The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

[_the narrator]

snip

Hey Nomad, I took the time to respond to your silly allegations and questions on that other thread. When are you going to get back to me?

I couldn't help but notice that you more or less ran away from the ressponses that I posed to you.

I wonder why that is?

Did you sense danger down that road?

[_Kevin Graham]

Schryver and his wife are, at this very moment, in a jet flying to Europe for a couple weeks.

We happen to know for a fact that this isn't true. (Moderator Note) information deleted per Universal rule #3.

[_3sheets2thewind]

It is very interesting that so many LDS here are so quick to defend WS regardless of the terms he uses, and none of the LDS here condemn the language WS uses or his mockery of sacred things (though Pahoran did say he thought it is inappropriate to use C&E as the butt of a joke)

circle jerk is circle jerk. no matter the use of circle jerk is all goes back to a bunch of men masturbating on someone else or each other. It is very telling that none of the LDS defenders here seem to object to such vulgarity.

that the many LDS here are so willing to accept WS behaviour is just shameful and that some of the LDS say "well that's the nature of the board" is just juvenile, but what more could be expected when someone chooses to defend vulgar and juvenile behaviour.

[_moksha]

It is very interesting that so many LDS here are so quick to defend WS regardless of the terms he uses, ...

Repetitive motion apologetics perhaps. Once you start denying it is hard to stop.

... and none of the LDS here condemn the language WS uses or his mockery of sacred things (though Pahoran did say he thought it is inappropriate to use C&E as the butt of a joke).

You obviously do not know every poster's religious affiliation. Mormons are not monolithic in their sensibilities. Some of us may scratch our heads and wonder why coffee is a sin and others may see no offense in lashing out at the women who excite and infuriate us with vulgar name calling.

[_asbestosman]

It is very telling that none of the LDS defenders here seem to object to such vulgarity.

It's very telling that you don't notice it. I refer you to this and this. Hint: I was being somewhat sarcastic in both replies.

that the many LDS here are so willing to accept WS behaviour is just shameful and that some of the LDS say "well that's the nature of the board" is just juvenile, but what more could be expected when someone chooses to defend vulgar and juvenile behaviour.

Some of us have been here a long time. Some of us have let Will know what we think. Will has made it clear that he doesn't care what we think. Why bother trying to talk to a brick wall--because you demand it? Whatever floats your boat I guess, but I think I'd have more success talking a raptor into becoming a vegetarian. To make Will care about his behavior requires that you put some teeth into your words. MsJack did precisely that, so now suddenly Will cares. Funny that. I never had any power to make Will care. I'm not going to go on a hunger strike or hold my breath until he does. It's just not worth it to me.

If your point is to smear the LDS church because what few defenders are here ignore Will, you fail. If your point is to encourage LDS defenders to jump on the bandwagon against Will, you're too late. We've done it and we're tired of it. I'm not here to preach to the choir on the matter of Will's behavior. I have nothing Will cares about so I have washed my hands of him long ago.