Doctor Scratch wrote:Liz, you would need to understand why people have a problem with the "Old Guard" in order to understand why Bokovoy isn't seen as being a part of it. And the reason you're never going to understand is because it's more important to you to be "friends" with Dan Peterson.
Explain this to me, Scratch. If David, by your own admission, is not part of the "Old Guard", then why is DCP, who is seen by you as a kingpin for the "Old Guard", welcoming him to his new "Mormon Interpreter" project with open arms ...
That's pretty obvious to anyone who has edited a publication - there are times when an editor would publish a relevant and basically adequate article by the horned one himself just to fill up the space. DCP has nailed his colors to the MI mast, and needs all the copy he can get. He would have been nuts to miss the chance to publish a Bokovoy article.
Since this is another thread about DCP, may I repeat that if we are to be informed what DCP thinks or thought on any topic we should be clearly told when Liz's statements are basically equivalent to "DCP said I could say that ...". That will save a bit of time.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Scratch wrote:None of this has anything whatsoever to do with what you want it to mean. At the end of the day, you are still going to be seen as the person who's "friends" with Dan Peterson, and trying to explain your way out of that is sort of like trying to justify to everyone why you're friends with, say, Joe Francis, or Charles Manson.
You are honestly comparing DCP with Charles Manson and Joe Fancis? Really???
And everyone claims you are innocent of libel. Amazing! F***ing amazing!
Beyond that ridiculous comment, Scratch, answer me this. If DCP is willing to make this concession, and invite a member of the "New Guard" to participate with the "Old Guard", and David accepted, maybe there isn't as much animosity between the two guards as some would like to think there is?
Beyond that ridiculous comment, Scratch, answer me this. If DCP is willing to make this concession, and invite a member of the "New Guard" to participate with the "Old Guard", and David accepted, maybe there isn't as much animosity between the two guards as some would like to think there is?
No, there is. Ask DCP and Hamblin how well they get along with LoaP and the narrator. Ask Hamblin what he thinks about "Mormon Studies."
Last edited by Guest on Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Scratch wrote:No, that's not what I said. But if we want to start tossing around potential in real life troubles, how about we ask what kind of hot water you'd get into at work if your employers were to learn about your various violations of people's privacy? Why don't we ask MsJack, Kishkumen, and others why it is that so many of us know that "Silver Hammer" was a Will Schryver sockpuppet?
Go ahead and ask, Scratch. Everything is your word against mine.
Markk wrote:the DCP's of the LDS world went from defending LDS thought to defining LDS thought...the common folks were forming their doctrines in the foyer from Internet apologist, who intern formed their ideology from the DCP's.
This is exactly why I've always called the Mopologists the new Prophets of the Mormon Cult. Want to nail down a doctrine? Apostles: "Don't write me a letter! Go talk to your SP!". SP doesn't know, so they send them to FARMS/NWI and where do they end up? With DCP? Doctrine now defined - according to DCP.
[Redacted for the sake of saving the moderators from excessive work.]
Last edited by Guest on Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Look, Liz: I apologize for my part in allowing things to get heated. I don't wish you any ill. I hope you have a great time with the people you've gathered on "Geeky NOMs."
Last edited by Guest on Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
liz3564 wrote:There has also been talk, on this board, in particular, about David Bokyvoy being a top contender as a "New Guard" LDS Apologist.
Comments?
We Mormons have enough problems without compounding them by that lying for the Lord stuff. David Bokovoy seems to be a man with both integrity and compassion, which as you know, help make for a good leader.
If we must stand for something, then let it be something good. Unleash the inner Leonard Arrington in apologetics, please. As the good book says, the truth shall set us free.
