Am I responsible for the "culture" of MormonDiscussions.com?

[_Simon Belmont]

There have been some times where I've felt unfairly moderated, but the mods are humans doing the best they can. I don't expect them to be perfect, and, overall the moderation here is fair. I don't agree with what Yahoo Bot and Pahoran seem to be saying about Liz... she's one of the nicer moderators -- to both sides of the isle, in my opinion.

[_Simon Belmont]

Uh. Where have you been for the last, uh, 25 years? This is beyond factual.

And for the last decade you've been mindlessly following your "prophet" Scratch, believing every word, every sentiment. The cult of Scratch has you in its web, and you haven't the mental fortitude to see it for what it is. When Scratch speaks, the thinking has been done, right Camwhatever?

[_Doctor Scratch]

Whether Scratch was trying to pry into Dan's account, or his son's, the creep factor is still present.

Again, it is just crossing a decency line.

And, Scratch did not apologize for snooping. He apologized for the mistaken identity.

Hi, Liz.

Look, I agree that this business with DCP has gotten out of hand, and as I told him down in Telestial, I'm interested in a reconciliation if he is, too.

But I do want to attempt to correct something here. I think that Dr. Peterson has really misrepresented the facts. For one thing, I was familiar with his Amazon stuff because he himself invited me to look at it:

How hopelessly pretentious, mindlessly hostile, and spectacularly ignorant you are, Scratch, to presume to know what I read and what I listen to.

Here's a clue: Look for my name as a reviewer on Amazon.com.

viewtopic.php?p=254283#p254283

If I owe him an apology for doing what he himself invited me to do, then I'll do that.

I honestly had no idea that any portion of the Amazon account had anything whatsoever to do with his son. I still, to this day, would not have known that his son was in any way attached to it if he hadn't said anything. The account is in "Daniel Peterson"'s name; it featured reviews that are obviously his (of the Book of Mormon, for example). I wouldn't have had any idea that his son had created the "Wishlist" if he hadn't mentioned it.

So if it was "creepy" of me to do something that Dan himself, during one of his hostile rants, told me to go and do, I guess I'll have to live with that. But I don't appreciate Dr. Peterson misrepresenting the facts here. He's trying to make it seem as if I was deliberately snooping around in his family's online stuff, and that's just not true. As I think I've made clear over the years, I think people's families are off-limits. (E.g., Bob's wife, Eric's stepfather, SGW's wife, etc.)

And all that said, my hand is still outstretched. I'm willing to work at a reconciliation if Dan is.

[Guest]

Frankly, the tone set by the Shades, Liz, and Harmony is one of the reasons I'm here. Kudos to you all.

[_Yahoo Bot]

There have been some times where I've felt unfairly moderated, but the mods are humans doing the best they can. I don't expect them to be perfect, and, overall the moderation here is fair. I don't agree with what Yahoo Bot and Pahoran seem to be saying about Liz... she's one of the nicer moderators -- to both sides of the isle, in my opinion.

Whoa there. I've only pinged Liz for using curse words to disparage me. Totally and wholly inappropriate in polite society and a board dedicated to discussion of LDS things. I've said nothing about her moderation in general. I don't really have an opinion. It is a thankless job.

No, the real nefarious culprit here is the Board itself and its sponsor. Someday there'll be an accounting for the vicious and vile attacks which slime out of here.

[_Simon Belmont]

And all that said, my hand is still outstretched. I'm willing to work at a reconciliation if Dan is.

On the surface, this looks like a genuine offer.

But I wonder, what will your demands for reconciliation include?

[_Simon Belmont]

Someday there'll be an accounting for the vicious and vile attacks which slime out of here.

With that I agree!

[_Daniel Peterson]

This will likely be my only post here today. There is something going on in my life, as of a few hours ago, that puts all of this silliness in its proper perspective, and I'm going to be very busy. But, mercifully, I have a few moments now, and I feel morally obliged to say something about this comment, which I overlooked earlier:

Mr. Will Shyrver . . . ought to have no place in decent Christian society.

That's way over the top, and I can't let it stand unchallenged.

I was traveling during the recent explosion of Schryver threads, and have read little of them. Still, I know what they were about.

I have no desire to start a thousand-and-first Schryver boil, and, if one starts, I won't participate in it, but I have to say that I have known Will for several years now -- not really well, but well enough -- and he is absolutely not the totally depraved monster that the remark above implies. Even if one were to grant all the charges made against him, that wouldn't come close to justifying such an extreme verdict as to deny him any "place in decent Christian society."

Come on. The demonization ought to have some limits.

Addendum, since I'm here: When, several years ago, Scratch was first rolling out his critique of my supposed tastes in literature, art, music, and theater, I responded (a) that he had no basis on which to make it, (b) that it was factually false, and (c) that even a glance at my reviews on amazon.com would go some considerable distance toward showing him to be wrong. He now brings up (c) as a justification for his or his "informant's" having sleuthed out a "wish list" under my name on amazon.com. But it seems obvious to me that reading a person's reviews -- which are meant to be public, and for which amazon.com actually deliberately provides a function ("Read all reviews by X") -- is rather a different thing than tracking down a person's "wish list," which is probably not meant to be public. (Certainly my then-early-teenage son, whose "wish list" from a decade or so back it actually is, didn't mean it to be public and could never have imagined that it would someday become an anonymous Internet stalker's newest weapon in a Bizarro World crusade against his dad.)

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Whether Scratch was trying to pry into Dan's account, or his son's, the creep factor is still present.

Again, it is just crossing a decency line.

And, Scratch did not apologize for snooping. He apologized for the mistaken identity.

Hi, Liz.

Look, I agree that this business with DCP has gotten out of hand, and as I told him down in Telestial, I'm interested in a reconciliation if he is, too.

Methinks Daniel has his mouse in too many message boards.. too many things to manage..

Doc, in my opinion you simply followed Dan's instructions.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19172

It is Dan's responsibility to keep track of the accounts and their contents which bear his name and login.

For that matter, I could claim that many of my posts here on this board were done by my son, and you all have to take my word on it.

[Guest]

This will likely be my only post here today. There is something going on in my life, as of a few hours ago, that puts all of this silliness in its proper perspective, and I'm going to be very busy. But, mercifully, I have a few moments now, and I feel morally obliged to say something about this comment, which I overlooked earlier:

Mr. Will Shyrver . . . ought to have no place in decent Christian society.

That's way over the top, and I can't let it stand unchallenged.

I was traveling during the recent explosion of Schryver threads, and have read little of them. Still, I know what they were about.

I have no desire to start a thousand-and-first Schryver boil, and, if one starts, I won't participate in it, but I have to say that I have known Will for several years now -- not really well, but well enough -- and he is absolutely not the totally depraved monster that the remark above implies. Even if one were to grant all the charges made against him, that wouldn't come close to justifying such an extreme verdict as to deny him any "place in decent Christian society."

Come on. The demonization ought to have some limits.

If I recall correctly, Perhaps this is sour grapes on the part of Bob over you rejecting his mo'pologetic work?

Also, hang on a sec... "PAGING MsJack, PAGING Ms Jack... please report to THIS post"

This is gonna be good!

Hey, can you get the lights please?



FYI, I started a fresh thread for this:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19173