wenglund wrote:It is interesting to see the differences in perception we each have of Dr. Peterson's posts as quoted above. What I saw as an unworried and lighthearted jab at the folks at RFM, others see as a near melt-down by DCP. Fascinating!
Anyway, even though there was an active thread here on the subject, it didn't warrant a mention by DCP. I wonder what that means in terms of level of interest and importance he may places on certain participants and the goings-on here?
Good question. I, for one, don't know how much "importance"---if any---he places on "certain participants and the goings-on here," although I do know that: ---He uses a quote from me in his sig line ---He has called me, with insufficient evidence, a "brazen liar" ---He spent a great deal of time reading, and responding to, via FAIR, recent threads dealing with GA remuneration and peer review at FROB ---He regularly monitors RfM, KG's board, and this board ---He has lobbed "water balloons" from the safe confines of FAIR/MAD at myself, Harmony, Rollo, Vegas, and others ---He demanded that I be "called on the carpet" and confess to doing things I didn't do ---He sent GA-like emails of condemnation to Rollo after the Mike Quinn gossipmongering incident
So, again, I don't know how much "importance"---if any---he places on folks and goings-on here. Do you know?
Yes...that is quite an impressive list. It certainly puts you and this board and other participants here, head and shoulders above the literally hundreds of people Dr. Peterson has engaged in multiple posts over the years--some of a personalized nature. The fact that he mentions you in his signiture line is clear indication of the high esteem and unrivalled importance in which he undoubtably viewsyou.
If he is only mildly amused and entirely unconcerned with the RFM bruhaha, imagine how miniscule an impression some people here must have made on him.
Huh, yeah, gee. I dunno. I guess it made a large enough impression to merit a rule-violating, personalized thread on the fittingly named MAD board.
...yet not neary even a mention in the thread in question. How could that be?
harmony wrote:He's quoting Tal in his signature line currently. Guess you've been demoted, Scratch.
Oh, boo hoo! I am weeping and gnashing my teeth in agony! Oh, whatever shall I do!
I suppose you could venegefully start a number of threads where you inanely pick nits with Dr. Peterson, and where you pretend to be in a position to rightly judge the matter.
...oh wait...you have already been doing that. Such is the nature of your obsession.
1. who told Daniel about the website (the Jewish one)?
2. why did Daniel go there? (was it just his normal hubris, or was he asked to put up that response by one of his 'friends' in his places in the church?)
3. what did he hope to accomplish? (because what he's done is clearly not helpful)
harmony wrote:He's quoting Tal in his signature line currently. Guess you've been demoted, Scratch.
Oh, boo hoo! I am weeping and gnashing my teeth in agony! Oh, whatever shall I do!
I suppose you could venegefully start a number of threads where you inanely pick nits with Dr. Peterson, and where you pretend to be in a position to rightly judge the matter.
...oh wait...you have already been doing that. Such is the nature of your obsession.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
I happen to like Prof. Peterson a great deal, despite him leveling false accusations against me. I have forgiven him. Still, he *is* the creme-de-la-creme (or would that be "kreme-de-la-kreme"?) of apologists, and anybody interested in LDS apologetis will ultimately need to reckon with him and his writings---including his online posts. What you are suggesting would be akin to a political commentator laying off the President, in order to avoid being labeled "obsessed."