Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:Incidentally, do you support Scartch's legal threat?


Actually, I don't think it was a legal threat. I think it was a threat of legal action (I'm sure you can figure out the difference.)

And I don't support threats of legal action, no matter where they pop up on the boards. I think there are other more effective ways of dealing with various posters.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Daniel Peterson wrote:Heh heh heh. My cunning plan to unmask Master Scartch may be working! If he attempts to sue me, he'll have to reveal his real identity -- which, I'm guessing, isn't "Mister Scratch."


My attorney advised me to simply keep track of your threats. You have been told to cease the behavior, so that's that. I'm sure you can tell the judge that it was "all a joke," just like men guilty of sexual harassment have done.

DCP has absolutely zero interest in such a scenario at the present time, and finds it difficult to imagine ever being interested. DCP has been at the receiving end of Scartch's virtually ceaseless character assassination for at least two years now.


None of my posts could reasonably be construed as "character assassination." I've merely commented upon your own words. Certainly I've never stooped to the kind of direct attack that is the stock-in-trade of both yourself as a poster, and the FARMS Review.

Sc[ratch] would have to suspend his campaign of spin and personal defamation for at least a year or two for such a possibility to be even remotely realistic, although publicly repudiating his crusade and apologizing for it might shorten the waiting period.


Likewise, you would have to suspend your Mopologetic campaign, and publicly repudiate the many attacks you have launched on critics. You would also have to apologize for such things as your "whisper campaigns" against Robert Ritner and Mike Quinn.
_LifeOnaPlate
_Emeritus
Posts: 2799
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:50 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _LifeOnaPlate »

Mister Scratch wrote:My *attorney advised me to simply keep track of your threats. You have been told to cease the behavior, so that's that. I'm sure you can tell the judge that it was "all a joke," just like men guilty of sexual harassment have done.


Read: therapist?

None of my posts could reasonably be construed as "character assassination."

*cue spitting water all over screen*

I've merely commented upon your own words. Certainly I've never stooped to the kind of direct attack that is the stock-in-trade of both yourself as a poster, and the FARMS Review.


You're right. I don't believe it is actually possible to stoop "up."
One moment in annihilation's waste,
one moment, of the well of life to taste-
The stars are setting and the caravan
starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste!

-Omar Khayaam

*Be on the lookout for the forthcoming album from Jiminy Finn and the Moneydiggers.*
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

LifeOnaPlate wrote:
None of my posts could reasonably be construed as "character assassination."

*cue spitting water all over screen*



Then prove it, LoaP.
_cksalmon
_Emeritus
Posts: 1267
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _cksalmon »

Mister Scratch wrote:My attorney advised me to simply keep track of your threats. You have been told to cease the behavior, so that's that. I'm sure you can tell the judge that it was "all a joke," just like men guilty of sexual harassment have done.


I will personally testify that Dr. Peterson harbors HI. Not under oath, mind you.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

cksalmon wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:My attorney advised me to simply keep track of your threats. You have been told to cease the behavior, so that's that. I'm sure you can tell the judge that it was "all a joke," just like men guilty of sexual harassment have done.


I will personally testify that Dr. Peterson harbors HI. Not under oath, mind you.


What do you mean by "HI", ck?

I would also just like to add that I take Dr. Peterson's threats on my life very seriously, and I don't much find them funny. If he wants to issue an apology, I'm sure that would go a good ways towards patching up the damage he has done.
_cksalmon
_Emeritus
Posts: 1267
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _cksalmon »

Mister Scratch wrote:What do you mean by "HI", ck?

I would also just like to add that I take Dr. Peterson's threats on my life very seriously, and I don't much find them funny. If he wants to issue an apology, I'm sure that would go a good ways towards patching up the damage he has done.


Typically, "homicidal ideation"; less often, "homicidal intent." But, I was, of course, jesting, as I hope you are, Scratch.

cks
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _moksha »

cksalmon wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:What do you mean by "HI", ck?

I would also just like to add that I take Dr. Peterson's threats on my life very seriously, and I don't much find them funny. If he wants to issue an apology, I'm sure that would go a good ways towards patching up the damage he has done.


Typically, "homicidal ideation"; less often, "homicidal intent." But, I was, of course, jesting, as I hope you are, Scratch.

cks


I was guessing you were just messing up on the symbol for hydrogen or hydrogen sulfide.

Dr. Peterson may be full of many things, but not homocidal intent.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Doctor Steuss
_Emeritus
Posts: 4597
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:57 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Doctor Steuss »

cksalmon wrote:I will personally testify that Dr. Peterson harbors HI. Not under oath, mind you.

Could this be a veiled reference (in a puntastic sort of way) that Doctor Peterson was a culprit in the bombing of Pearl Harbor, HI?

I knew it!

*Dun, dun, duuunnnn…*
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
_KimberlyAnn
_Emeritus
Posts: 3171
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:03 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _KimberlyAnn »

moksha wrote:I was guessing you were just messing up on the symbol for hydrogen or hydrogen sulfide.


I was guessing it stood for Hormonal Imbalance. Or Humor Impairment. Maybe Heretical Ideologies.

KA
Post Reply