Dr. Peterson is belly-aching about this board, and
Dr. Shades has been putting up a stout defense.
Midgley launches the first salvo:
Midgley wrote:This illustrates the kind of rubbish that otherwise presumably rational people who are driven by violent passions regularly post on a truly disgusting message board, where the so-called "moderator" hides what must be his miserable identity behind by calling himself "Dr. Shades." This bizarre handle illustrates what others, most often perhaps even illustrating their miserable identities under even more weird handles. I actually enjoy knowing that whoever they are constantly pawing through Dan's blog looking for something about which to opine, often in vulgar language that sometimes would cause a brute to blush.
I know that Dr. Midgley doesn't believe in "evidence," but just in case I'm wrong--let him cite the "vulgar language." Let's see him do it.
Shades responds:
??? Why bring me into this? Am I to be punished for Adam's transgressions?
The poster called "Sledge" lays into Dr. Shades:
Shut DOWN your cruel and malicious board, Shades.
So... I guess censorship is the answer? Interesting. Shades has another solution in mind:
Or, better yet, you could create an account there and correct any inaccuracies you may see.
Think that will cut it? No, it won't:
Sledge wrote:A HUGE glaring inaccuracy was just exposed here in this blog post, and what happened? They all brushed it off as "aw, we were just trolling." So, you can see why correcting inaccuracies would be an exercise in futility.
No, Shades, the trolls must be deplatformed. Shut down the board.
Dr. Shades wrote:"Shut down the board?" Umm, you don't have to read it, you know. . .
At which point Dr. Peterson, who wishes very much that he could censor this board, barges in:
Daniel Peterson wrote:I'm a victim of it.
Day in, day out. Week in, week out. Month in, month out. Year after year after year after year after year.
Slander. Defamation. Character assassination.
It never ends. It never stops.
It's shameful. It's a disgrace.
To some extent, at least, it looks very likely to be your legacy.
Rather like his and Midgley's treatment of Gemli (and Mike Quinn, and John Dehlin, and Jeremy Runnells, and Grant Palmer, and Rodney Meldrum, etc., etc., etc.) will be *their* legacy?
Dr. Shades very rightly points out to DCP:
Dr. Shades wrote:You don't have to read it, either.
Yes... Why
does DCP even bother reading this board, if it is so awful?
Playboy and
Penthouse are supposed to be anathema to Mormon men, too; does DCP have difficulty avoiding those publications? How is it that he's got the willpower to avoid porno, but not MormonDiscussions.com? This is a question that is well worth exploring. I have heard rumors that Cassius will be granting fellowships to graduate students who are willing to provide the world with insights into this question.
Here's another question: if all of "this" is so awful, why not stop blogging? If one's job is to be a professor of Middle Eastern Studies, then why not focus on that? Why concentrate on things that are not even remotely connected to the job description? At any rate, as you might imagine, DCP erupted at Shades:
DCP wrote:Right. I just need to ignore the fact that I'm being publicly slandered and defamed on a daily basis at your cesspool, with factually untrue accusations -- of unethical acts, mean-spirited viciousness, and occasionally even borderline crimes -- being leveled against me virtually every day, certainly every week and every month, for fifteen years and counting. No let-up. No interruption. No break.
I'm supposed to let that (not to mention the completely bogus "reports" about Interpreter and the "Witnesses" film project and other such things -- go into the public record without dissent or contradiction.
Right.
How could THAT possibly hurt me?
Actually.... I don't know. Can you explain it to all of us dummies? Whatever the case may be, DCP predictably trots out something he's said many times before:
Incidentally, I'm still receiving really nasty and often foul and obscene anonymous emails from somebody who is clearly a swimmer in your cesspool. Every two to four days or so. Sometimes twice a day.
I have gone on the record as saying that, if these allegations are true, I disapprove of whoever the perpetrator happens to be. That said, it *does* seem kind of convenient that this particular complaint is surfacing at this particular time. And why *doesn't* DCP get law enforcement involved? Very strange. And it needs to be noted that, if the allegations are true, the "nasty and often foul" email harasser only attacks DCP a fraction of the times that he and Midgley slam Gemli. I think some reflection is in order.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
