The Origin of FAIR/MAD

[_Mister Scratch]

Just finding out? hearing that? passively gaining the information?

I don't know what you're getting at Tarski.
.

Well, look casefully at how things flowed above.
My point is that

to hear ≠ to smear

even in Mormon circles no one thinks you are guilty if you simply hear some gossip.

How about if you relate that gossip, multiple times, to the hoots and hollers of a hostile audience, on the FAIRboard? Would a person be guilty then?

[_Tarski]

Mr. Scratch, I enjoyed your most recent post and thought the whole issue about the transcript was something of great interest.
But, in general, I have been known to skip long personal threads and threads that seem to consist of he said she said.

Tarski, you disappoint me. You are obviously well-educated and intelligent.

Perhaps this is simply a case of lack of exposure?

Perhaps. But, I would be very surprised to find out that the evidence of DCP's scorn toward Quinn is better than the evidence for scorn that you hold toward DCP. Yet you say that you hold no animus toward DCP. Of course, he will say the same about his attitude toward Quinn. And yet what happens if we set about reading and interpeting your words and his words? Looks to me like plenty of derision and animus to go around.
What are we to believe?

I am sorry that I disappoint you but I am not running for the "Mr. Critic of the Year" contest and still really think that the Quinn gossip thing is both a tangent and far too biased and personal. Even if he were guilty of gossip, its time to let it go in my opinion.
Maybe that's a matter of taste.
I prefer to argue things like the issues surrounding why I think it nearly obvious that the Mormon church is not what it claims to be (or even close).

Speaking of which, Mr. Scratch, in your opinion, is the LDS gospel just as false as a wooden tooth? What is your opinion about Gods, spirits, angels, Nephites and golden plates? Is there a thread where you have delt with any of these things?

It's just not my style to go for the throat of specific mopologists.

[_Tarski]

Just finding out? hearing that? passively gaining the information?

I don't know what you're getting at Tarski.
.

Well, look casefully at how things flowed above.
My point is that

to hear ≠ to smear

even in Mormon circles no one thinks you are guilty if you simply hear some gossip.

How about if you relate that gossip, multiple times, to the hoots and hollers of a hostile audience, on the FAIRboard? Would a person be guilty then?

Hoots and hollers of a hostile audience? That sounds funny. I'm getting a picture in my head.....
kinda like when a person is not generally known to be gay and yet some one says or types something like: "hey did you know that so and so is a f**#king fag? And then people say

"Oh you are kidding me. That douchebag is a flamer?"

"Oh, yeah! I'm serious! He is a real &^%$#$%^ and even has a boyfriend! They probably $@$@%^ each other up and down."

"Yup, you heard it first from me!"

Then people start typing "LOL, LOL, ROTFLMAO!!! " or "bwah ha ha ha ha ha".

Did it go anything like that?

[_Tarski]

I must say that I am quite amazed that the thread has endured and developed as it has.

Liz---

There appears to be some confusion pertaining to the DCP/Quinn gossipmongering story. For whatever reason, some people seem to think that either myself, or Rollo, or (apparently) both of us, have somehow implicated the Good Professor as a kind of "engineer" in a widespread campaign to smear Quinn. So far as I know, nobody ever said that.

Oh really? Here is what DCP said and then Rollo's response"
DCP:

I’ve said this repeatedly. I can’t think of any clearer way than what I’ve already said to state that I was involved in no smear campaign against Mike Quinn and that, in fact, so far as I know, there was no smear campaign against Mike Quinn.

-

Rollo:

Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

-


Rollo thinks DCP was part of a viscious conspiracy.
I am still reading the thread that Scratch raised again but it doesn't look so far like some kind of slam dunk against DCP. Shades seems to be the voice of reason there.

[_Mister Scratch]

I must say that I am quite amazed that the thread has endured and developed as it has.

Liz---

There appears to be some confusion pertaining to the DCP/Quinn gossipmongering story. For whatever reason, some people seem to think that either myself, or Rollo, or (apparently) both of us, have somehow implicated the Good Professor as a kind of "engineer" in a widespread campaign to smear Quinn. So far as I know, nobody ever said that.

Oh really? Here is what DCP said and then Rollo's response"

Ah, okay---well then DCP may have said that, i.e., in the sense that he was putting those words into others' mouths.

DCP:

I’ve said this repeatedly. I can’t think of any clearer way than what I’ve already said to state that I was involved in no smear campaign against Mike Quinn and that, in fact, so far as I know, there was no smear campaign against Mike Quinn.

-

Rollo:

Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

-


Rollo thinks DCP was part of a viscious conspiracy.

Isn't that a bit of a leap, Tarski? Which part of DCP's statement do you think Rollo isn't buying? Do *you* think there was an effort to discredit Quinn? E.g., the demoting of him at the Yale conference? Or the backstabbing by his friend that was noted in the Wall Street Journal article? Or the BKP-headed attack on him? Or the ad hominem-heavy reviews of his books in FARMS Review? Or what about BKP's infamous talk, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater than the Intellect"?

The evidence is overwhelming that Mopologists---and even the Church hierarchy---have had it in for Quinn for a long, long time. Hence, Rollo's "I'm just not buying it."

I am still reading the thread that Scratch raised again but it doesn't look so far like some kind of slam dunk against DCP. Shades seems to be the voice of reason there.

Shades seemed to be confused about just what the charges were. (I think that this was a result of DCP's obfuscation of things.) There are really two very straightforward charges:
1. DCP engaged in gossip about Quinn
2. There was an effort made by various TBMs to smear Quinn

Does the fact that DCP was spreading some rather malicious gossip about Quinn on FAIR mean that he was therefore a part of this larger "campaign" to smear Quinn? Yes, in my opinion, I'm afraid so.

[_Tarski]

Does the fact that DCP was spreading some rather malicious gossip about Quinn on FAIR mean that he was therefore a part of this larger "campaign" to smear Quinn? Yes, in my opinion, I'm afraid so.

You mean an unwitting part?

It is interesting to observe that I heard that Quinn was gay first from statements made by Rollo. In fact, I think that the prolongation of this topic and repeated accusations directed at DCP is actually spreading this tid bit around to new people at a rate that dwarfs anthing DCP said.
Maybe we are all part of the extended campaign?
:)

[_Mister Scratch]

Does the fact that DCP was spreading some rather malicious gossip about Quinn on FAIR mean that he was therefore a part of this larger "campaign" to smear Quinn? Yes, in my opinion, I'm afraid so.

You mean an unwitting part?

Perhaps, yes. Then again, despite all of the evidence, he claims to believe that there is no smear campaign whatsoever!!!

It is interesting to observe that I heard that Quinn was gay first from statements made by Rollo. In fact, I think that the prolongation of this topic and repeated accusations directed at DCP is actually spreading this tid bit around to new people at a rate that dwarfs anthing DCP said.

Lol... Maybe so. Then again, unless I'm mistaken, I don't think you, I, or Rollo have ever declared ourselves to be "Holy Warriors" on a divinely-sanctioned mission to defend the LDS Church.

Maybe we are all part of the extended campaign?
:)

Nothing I have ever said about Quinn was done so in the spirit of laughing at him or mocking him, or wishing him ill, or trying to discredit his work, etc.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Oh really? Here is what DCP said and then Rollo's response"
DCP:

I’ve said this repeatedly. I can’t think of any clearer way than what I’ve already said to state that I was involved in no smear campaign against Mike Quinn and that, in fact, so far as I know, there was no smear campaign against Mike Quinn.

-

Rollo:

Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

Rollo thinks DCP was part of a viscious conspiracy.

No, I don't think there was some sort of conspiracy. I do think there was rampant gossip and rumor-mongering behind Quinn's back about his private sex life, and that DCP was a participant.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

It is interesting to observe that I heard that Quinn was gay first from statements made by Rollo. In fact, I think that the prolongation of this topic and repeated accusations directed at DCP is actually spreading this tid bit around to new people at a rate that dwarfs anthing DCP said.

I first discussed it on FAIR in the Wall Street Journal article thread in April 2006, after another poster said that Quinn's homosexuality was the reason for his excommunication, and I responded that was not the reason. DCP then jumped in about how his "circles" had long known of Quinn's sexual orientation, and that even Quinn's SP knew.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I do think there was rampant gossip and rumor-mongering behind Quinn's back about his private sex life, and that DCP was a participant.

I've been gone for a week and the idiotic and malevolent smear-campaign is still going on? There's a word for this. It begins with ob and ends with session.

Just imagine how delighted the Scroatchii would be if they could uncover actual evidence that, in addition to having a handful of others mention the subject of Quinn's sexual orientation in my presence over the course of several years, I had actually initiated one or two conversations on the topic!

Well, carry on. (The Scroatchii will, anyway.)