rcrocket wrote:I was the one who brought GoodK's public humiliation of his then-dying sister and of his father to the attention of his father, who is a good friend.
Liar liar pants on fire. Daniel C Peterson did.
I've had just about enough of you.
Are you trying to get a FARMS upgrade by stepping up to be the whipping boy?
You are a pathetic, little man and I can't believe your foul genes produced a lovely and beautiful specimen such as [name deleted].
If I hear you falsely accuse me of humiliating my little sister (whom you don't even know) again, either in print or in person, you will be very sorry. Consider yourself on notice. Shortstack.
GoodK wrote:Liar liar pants on fire. Daniel C Peterson did.
I've had just about enough of you.
Are you trying to get a FARMS upgrade by stepping up to be the whipping boy?
You are a pathetic, little man and I can't believe your foul genes produced a lovely and beautiful specimen such as [name deleted].
If I hear you falsely accuse me of humiliating my little sister (whom you don't even know) again, either in print or in person, you will be very sorry. Consider yourself on notice. Shortstack.
Ouch, crocket just got owned!
It's very possible that they both talked to GoodK's father, and feasibly without checking with each other, since it seems that Bob and DCP are not particularly close friends. They both share a friendship with GoodK's father.
What I'm curious about is which one actually informed GoodK's father first. And, when they did, did GoodK's father already tell them that he had heard the news from someone else first.
I must say that although Bob's style is abrasive, I admire what he did a little more. He at least talked with GoodK first, and gave him a heads up that he was going to talk with his father.
liz3564 wrote:It's very possible that they both talked to GoodK's father, and feasibly without checking with each other, since it seems that Bob and DCP are not particularly close friends. They both share a friendship with GoodK's father.
What I'm curious about is which one actually informed GoodK's father first. And, when they did, did GoodK's father already tell them that he had heard the news from someone else first.
I must say that although Bob's style is abrasive, I admire what he did a little more. He at least talked with GoodK first, and gave him a heads up that he was going to talk with his father.
ROFL, given the sour grapes crocket seems to have concerning his broken relationship with DCP, I imagine FatherK is in a tight spot being friends with both.
You are so naïve. Your profession obviously is very far from academia, nonprofits and politics. Do you live in a trailer park?
Ohhh...
Don't get me started rc. I'm back on the ad hominem wagon and don't want to fall off too soon again (after the Nazi thread dust up), even though this board is just festooned with provocations.
Trailer park? No. Scratch's nonexistent profile seems to indicate that he (she) is a political activist or lobbyist or some such. I see Scratch as more of an urban, cosmopolitan secularist who's ignorance of various things is more of a cultivated, selective ignorance, as opposed to the kind which stems from a benighted cultural upbringing.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Once again, we have the anonymous smear. I was the one who brought GoodK's public humiliation of his then-dying sister and of his father to the attention of his father, who is a good friend. Smear me, you boor.
Yes, I recall that initial thread and its OP. Goodk thrashed, twisted, and fought hard on that hook but couldn't get free once the attack had been made. That thread received a great deal of attention. That thread alone could be used as a prime example of why I've always taken a psychological interest in the driving motivational forces behinds exmo and countermo polemics and attitudes.
Rc explained all of this (and didn't Daniel stop by for some verbal fisticuffs as well?), and yet, as usual, Scratch just plows on through the facts and continues to bang the same drum, while Goodk hides under the sheets hoping not to be noticed.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.
Droopy wrote: Goodk hides under the sheets hoping not to be noticed.
Odd that he posted so much on the topic, then.
But, as our Marxist friends used to say, 'objectively' GoodK was hiding under the sheets, even thought superficially he was engaging in vigorous polemics with DCP and rcrocket. You need to look at these things with the properly trained eye, all false consciousness banished.
rcrocket wrote:I was the one who brought GoodK's public humiliation of his then-dying sister and of his father to the attention of his father, who is a good friend.
You are a pathetic, little man and I can't believe your foul genes produced a lovely and beautiful specimen such as [name deleted].
If I hear you falsely accuse me of humiliating my little sister (whom you don't even know) again, either in print or in person, you will be very sorry. Consider yourself on notice. Shortstack.
This to me stands as proof positive, that anonymity on the internet is essential, no matter how incessantly someone tries to goad you into revealing yourself in order to extract retribution. As soon as the identifiable enters the picture, people will be at each others throats.
GoodK wrote:You are a pathetic, little man and I can't believe your foul genes produced a lovely and beautiful specimen such as [name deleted].
If I hear you falsely accuse me of humiliating my little sister (whom you don't even know) again, either in print or in person, you will be very sorry. Consider yourself on notice. Shortstack.
This to me stands as proof positive, that anonymity on the internet is essential, no matter how incessantly someone tries to goad you into revealing yourself in order to extract retribution. As soon as the identifiable enters the picture, people will be at each others throats.
Some who post here stay anonymous because, were their names to become public, their membership in the Church could conceivably become threatened. Others don't want family or friends to know their true feelings about the Church.
Vicious, hateful bigots like Goodk may or may not feel the need for anonymity, as they may not care one way or another what others think of them.
Those who have nothing to hide need not hide.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.