Bret Ripley wrote:I'm stealing that:just me wrote:This whole thing is lunacy.
Echols is not Scratch
This whole thing is lunacy
Patheos defiled
I approve.
Bret Ripley wrote:I'm stealing that:just me wrote:This whole thing is lunacy.
Echols is not Scratch
This whole thing is lunacy
Patheos defiled
sock puppet wrote:Silly lawyer. Asking a religionist for evidence.
beastie wrote:I'd like to know the goal behind knowing scratch's identity in the first place. Once that knowledge is had, what did DCP and his defenders intend to do with the information?
beastie wrote:I'd like to know the goal behind knowing scratch's identity in the first place. Once that knowledge is had, what did DCP and his defenders intend to do with the information?
liz3564 wrote:We do not have access to PM's. Even Admin does not have access to PM's.
beastie wrote:I'd like to know the goal behind knowing scratch's identity in the first place. Once that knowledge is had, what did DCP and his defenders intend to do with the information?
Ceeboo wrote:Hey SPsock puppet wrote:Silly lawyer. Asking a religionist for evidence.
Look SP, I think this is a complex and very unfortunate scenario we are discussing. Without question or exception, I believe that the in real life identity of all members of this community should absolutely be protected. I believe that many have made very valid points (including you) and I most certainly believe that this is a topic that is worthy of this discussion to take place.
BUT........I find your broad brush painting to be distracting and not exactly fair. I also believe that it is entirley possible for a 'religionist' to actually add to this MDB discussion, evaluate and measure this complex issue, and maintain sanity long enough to bang away at a few letter keys and actually contribute something to the board.
Imagine that!![]()
Peace,
Ceeboo
sock puppet wrote:I agree it is possible