a Mormon, something I find very peculiar and weird to do. I am first me, and I identify very strongly with that, and then I have a religion, which I regard as a very private matter.

I grew up in a world where I didn't have to lie. I didn't have to say someone was pretty when they weren't, and I didn't have to hold anything in to please someone else's touchy feelings. With american mormons, every virtue must bow and pay homage to the hypersensitive feelings of others. Everything about you is judged on how well you protect the "feelings" of others. It is a world where no one means a thing they say, and you can't say "no" without guilt. If this is Zion, I am outta here. I would rather be real, genuine, and have my relationships above board. Totally.

One of the most difficult things I encounter is the american greeting "How are you?" or "How are you doing?". It took me quite a while to get it that no one who says that really cares how you are doing and no one asked answers back honestly. I once listened in a small town grocery store as everyone came in knew each other and constantly said, " how you doing?" and every answer back was "great" "glorious" "perfect" and "couldn't be better!" I had the very bad manners of actually answering honestly, expecting them to care, only to see downcast eyes that said, " I am sorry I asked". The way I look at it, if you don't want to know how I'm doing, and you don't really care, then DON'T ask me. If this kind of insincerity is considered good enough for "Zion", then I don't want any part of it,

Missionaries going to the Netherlands have to be apprised of the very direct and abrupt nature of the dutch. But they are not told to make us over into phony make nice americans who want Jesus to embrace us so we can be a zion people, too. I might add that once missionaries get "used" to telling it like it is, they love it and find that a great relief comes over them. They find the dutch to be the most genuine people who really care about others and willingly help strangers ( that's why the dutch took in the pilgrims ). They work well as a group with no one trying to exalt themselves over others ( even CEO's don't get a private secretary and have to get their own cup of coffee ( copje Koffe ) and are probably the last country in Europe to be strongly family centered with mom still at home.

Nevertheless, if I don't talk your brand of "nice", And if I don't look forward to Jesus embracing me, I am NOT a Zion person and need to be fixed.

( please don't take this personally. As you can see, if I meant it personally, I would SAY i meant this personally. I like you quite a bit. I am just venting out how a foreign person can react to threads such as this.)

[brlenox]

Alaris, everything you said frustrates me.

The common fault I see here is the assumption that everyone on the planet sees things like this exactly the same. With how you describe Zion, I would have to conclude you think I am "bad", my culture is "bad", my family is "bad", and my personal adjustment to the world is "bad", and I had just better get an Alaris style make over so I can go to Zion.

I am dutch. The Dutch are known for being blunt and honest to the point of absolute brutality. In my world, this is just ordinary conversation and is not considered unkind or uncharitable, But you would say it was awful, and we could not be a "zion" people and insist something is "wrong" with us. Also, we do NOT hug. Yet you paint a picture of Jesus embracing us. I would not like this. I do not want to be welcomed into the arms of Jesus. Dutch people kiss each other to show affection, we do not embrace. Do you insist I must desired to be embraced or I am not a Zion person? That would be uncomfortable and mean nothing to me. Looks like I do not "fit" into your Zion, and I must be excluded as defective.

Where I come from, no one has a meltdown because someone said their haircut wasn't good, their clothes don't fit, their kids are complete monsters, their yard is a mess, their talk in church was boring, or heaven forbid, their tattoos are ugly and incongruent to a church member. No one goes on Facebook crying about the horrible judgmental person who fat shamed them, etc. demanding sympathy and validation for their personal weaknesses. To me, acting this way is just too hilarious.

Dutch people do not take everything said to them personally, as every american does and to the max. Are you insisting that we should? We do not personally identify with being fat, old, our political persuasions, our country, tattoos, body jewelry, our sexual orientation, or even our religion. I do not personally identify as a Mormon, something I find very peculiar and weird to do. I am first me, and I identify very strongly with that, and then I have a religion, which I regard as a very private matter.

I grew up in a world where I didn't have to lie. I didn't have to say someone was pretty when they weren't, and I didn't have to hold anything in to please someone else's touchy feelings. With american mormons, every virtue must bow and pay homage to the hypersensitive feelings of others. Everything about you is judged on how well you protect the "feelings" of others. It is a world where no one means a thing they say, and you can't say "no" without guilt. If this is Zion, I am outta here. I would rather be real, genuine, and have my relationships above board. Totally.

One of the most difficult things I encounter is the american greeting "How are you?" or "How are you doing?". It took me quite a while to get it that no one who says that really cares how you are doing and no one asked answers back honestly. I once listened in a small town grocery store as everyone came in knew each other and constantly said, " how you doing?" and every answer back was "great" "glorious" "perfect" and "couldn't be better!" I had the very bad manners of actually answering honestly, expecting them to care, only to see downcast eyes that said, " I am sorry I asked". The way I look at it, if you don't want to know how I'm doing, and you don't really care, then DON'T ask me. If this kind of insincerity is considered good enough for "Zion", then I don't want any part of it,

Missionaries going to the Netherlands have to be apprised of the very direct and abrupt nature of the dutch. But they are not told to make us over into phony make nice americans who want Jesus to embrace us so we can be a zion people, too. I might add that once missionaries get "used" to telling it like it is, they love it and find that a great relief comes over them. They find the dutch to be the most genuine people who really care about others and willingly help strangers ( that's why the dutch took in the pilgrims ). They work well as a group with no one trying to exalt themselves over others ( even CEO's don't get a private secretary and have to get their own cup of coffee ( copje Koffe ) and are probably the last country in Europe to be strongly family centered with mom still at home.

Nevertheless, if I don't talk your brand of "nice", And if I don't look forward to Jesus embracing me, I am NOT a Zion person and need to be fixed.

( please don't take this personally. As you can see, if I meant it personally, I would SAY i meant this personally. I like you quite a bit. I am just venting out how a foreign person can react to threads such as this.)

You have stated this wonderfully from my perspective. I especially appreciated this observation:

Where I come from, no one has a meltdown because someone said their haircut wasn't good, their clothes don't fit, their kids are complete monsters, their yard is a mess, their talk in church was boring, or heaven forbid, their tattoos are ugly and incongruent to a church member. No one goes on Facebook crying about the horrible judgmental person who fat shamed them, etc. demanding sympathy and validation for their personal weaknesses. To me, acting this way is just too hilarious.

and this:

I grew up in a world where I didn't have to lie. I didn't have to say someone was pretty when they weren't, and I didn't have to hold anything in to please someone else's touchy feelings. With american mormons, every virtue must bow and pay homage to the hypersensitive feelings of others. Everything about you is judged on how well you protect the "feelings" of others. It is a world where no one means a thing they say, and you can't say "no" without guilt. If this is Zion, I am outta here. I would rather be real, genuine, and have my relationships above board. Totally.

You hit this on the head about growing up in a world where you don't have to lie. Brilliantly stated and I honestly have to say that in a certain fashion the purity of your understanding exceeds my own because I have grown up in America and have to work very very hard to filter out a degree of indoctrination that is simply the result of societal influence. I have a slight edge over some Americans in that my Dad was 60 when I was born and he raised me according to the values of America 1920. So in a way I skipped a couple of generations of social dumbing down but your take on this is clean and I appreciate very much what you have said.

[Alaris]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

[brlenox]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Sorry passionflower, I am going to interject a touch when it really is yours to reply to but...

Alaris, you missed the majority of her post down to the point of claiming she is angry with you when she only claims frustration. Two completely different meanings and words. However that highlights the indoctrination of our day and what passionflower has so eloquently spoken to. She says one thing and you completely hear another and in a different spirit and tone that she intended. As I felt what she was saying, I felt she was actually being conciliatory trying to bring two different worlds together in harmony. What you got was angry...

Passionflower please correct anything I have said as I do not mean to speak for you, I am just speaking for me and what I heard.

[Alaris]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Sorry passionflower, I am going to interject a touch when it really is yours to reply to but...

Alaris, you missed the majority of her post down to the point of claiming she is angry with you when she only claims frustration. Two completely different meanings and words. However that highlights the indoctrination of our day and what passionflower has so eloquently spoken to. She says one thing and you completely hear another and in a different spirit and tone that she intended. As I felt what she was saying, I felt she was actually being conciliatory trying to bring two different worlds together in harmony. What you got was angry...

Passionflower please correct anything I have said as I do not mean to speak for you, I am just speaking for me and what I heard.

That may be. I just want to clarify that I certainly don't want Alaris' brand of nice becoming a thing. She does make some good points, but I would be happy to make some counterpoints and suggestions if desired.

[brlenox]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Another thought...this is the point I made in my earlier post today...your brand of nice is the lop-sided hyper-emphasized brand that treats the subject like it is a point of understanding. Be nice no matter what you are responding to. The approach I prefer is the one that takes all relevant scriptural commentary and creates a spectrum of understanding so that I can modify my approach to a situation by completely understanding the spectrum of doctrine instead of a point of doctrine. That may or may not make sense but it is all I have time for for now.

[brlenox]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Sorry passionflower, I am going to interject a touch when it really is yours to reply to but...

Alaris, you missed the majority of her post down to the point of claiming she is angry with you when she only claims frustration. Two completely different meanings and words. However that highlights the indoctrination of our day and what passionflower has so eloquently spoken to. She says one thing and you completely hear another and in a different spirit and tone that she intended. As I felt what she was saying, I felt she was actually being conciliatory trying to bring two different worlds together in harmony. What you got was angry...

Passionflower please correct anything I have said as I do not mean to speak for you, I am just speaking for me and what I heard.

That may be. I just want to clarify that I certainly don't want Alaris' brand of nice becoming a thing. She does make some good points, but I would be happy to make some counterpoints and suggestions if desired.

It is not really your brand of nice, long before you it was Jules, it was blarsen (as in brent larson), it was Amonhi's, it was Gad's, agstakers, franktalk, jo1982, thomas, frederick...the list goes on and on. However, Darwin wasn't the first with the theory of evolution either and look what we blame him for now.

[Finrock]

Personal attacks are not relative things that can be explained away by saying that some people are more sensitive than other people. Ad hominem tactics are independent of any individual's personal fortitude in dealing with the behavior of others. In a discussion or during a debate an ad hominem is attacking the person as opposed to the content and substance of what the person is saying. Attacking the person can be quiet benign or it can be very severe and many things in between.

There is no doubt that on this internet forum there are people who use ad hominem and other rhetorical tactics to shut down conversations, to try to discredit a message, to prevent discourse, and to prevent ideas and thoughts from being expressed, discussed, and considered either because they don't like the message or they can't reasonably refute the message. In Mormon circles the excuse for unethical and immoral behavior is always "defending the flock or defending the truth or defending the Brethren" or some other such excuse. Because I am defending the faith, I will attack a person personally instead of attacking the substance and the content of their message, and it is OK.

Nobody who has participated in this thread is complaining about people being blunt, straightforward, or brutally honest. Wonderful traits and when used appropriately can do a great deal of good. However, that isn't the issue.

How we should act and how we should treat others is really very simple. Respect others and treat others the way that you want to be treated, or treat them better than you want to be treated. Stating that someone is an "enemy" to you, to your paradigm, to our group, etc., to a Christian or to a Latter-day Saint, this does not excuse one from that requirement of treating others with respect. We should not use language or take part in language that is intended to hurt or harm another person. Of course people will act as they wish and do as they will, but, standards do exist and there is behavior that is universally unethical and immoral, whether a person becomes offended by that behavior/language or not.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Sorry passionflower, I am going to interject a touch when it really is yours to reply to but...

Alaris, you missed the majority of her post down to the point of claiming she is angry with you when she only claims frustration. Two completely different meanings and words. However that highlights the indoctrination of our day and what passionflower has so eloquently spoken to. She says one thing and you completely hear another and in a different spirit and tone that she intended. As I felt what she was saying, I felt she was actually being conciliatory trying to bring two different worlds together in harmony. What you got was angry...

Passionflower please correct anything I have said as I do not mean to speak for you, I am just speaking for me and what I heard.

I'm going to interject as well: Being frustrated is being angry or upset because of obstacles or challenges.

Frustration is under the "anger" umbrella. It is feeling annoyed, upset, etc. These are all "angry" words and "angry" feelings. Frustration is a synonym for anger.

My therapist gave me a great list of words/feelings that are all under the "anger" umbrella. It helped me to identify my feelings of anger that I was disguising/hiding by calling them something else. Initially it was no fun because I could no longer pretend that I wasn't really angry but just "frustrated".

-Finrock

[Alaris]

Firstly no offense taken.

Secondly what is my brand of nice? I have quoted scriptures to reinforce the fact we are commanded to love one another and told that without charity we are essentially worthless to God. These scriptures suggest that if we are doctrinely correct in our discussions yet devoid of charity we are availed nothing.

I'm sorry my words anger you but I submit to you that perhaps your anger is displaced as your lengthy post suggests.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is a path to Godhood we are all invited to embark on. None of us will be forced just like my invitations are only intended to elevate the conversation here and improve the fruits of charity. I'm sorry that angers you and so many here. I've not excluded myself from the invitation as none of us are perfect and therein is the point. Should we not be aiming higher each day? This concept should be welcome in an lds discussion forum.

Another thought...this is the point I made in my earlier post today...your brand of nice is the lop-sided hyper-emphasized brand that treats the subject like it is a point of understanding. Be nice no matter what you are responding to. The approach I prefer is the one that takes all relevant scriptural commentary and creates a spectrum of understanding so that I can modify my approach to a situation by completely understanding the spectrum of doctrine instead of a point of doctrine. That may or may not make sense but it is all I have time for for now.

Perhaps you should reread my posts. I gave specific instances where sharpness is not only justified but the correct course of action - that I have taken many times on LDSFF - in fact I have used far more scriptures than you in this thread to qualify the Lord's brand of nice. It's the same brand that Moroni taught in Moroni 7 and before him the Lord taught at the Sermon on the Mount. ;)

[passionflower]

Personal attacks are not relative things that can be explained away by saying that some people are more sensitive than other people. Ad hominem tactics are independent of any individual's personal fortitude in dealing with the behavior of others. In a discussion or during a debate an ad hominem is attacking the person as opposed to the content and substance of what the person is saying. Attacking the person can be quiet benign or it can be very severe and many things in between.

There is no doubt that on this internet forum there are people who use ad hominem and other rhetorical tactics to shut down conversations, to try to discredit a message, to prevent discourse, and to prevent ideas and thoughts from being expressed, discussed, and considered either because they don't like the message or they can't reasonably refute the message. In Mormon circles the excuse for unethical and immoral behavior is always "defending the flock or defending the truth or defending the Brethren" or some other such excuse. Because I am defending the faith, I will attack a person personally instead of attacking the substance and the content of their message, and it is OK.

Nobody who has participated in this thread is complaining about people being blunt, straightforward, or brutally honest. Wonderful traits and when used appropriately can do a great deal of good. However, that isn't the issue.

How we should act and how we should treat others is really very simple. Respect others and treat others the way that you want to be treated, or treat them better than you want to be treated. Stating that someone is an "enemy" to you, to your paradigm, to our group, etc., to a Christian or to a Latter-day Saint, this does not excuse one from that requirement of treating others with respect. We should not use language or take part in language that is intended to hurt or harm another person. Of course people will act as they wish and do as they will, but, standards do exist and there is behavior that is universally unethical and immoral, whether a person becomes offended by that behavior/language or not.

-Finrock

This is an attack on me, my culture, my family, my heritage, and my country.

[Finrock]

Personal attacks are not relative things that can be explained away by saying that some people are more sensitive than other people. Ad hominem tactics are independent of any individual's personal fortitude in dealing with the behavior of others. In a discussion or during a debate an ad hominem is attacking the person as opposed to the content and substance of what the person is saying. Attacking the person can be quiet benign or it can be very severe and many things in between.

There is no doubt that on this internet forum there are people who use ad hominem and other rhetorical tactics to shut down conversations, to try to discredit a message, to prevent discourse, and to prevent ideas and thoughts from being expressed, discussed, and considered either because they don't like the message or they can't reasonably refute the message. In Mormon circles the excuse for unethical and immoral behavior is always "defending the flock or defending the truth or defending the Brethren" or some other such excuse. Because I am defending the faith, I will attack a person personally instead of attacking the substance and the content of their message, and it is OK.

Nobody who has participated in this thread is complaining about people being blunt, straightforward, or brutally honest. Wonderful traits and when used appropriately can do a great deal of good. However, that isn't the issue.

How we should act and how we should treat others is really very simple. Respect others and treat others the way that you want to be treated, or treat them better than you want to be treated. Stating that someone is an "enemy" to you, to your paradigm, to our group, etc., to a Christian or to a Latter-day Saint, this does not excuse one from that requirement of treating others with respect. We should not use language or take part in language that is intended to hurt or harm another person. Of course people will act as they wish and do as they will, but, standards do exist and there is behavior that is universally unethical and immoral, whether a person becomes offended by that behavior/language or not.

-Finrock

This is an attack on me, my culture, my family, my heritage, and my country.

No it isn't.

-Finrock

[shadow]

Ben Shapiro showing honest and true brotherly love by melting down one snowflake at a time. True respect of a person is shown by not participating in deception, no matter how much the person wants the deception to be true. I have a feeling that Alaris and Finrock won't like Ben's approach, but maybe they'll surprise me. I find it refreshing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgQy70_LPS4

[Alaris]

Ben Shapiro showing honest and true brotherly love by melting down one snowflake at a time. True respect of a person is shown by not participating in deception, no matter how much the person wants the deception to be true. I have a feeling that Alaris and Finrock won't like Ben's approach, but maybe they'll surprise me. I find it refreshing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgQy70_LPS4

I listen to Ben Shapiro nearly every day - thoroughly enjoy his show. He sticks to facts for the most part, but his model is hardly one to emulate in this space. He is combating liberalism which is an extension of luciferianism - We are all mostly LDS who shouldn't be challenged to stick to truth (facts) and be decent to each other while refraining from trolling and abruptness. It's quite amazing how many of you can't abide a call to be kind while being doctrinally correct in your forum posts.

ab·rupt
əˈbrəpt/Submit
brief to the point of rudeness; curt.