Candidate to moderate /r/mormon

/u/VultureofUruguay wrote:

Similar to Marmot, I’ve found /u/bwv549 to have good content and a respectful tone. Here’s a great recent example.

objective, well-researched, heavily-sourced, and positive take

/u/Practical_Condition wrote:

I’ve just gotta tell you, u/bwv549, I have LOVED your blog, “A Careful Examination.” I’ve never seen a more objective, well-researched, heavily-sourced, and positive take on the church. I found it looking for a response to Callister’s book, “A Case for the Book of Mormon” and loved your responses.

I just saw your comment here and wanted to say thanks. :)

Respectful tone; corrects misinformation on “both sides”

/u/Fuzzy_Thoughts wrote:

/u/bwv549 is by far the best example of maintaining a respectful tone during debates as far as I’ve seen. His willingness to correct those with misinformation on “both sides of the aisle” has inspired me. I have been attempting to follow his example in my posts. His well-researched essays and criticical [sic] thinking have been instrumental in my ongoing faith transition.

True academic

From this post

Complex Logic (Truth-Centered):

The true logicians, analysts and academics of our communities. They seek to understand not just church history, but how it fits into history. They seek to understand not just science and reason, but the limitations of science of reason. They have analytical brains, but they can understand and accept that not everyone does. They’ll follow logic and reason to the end of its limits, and avoid making up pretend answers that exceed those limits. If they do make up an answer, they identify it as such: a hypothesis. They don’t accept the church for one reason alone – it’s not true. Maybe it does some good, maybe it does some bad, and it should be praised or derided for both. But the church is probably a net bad for the simple reason that it perpetuates fallacies and falsehoods. Even for those that benefit from the church, the church is doing damage because it promotes ignorance. Ignorance is the ultimate evil, and for humanity to have a chance at rising above ignorance, those who prop it up must be opposed.

Examples: Richard Dawkins & Friends, u/bwv549, Fowler Stage 5.

Responds to incivility with civility

/u/frogontrombone, acting as a moderator of MormonDoctrine, wrote:

However, as long as other mods agree, I will let this one post stand because other users (especially /u/bwv549) have decided to respond with civility despite the rule-breaking. I hope that this debate continues in a civil manner.

Extremely measured, gives credit

frogontrombone wrote:

… I’ve really admired the approach of /u/bwv549. He is an unbeliever like me. However, he is always extremely measured in his arguments and is careful to give credit where it is due. His approach to debate and discourse made me realize that I was being too harsh and militant. I’ve followed his lead and attempted to soften my tone and ensure my arguments are as tight and balanced as possible.

one of the most insightful Redditors

A user who later deleted their profile wrote:

Also, there are a lot of insightful Redditors to borrow from, and I think that one of the most insightful Redditors participating in this space at the moment (in a really accessible but stupidly smart way) is /u/bwv549 (among others, I’m just calling him out because he’s got this great summary of his beliefs that are handy and thoughtful).

very polite

MagusSanguis wrote:

Another thread earlier today by u/bwv549 on r/Mormon was a letter he wrote to Elder Oaks and Bednar about this very topic. I would highly recommend you read that letter. It’s very polite and matter of fact and addresses the stigma that non believers deal with.

As objective as possible

In response to the question “Is there any “objective” Mormon historical research”, /u/Fuzzy_Thoughts wrote:

/u/bwv549’s posts attempt to remain as objective as possible and let the data speak for itself.

Fantastic

From a post bemoaning the waning levels of scholarship on exmormon:

Love the growth of this sub [/r/exmormon] over the last few years. But also don’t love the dwindling amount of sources backing up sourcable information.

NotTerriblyHelpful wrote:

Also, I recently found r/mormonscholar [which I started]. It is a great resource for anyone who is looking for a more scholarly critique of Mormonism. It is still small, but lots of posts there by u/bwv549, who is fantastic.

Sizeable amount of the content in those references

Fuzzy Thoughts wrote:

Credit to /u/bwv549 for creating a sizable amount of the content in those references!

Well organized and referenced

Fuzzy Thoughts wrote:

I pretty much only send people material from his [bwv549’s] site… it’s so well organized and referenced.

needs to be the new CES [Letter] we all hand out

Browningtons1 wrote:

Woot woot 🙌🙌 u/bwv549 for the win. His site (linked website) needs to be the new CES we all “hand out”.

truly appreciated and valuable [work]

ammonthenephite wrote:

Seriously though, props to people like you, /u/bwv549 and many others that take the time to put together resources like this that others of us can both learn from as well as point to later on during future discussions on these topics. Keep up the good work, it is truly appreciated and valuable!

Amazing scholarly writings

MagusSanguis wrote:

I also find great value in exploring the amazing scholarly writing of u/fuzzy_thoughts and u/bwv549! There’s something cathartic about going through and reading the well informed thoughts and research of others who have gone through (and are currently going through) similar experiences. It makes you realize that you’re not alone in your thoughts and conclusions.

Scholarly/interesting

Browningtons1 wrote:

Also, following the scholarly/interesting posters here and on r/mormon has been incredibly helpful. If you have an insatiable thirst for everything mormon look into posts by u/Fuzzy_Thoughts u/bwv549 and u/MagusSanguis.

Pure Gold for days!

Fantastic post

/u/but_muh_shelf wrote:

Here is a fantastic post about this exact topic written by u/bwv549