Jamie, It's almost as though there is an "soft evangelical" rubric for dealing with dissent on LGBTQ. A few items mirror my own experience: 1 Reports to leadership from an anonymous source raising concerns, followed by denial of concerns by leadership when asked. 2. Late in the game an offer to meet and talk, which, with a little prodding reveals itself to be not an open discussion of the matter at hand, but a meeting to discuss how the dissenter can leave in a way that makes the organization looks least bad 3. The tactic you describe as "requiring [dissenters] to exclude themself" (so the organization can deny excluding dissenters) I think ECC was very much a mirror of Vineyard in this respect. Hardline fundamentalists do less gas-lighting.