Today on its home page, MormonThink made the following announcement:

"MormonThink is pleased to announce the appointment of its new Managing Editor, Scott Carles. Tom Phillips, who served as M.E. for the last 15 months has decided to pass the baton as he enjoys retirement in Algarve, Portugal. We thank Tom for his help, especially with sharing the truly, fascinating story of his Second Anointing which few members are aware still exists."

Here’s the link to Carles’ page on MT: http://mormonthink.com/scottcarles.htm

It looks like the site is changing focus a bit with this announcement. Carles is apparently an inactive member who has worked behind the scenes at MT for some time.

I wish him (and MT) good luck!

Luck and hats off to Scott Carles!

I think Tom has forged a path that more of us now need to build upon.

It's someone else's turn

Good luck for the new fellow

Thanks to Tom for all he's done. Good luck to Scott as he takes over the reigns.

Mormonthink was integral to my learning process and helped me realize that the reality of tscc bears little resemblance to what I was taught my entire life. A big thanks to everyone who has been involved with the website, it changed my life.

Thank you Tom, and Scott, good luck to you. I wish you both the best.

We'll keep improving it as we go along. Scott has already been extremely helpful this past year with his Web design skills and professional background. He also has some good ideas for improvement going forward. So thanks to everyone for their support. MT has grown tremendously in web traffic in the past 2 years and we look forward to continuing to help spread the truth about the church's history so members and investigators can make informed decisions about the church.

Deep bow to Tom and great thanks for his service.

Anagrammy

Thank you, Tom, and best of luck to you in your future endeavors! And thank you, Scott, for taking the helm!

: )

Is Mormonthink going to move more towards being just another apologetic site, like John Dehlin's Mormonstories and other similar sites. If that is the case, I think it may be a big mistake.

Why do you think MT readership went up to a huge 2.5 million+ hits a month. It was mostly down to Tom Phillips courage and forthright stance in exposing the church and its institutionalised corruption that is found among its leaders at the very highest level.

Changing course and being nice and conciliatory to these religious conmen in Salt Lake, will only be welcomed with open arms and relief by them. They need a severe jolt and apologetic sites just don't do it. They don't like to be called out on their lies and it needs an ongoing aggressive approach to get them to take notice and change.

Mormonthink is uniquely different and effective in that it is not afraid to expose the church, its leaders and their corruption, and let the cards fall where they will. The church rushed out the Essays in utter desperation, because they were forced into it by Tom and MT.

Please don't let MT go backwards and become yet another soft apologetic website. There are more than enough of those around, and they are not nearly as successful in exposing and getting meaningful changes and quickly, as Mormonthink clearly has been.

It is a highly successful and unique brand. If it keeps going forward with this proven strategy and please it will continue to be effective and continue in increasing its readership.

offradar Wrote, in part:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Please don't let MT go backwards and become yet
> another soft apologetic website. There are more
> than enough of those around, and they are not
> nearly as successful in exposing and getting
> meaningful changes and quickly, as Mormonthink
> clearly has been.
==========================
I don't think that's gonna happen. I have confidence
in MT and its goal of total honesty, so much in contrast
to the apologetics places, who seem to specialize in
doubletalk and tangled spinning.

Sending MT good wishes, good waggies, and many DBKs!

[For the uninitiated: DBKs = Dogbreath kisses!]

Let's all join paws and sing, "I believe in you" from "How to Succeed in Business without Really Trying"!

Yer Pal,
Reggie
The Showtunes Expert StalkerDog™

Offradar,

I disagree. Mormonthink should be neither anti nor pro only factual. We don't beats lies with other lies. The site will gain greater credibility because it is always accurate and honest.

Some things will fall for the church others against. Members will be able to judge for themselves and will at least have the confidence that mormonthink is presenting the facts.

That will do far more than any agenda to break the chur h.

With great respect, I just cannot agree.

The compulsive liars in SL will only take notice if they are aggressively challenged. The softly softly approach will never work with these criminals. The massive corruption that they jealously protect can only be exposed and brought down by the forthright actions of individuals like Tom and aggressive and meaningful exposure of church corruption through excellent websites like Mormonthink.

The John Dehlin strategy is largely ineffective and of little or no threat whatsoever to the financial crooks in SL. They accommodate him and absorb it, continuing happily to spew their vicious bile upon their membership with absolute and unapposed relish.

But I will be very happy to be proved wrong.

Scott is committed to conveying information accurately and letting the chips fall where they may, which is more than LDS inc. can say. To distort, exaggerate, or make accusation in order to garner attention, while perhaps effective, would make MormonThink no better than the organization it stands against.

Don't worry, accurate information is plenty damaging for the church by itself. People in possession of the truth need not fear accurately presenting all sides of every argument.

>
> Don't worry, accurate information is plenty
> damaging for the church by itself. People in
> possession of the truth need not fear accurately
> presenting all sides of every argument.


I agree. Scott's a good guy. He will do a great job and already has behind the scenes for quite a while.

I just want honesty. If some bit of information is perhaps untrue or the source isn't that credible, say it. Regardless of whether it makes the church look good/bad/whatever.

On the other hand, stuff like the book of abraham and kinderhood plates and stuff that are clearly fraudulent garbage shouldn't be sugar coated.

I don't think anyone has suggested MormonThink will be changing either its tone or its content.

It was there and already excellent before Tom Phillips (whom I salute ;-) became editor and I'm sure it will continue to be excellent moving forward.

There's too much dispassionate truth on there for it ever to become an apologist site.

I can't even understand why you're worried, to be honest.

Tom in Paris

Good wishes to Mormonthink and its new managing editor.

I think a return to a neutral, non-activist approach is essential, and it was why Mormonthink had been so successful, perhaps not in garnering traffic, but more importantly, in allowing timid and curious LDS members a place to approach honest inquiry into troubling aspects of the correlated LDS historical foundation narrative.

And Tom is in the perfect place for some needed rest and relaxation.

Yes! This was so important for me. I still think it's great, but it seems like there has been a shift in tone making it less friendly to TBMs. The even, balanced tone was instrumental was incredible when I first read MT. The difference between that and FAIR/FARMS/SHIELD was incredible. It became instantly clear who was hiding things.

Will Scott now face the prospect of a Court of Love?

Thank you Tom. You were inspiring. What you did meant so much to so many I dare say.

And thank you Scott for picking up the reins--or should I say taking on the "mantle." Seems more appropriate, tongue in cheek at least.

Good Luck Scott!

Thank you Tom for your fearless leadership! Because of your efforts many have taken the next step to discover LD$ Inc.'s lies and made up history. I wish you the best!

Thanks Tom and Scott. With all the talent we have each will rise to its occasion to reach the many out there who are impressed with one or the other in approach

thanks Tom.

Tom has done a great job, and his talents obviously lie in actively challenging church leaders. The case may not have succeeded, but it was creative and well-researched. A different judge may have seen it more favorably.

But I think with his name out there so prominently now as an angry ex-Mormon (though he isn't- ex, I mean) a new leader might help MormonThink appeal more to questioning members. I think getting rid of the snarkiness and keeping the truth is a great plan, and look forward to seeing the site under the new editor. And I also look forward to seeing Tom's next move - even though he deserves some R&R I don't think he will be able to stay quiet for long...

Scott, I read your preamble on MT and found it interesting and sincere although leaning towards a more apologetic approach.

I was wondering what you meant by the following statement you made in your intro:

"Ultimately a more informed member is a more committed member"

particularly in relation to your more conciliatory tone towards church history, corruption and any further damaging exposes.

Just seems a rather puzzling statement.

That is a truthful statement. Although, many members who become "more informed" leave the church, those that stay have, at least, built their testimonies on more actuate information, which in turn, leaves them more committed.

As time moves on, those few who stay TBM will become religious zealots who are more "peculiar" and separate from the normal world. They'll be very committed to their own delusion.

Offradar, thanks for the question. The goal of MormonThink is to provide the serious inquirer with information they need to make a decision about the way they approach their religion. For those who wish to remain committed to their faith, MormonThink provides the information they need to be fully informed. It's as simple as that.

The purpose of MormonThink, as stated on the "Introduction" page of the site:

"The purpose of this site is to generate discussion about little-known topics of church history to those interested in increasing their knowledge about these kinds of interesting, historical Mormon issues. We encourage people to think objectively about issues involving the doctrine, practices and history of the LDS church. Many Latter-day Saints are completely unaware of some or all of the issues discussed here, or have an incomplete, one-sided view of them. We present arguments and responses from both critics of the church and true-believing members and add some opinions of those who helped compile the data."

In addition, found on the homepage:

"There is a lot of misinformation on the LDS Church that is presented by both critics and defenders of the faith - particularly on the Internet. We present a range of perspectives and viewpoints, privileging those we believe are the most accurate, consistent and empirically valid, then let the reader decide."

Many in the post-mormon/ex-mormon community think the purpose of the site is to deconvert people. Although that is not it's purpose, deconversion may result from people reading the site.

To clarify, you said:

"...your more conciliatory tone towards church history, corruption and any further damaging exposes[.]"

This is an inaccurate representation of what I said on my personal page at MT. Let me address the issues in your quote.

1) "Conciliatory" - The only changes to the site that I'm advocating deal with the tone of rhetoric used in discussing historical and doctrinal issues. The content of the site will not change unless there are inaccuracies found (none that I am aware of at this writing). It's possible to state truths clearly and matter-of-factly without a demeaning or condescending tone. There will be no conciliatory gestures made when presenting the facts of Church history and doctrine.

2) "Corruption...damaging exposés" - I'm not sure where you gathered the idea that I would be addressing or corruption or damaging exposés, let alone being conciliatory toward them. It remains the mission of MT to share and report on all aspects of the LDS Church, whether that information seems to support, damage or expose them.

Concerning your use of "apologetic" - in our business, the term is used to describe those who are defending their faith. I take it to mean the other definition which is to apologize for actions. There is no apology in what I said, I'm simply stating the small tweak in some of the rhetoric.

If I'm unclear on anything, please let me know.

[edited to add the information about "apologetic"]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2014 02:29PM by Scott Carles.

Thank you Tom!

Scott, thank you for taking time and answering, although I cannot quite get how active members who visit and become fully aware of the mass of damning info, that after digesting the distressing and unknown facts, would somehow have their belief system strengthened and become even more committed.
I know we all react in different ways to the hidden and unsavoury elements, but I feel this is stretching things a bit.
Thanks again though Scott and very best wishes indeed with your new appointment and with MT going forward, hopefully with renewed vigour and typical unwavering resolve.