The Origin of FAIR/MAD

[_Daniel Peterson]

I wouldn't dare blame you for the break-up of the Beatles.....

But I do think you're in on the conspiracy that requires hot dogs to be sold in packs of 10 while buns are sold in packs of 8.

Heh heh.

A trifle. A mere bagatelle.

Midgley, Elder Packer, Mike Quinn's stake president, and I came up with it on a slow afternoon, between a session of torturing puppies and our regular early-evening assault on homeless people living under Utah bridges.

[_Mister Scratch]

Why not be a man and just admit you done wrong, Prof. P.?

I already have.

That's good. Now be a bit more specific. What did you do wrong?

I didn't do wrong. To plead guilty to your ludicrous accusations would be to lie.

What is so "ludicrous" about my accusation? I have said that you gossiped. You did. Are you going to lie to us by claiming that you didn't engage in gossip? Because even your defenders---Dr. Shades and Tarski---believe that you gossiped. There is no way for you to wriggle out of that charge. You are guilty of gossiping. Admit it.

I hope that's clear enough for you.

Frankly, it's not. Perhaps you can clear up what you meant when you referred to this so-called "sad incident"?

You're free to disbelieve it, or to pretend to disbelieve it, but I've said it, and anybody who reads this thread can read what I've said. It's in plain English. When you pretend that I haven't said it, or even that I've said the opposite, they'll know how seriously to take you.

You have waffled, dodged, joked, waffled some more, flip-flopped, whined, pleaded, begged, joked, and joked some more. I have not seen you say---anywhere in this thread, "I did not gossip." You seem, for some reason, to think that the charge is different from this. It is not. You are guilty of gossip, and yet you continue to try and avoid taking any accountability for it. I hope *this* is clear enough for you:

You are guilty of gossipmongering..

Are you really going to try and deny that? I'd like to see it. Sure, you have pooh-poohed away the notion that you were "actively engaged in a smear campaign." Which is fine---I believe you. But you *were* engaged in gossipmongering. There's no way around it, Prof. P. Own up to it.

[_Mister Scratch]

And they haven't yet begun to blame me for the fall of Rome, global warming, the historically poor performance of the Chicago Cubs, the Black Death, Paris Hilton, Darfur, western wildfires, AIDS, the break-up of the Beatles, Hugh Grant, or Brussels sprouts.

I wouldn't dare blame you for the break-up of the Beatles.....

But I do think you're in on the conspiracy that requires hot dogs to be sold in packs of 10 while buns are sold in packs of 8.

Bond,

I vote that you fire up a new thread that asks readers to weigh in on this issue. (I would start it myself, but have formally retired from opening up DCP threads.) The main question should say something like,

Regarding the Mike Quinn Gossipmongering Fiasco, What was DCP guilty of?
1) He was in on the smear campaign, and participated in it, including the gossipmongering.
2) He gossiped, and the nature of the gossip itself was unethical/malicious, esp. considering the SP's involvement.
3) He gossiped, which was fine, but it crossed the line when he announced it on the FAIRboard.
4) Everything was okay, save for the fact that Quinn was ex'ed due to this sort of gossip, which kind of condemns DCP.
5) He gossiped, but, hey, that's what people do. No harm, no foul.

Perhaps this will help settle the matter once and for all? (And it would satisfy Liz's suggestion re: splitting off the thread.)

[_Daniel Peterson]

Now be a bit more specific. What did you do wrong?

What I did in the kitchen, with a wrench, from the grassy knoll, while wearing a silk dress and reciting Chinese lyric poetry.

Are you going to lie to us by claiming that you didn't engage in gossip?

No, I'm going to tell the truth by claiming that I didn't engage in gossip.

Because even your defenders---Dr. Shades and Tarski---believe that you gossiped. There is no way for you to wriggle out of that charge. You are guilty of gossiping. Admit it.

I don't consider hearing somebody else mention something "gossiping."

Perhaps you can clear up what you meant when you referred to this so-called "sad incident"?

I could, but I won't. Because that would be gossip.

You have waffled, dodged, joked, waffled some more, flip-flopped, whined, pleaded, begged, joked, and joked some more. I have not seen you say---anywhere in this thread, "I did not gossip."

I did not gossip.

You are guilty of gossip, and yet you continue to try and avoid taking any accountability for it. I hope *this* is clear enough for you:

You are guilty of gossipmongering..

I am not.

I hope that was large and emphatic enough. I don't think that this message board permits anything larger or more emphatic.

You are guilty of gossip. . . . You are guilty of gossipmongering. . . . Are you really going to try and deny that? I'd like to see it. Sure, you have pooh-poohed away the notion that you were "actively engaged in a smear campaign." Which is fine---I believe you. But you *were* engaged in gossipmongering. There's no way around it, Prof. P. Own up to it.

You leave me no option.

Except to say that you're a malevolent obsessive and that your charge is entirely and wholly false.

[_Bond...James Bond]

I started your poll Scratch....now quid pro quo......where's my profiles on Doctor Stuess, Sethbag, cksalmon, and Dan Vogel?

(EVIL MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA LAUGH!!!)

[_Mister Scratch]

Now be a bit more specific. What did you do wrong?

What I did in the kitchen, with a wrench, from the grassy knoll, while wearing a silk dress and reciting Chinese lyric poetry.

Are you going to lie to us by claiming that you didn't engage in gossip?

No, I'm going to tell the truth by claiming that I didn't engage in gossip.

Because even your defenders---Dr. Shades and Tarski---believe that you gossiped. There is no way for you to wriggle out of that charge. You are guilty of gossiping. Admit it.

I don't consider hearing somebody else mention something "gossiping."

Then what do you consider blabbing about it on the FAIRboard?

Perhaps you can clear up what you meant when you referred to this so-called "sad incident"?

I could, but I won't. Because that would be gossip.

Too late! You already leaked this information. In other words, you gossiped again..

[_Daniel Peterson]

I . . . have formally retired from opening up DCP threads.

Awwww. Say it ain't so!

We’d like to have a little dirt about you for our files.
We’d like to help you learn to help yourself.
Look around you, all you see are sympathetic eyes;
Stroll around the grounds until you feel at home.

And here’s to you, Dr. Peterson.
The Scratches love you more than you will know.
(Wo wo wo)
Confess your sin, Dr. Peterson.
Heaven holds a place for those who prey.
(Hey hey hey – hey hey hey)

Hide it in a hiding place where no one ever goes;
Put it in your pantry with your cupcakes.
It’s a little secret, just Doc Peterson's affair.
Most of all you’ve got to hide it from the kids.

Coo coo ca choo, Dr. Peterson.
We Scratches love you more than you will know.
(Wo wo wo)
Confess your sin, Dr. Peterson.
Heaven holds a place for those who prey.
(Hey hey hey – hey hey hey)

Sitting in your office on a Tuesday afternoon,
Watching as the Scratches both berate.
Laugh about it, joke about it:
When you’ve got to choose,
Ev’ry way you look at it you lose.

Where have you gone, Mister Scratchio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
(Woo woo woo)
What’s that you say, Dr. Peterson?
Mister Scratch will never go away?
(Hey hey hey – hey hey hey)

The main question should say something like,

Regarding the Mike Quinn Gossipmongering Fiasco, What was DCP guilty of?

Queston-begging: No "Mike Quinn Gossipmongering Fiasco" has been demonstrated to have occurred.

1) He was in on the smear campaign, and participated in it, including the gossipmongering.

See above.

2) He gossiped, and the nature of the gossip itself was unethical/malicious, esp. considering the SP's involvement. . . .

4) Everything was okay, save for the fact that Quinn was ex'ed due to this sort of gossip, which kind of condemns DCP.

Hard to see how Peterson's supposed gossip-mongering, which consisted of hearing someone say what that person had heard the stake president say, could have had any effect on the stake president. With no known exception, historical causes always precede their effects in time.

Perhaps this will help settle the matter once and for all?

It might do so -- but only if opinion polls are thought to determine the nature of external reality.

I would imagine that participants here are simply panting to get involved in this wonderful topic. Heretofore, they've had to be content to watch from the sidelines, but, now, if this poll is established, they'll actually be able to enter into it themselves.

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
They chortle in their joy.

[_Mister Scratch]

2) He gossiped, and the nature of the gossip itself was unethical/malicious, esp. considering the SP's involvement. . . .

4) Everything was okay, save for the fact that Quinn was ex'ed due to this sort of gossip, which kind of condemns DCP.

Hard to see how Peterson's supposed gossip-mongering, which consisted of hearing someone say what that person had heard the stake president say,

No, it consisted of you blabbing about it on FAIR. Get it straight.

could have had any effect on the stake president. With no known exception, historical causes always precede their effects in time.

Yet another dumb, dodgy post from you. It was unethical for Paul Hanks, the SP, to be blabbing about this stuff in the first place. The fact that you fail to see this, and, in fact, that you passed along the gossip yet again, condemns you doubly.

Perhaps this will help settle the matter once and for all?

It might do so -- but only if opinion polls are thought to determine the nature of external reality.

What, that you gossiped? By the way, I notice that 100% of the respondents believe that you gossiped!!! How about that? Would you care to revise your earlier claims?

[_Daniel Peterson]

I notice that 100% of the respondents believe that you gossiped!!! How about that? Would you care to revise your earlier claims?

I won't feel the need to revise my first-hand knowledge of a situation involving me personally even if two hundred percent of the people polled on this board (of all places!) think differently than I do about a situation regarding which not a one of them possesses any first-hand knowledge and in which not a single one of them has any personal involvement.

What an odd epistemological method you propose!

[_Mister Scratch]

I notice that 100% of the respondents believe that you gossiped!!! How about that? Would you care to revise your earlier claims?

I won't feel the need to revise my first-hand knowledge of a situation involving me personally even if two hundred percent of the people polled on this board (of all places!) think differently than I do about a situation regarding which not a one of them possesses any first-hand knowledge and in which not a single one of them has any personal involvement.

What an odd epistemological method you propose!

Well, I have "first-hand knowledge" too! I saw you post nasty gossip about Mike Quinn on FAIR. Did you or did you not post that material?