[DelphiUser]

Actually, Jim, I think this is consistent with the rules that were discussed when the “new” religion mod took up the mantle.

While caucuses, devotionals, etc., were allowed it was stated at the time that a caucus TITLE or the content of a caucus THREAD could not be worded in such a way as to provoke others. “Joseph Smith: an apostle of Jesus Christ” is a bit of a red flag, wouldn’t you think?

I do not start caucus threads, I have not tried to keep up with rules changes, so do threads that break the rules get thrown in breaking news all the time, or are they just making an example of Mormons?

“Joseph Smith: founder of the Mormon movement” would be a title that wouldn’t provoke. It would just be a statement of fact.

The Relig Mod might remember all this. I’m pretty sure that I do.

I agree the title could have been a red flag and I would recommended that future posts by LDS take that into account, however, I didn't see a warning, or anything by the MOD, indeed PD seemed confused as to what happened. IMHO punishments work best if administered with full knowledge by the punished of what they are being punished for. JM$.02

Delph

[Kevmo]

I do not start caucus threads, I have not tried to keep up with rules changes, so do threads that break the rules get thrown in breaking news all the time, or are they just making an example of Mormons?
***From what I can tell, this is the first instance. It probably isn’t “making an example of Mormons” as much as it is making an example of the first to offend. Being the first to offend is a rough deal — for instance Ananias & Sapphira, the guys who touched the ark of the covenant, the guy who took loot home on the first raid into the promised land, etc.