I understand; I do 'get it'.
What WE are doing is showing that apparently what the LDS Organization believes NOW is different than what it 'believed' THEN.
We merely want to show that there is no documentation for these changes.
And because of these undocumented changes, that have no basis in LDS scripture, and were not ordered "thus sayeth the Lord," they certainly cannot be seen as doctrinal.
Why would anyone follow them? Why would anyone listen at all to a current "prophet," when the next one down the road is going to say this one is mistaken and speaking as a man?
Talk about circular reasoning?