Wingnut

I like/comment on funny or witty posts, or bad day vents. I like/comment on good day celebrations. If I find an article/cause that I identify strongly with, I'll engage with that as well. I don't engage with the like/share/comment memes, and I don't engage with pleas for attention. Repeated overly-frequent political posts or victimized whining will get you hidden from my news feed.

I think that in such a worldwide church as we are now, political correctness is important. Its absence can be a barrier in missionary work. That doesn't necessarily mean bending to popular will, but extra care taken in one's language is helpful. What I took from Mordorbund's post is that "calling a spade a spade" actually isn't such a simple thing. Even the word "spade" has multiple meanings. Agreed. Context is important. Words change. Meanings change. Intentions change. We have to adapt. Some may argue that "gay," for example, actually means "merry, happy, gleeful," but when was the last time that was its common usage? We have to accept, in 2014, that "gay" means "same-sex-attracted." Because that's what it's become. I listened to an interesting podcast a few weeks ago about the provenance and evolution of the word "dude." It originally referred to a young man who was a dandy, then eventually referred to hipsters (of a different time period), and has changed now to be a stand-alone expression, as well as refer to a man who is "a bro." I also ran across a Buzzfeed article today about Disney facts. One of them was this: Keep in mind that this film was released in 1937. While I think Jumpy, Dizzy, and Burpy would have been hilarious names, I can see several of them that would cause Disney to come under heavy fire now, nearly 8 decades later.

Twenty posts per page is throwing me off. Not complaining about it -- it's just different.

I just had to quote this, because the Arial font is so refreshing. :)

Several years ago, Elder Bednar visited our stake for stake conference. My husband was in the ward YM presidency at the time, and got to attend a Q&A with Elder Bednar for the youth. I went with him, and I remember several things he taught that day. One was about the Articles of Faith. I don't remember the question, bu I think it was probably something along the lines of "what's the best way to share the Gospel with our friends or answer questions when they ask?" He taught the youth that they should memorize the articles of faith, because everything they needed to know started there. Any and every question they might come up against about the Gospel could be tied into an Article of Faith, and then expounded upon. But the Articles of Faith are the most distilled doctrinal summation we have, and are absolutely crucial to knowing the Gospel.

I think the shift toward less-blunt speech indicates a growing Church population, an international mixed culture in the Church, and a greater diversity in general of circumstance and background.

Probably more of a PICNIC error. (problem in chair, not in computer)

Looks like quotes are now showing who is being quoted...that's helpful. It seems that there's still a login issue, though. Others have mentioned it, but it didn't come up for me until today. Here's a screenshot. Notice in the top right that it shows my name -- it recognizes me as being logged in somehow, yet at the top of the messages, it's asking me to login in order to reply. So I had to log out, then log back in again.

Yay! Multi-quote! And HTML! And faster "likes!" I'm not crazy about the ability to change usernames, but I'm sure it's great for some people. I think that's a personal preference. EDIT: And yay for no more confusing slash marks!

It seems to take a really long time to register when I \"like\" a post.

Pam, it looks like PMs didn\'t port over. When I go to \"personal messenger,\" the only things that show up are my previous infractions, but none of my private correspondence with other site members.

Rose, if you look at the top of your screen on the right, it should say your name. If not, you\'re probably not logged in. But if you hover your cursor over your name, a drop-down menu will appear, with options to go to \"my settings\" (where you can view your profile and change your avatar), and \"log out\" as well.

I seem to remember a few years ago when the old forum was updated, mostly in appearance (and with the addition of the \"laugh\" button), it was switched to a white background. Feedback was much the same, that it was really stark. So it was switched to a softer grayish blue, which is what we had from then until last week. It was a quick change, and it made a huge difference. But I was just thinking that this conversation felt familiar.

It was still an issue for me this morning, but it just let me like your post, so it looks good for now anyway. Thanks, Pam!

And they were smart enough to show the videos (and do the \"name that tune\" thing) toward the beginning, because they knew that they were going to lose attention no matter what. They capitalized on it while they still had it.

I\'m on a desktop, and there\'s a LOT of blue space on either side that feels wasted. I think it depends on monitor size and resolution.

Maybe this will be a stupid question, but did you click the \"remember me\" box? I haven\'t had a problem with it.

I had wondered about that, so when Slamjet said something about it yesterday, I looked specifically and couldn\'t see anything by his avatar. I assume it\'s only for our own benefit.

Well, I wanted to \"like\" this post, but I\'ve apparently been too nice already today, because I\'ve reached my quota of positive posts for the day. In the quoting area, not only is there currently no multi-quote function right now, but when we do quote, there\'s no reference to who we are quoting, which I can see leading to a lot of confusion.

I think it\'s because they have used a different font. I find it more difficult as well. The Times New Roman that we see right now is too busy. We need a simple sans serif font that has less going on. :)

PEOPLE!! You need to upload new photos for avatars! We can\\\'t tell who you are quickly enough!

I don\'t mind the colorful graphic look of the site (I like it, actually...the old one was out of date, whereas this looks quite modern), but I otherwise agree with Jenamarie and Mnn. There\'s too much negative space, quotes within posts aren\'t obvious enough, and the forum lists are spaced too far apart.

Oh, and the multi-quote function is needed back, too. :)

Well, however it applies to your schedule. But yeah.

I held my daughter when she was blessed. She was nine months old at the time, and wouldn\'t have sat still otherwise. Placing hands under the baby is likely only because a baby\'s head tends to be too small to accommodate many hands, and the baby needs holding anyway (in my daughter\'s case, my husband, our bishop, and the two grandfathers were the only ones in the circle, and they took care to mostly use fingertips instead of whole hands on her head). But the ordinance of \"naming and blessing\" isn\'t exclusive to infants. A five-year-old who is named and blessed in Sacrament meeting isn\'t held by the Priesthood brethren in the circle. Most women who bring up the baby blessing example aren\'t looking to participate in the Priesthood circle, but rather to simply have the privilege and ability to hold the infant that they carried and gave birth to, as it receives the first Priesthood ordinance of its life. It\'s not an unreasonable request.