Mr. Scratch's Guide to FAIR

[_asbestosman]

What about the dossiers is inaccurate, Pah?

For one thing Pahoran doesn't strike me as a homophobe. Maybe you could accuse him of being a mishomothist (I made the word up, but it is similar in derivation to misanthrope and misogynist), but I see nothing to indicate he fears homosexuals. Thus I have to conclude that he is right (and I also get tired of the term homophobe being thrown around so often).

For another, I do not get the feeling that Pahoran is being mean by signing of with "regards, Pahoran" He appears to do so with those he regards more highly than he does you (or I).

[_wenglund]

I can confirm that "Kevin Graham" is a pseudonym. The person using that screen name at Mormon Think Tank and FAIR and ZLMB informed be two days ago that was, in fact, the case (it caught me by surprise). I would cut and paste here what he/she said, but as of yesterday I have been banned from MTT (or, as the mods there like to "technically" call it, my user I.D. has been denied access), and so I no longer have access to the thread where it was stated.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hi Wade,

So the much-touted MTT isn't that tolerant of divergent viewpoints either? Who'da thunk it!

Perhaps you should take a leaf out of Scratchy's book and start a blog in which you compile nasty and highly inaccurate "dossiers" on some of the dramatis personae over there.

But then again, perhaps hateful obsessing is not your style.

Regards,
Pahoran

What about the dossiers is inaccurate, Pah? I'm totally open to corrections. But then you don't really care, do you? Instead you're interested in feeding your superiority complex, and continuing to play gollum to the FAIRscholars. Keep sucking on that teat, Pah. Some day I'm sure you will get your just desserts.

You evidently missed Pahoran's point, while actually unwittingly underscoring it. Not bad for a single post.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_The Dude]

I like the way Pahoran signs his posts "Regards, Pahoran"

It just wouldn't be the same any other way.

Pahoran, have you ever been queued on FAIR? You've got a style that seems like it could get you in trouble, and from time to time I've noticed long periods when you don't post and I've wondered if you were being punished. You may remember a couple times when I gave you a big "WELCOME BACK!" hug... but I was to embarassed to ask where you'd been... just wondering.

[_OUT OF MY MISERY]

YEah I have been wondering that too considering what actually got me banned from FAIR which I have already stated some where on this board and I will post it again if I need to...not a problem.


Can someone on this Board register under two differnt names and not be outed so to speak???

I am wondering if Pahoran and Jason Bourne are one in the same???

Thanks

[_OUT OF MY MISERY]

just wondering????

[_Mister Scratch]

What about the dossiers is inaccurate, Pah?

For one thing Pahoran doesn't strike me as a homophobe. Maybe you could accuse him of being a mishomothist (I made the word up, but it is similar in derivation to misanthrope and misogynist), but I see nothing to indicate he fears homosexuals. Thus I have to conclude that he is right (and I also get tired of the term homophobe being thrown around so often).

For another, I do not get the feeling that Pahoran is being mean by signing of with "regards, Pahoran" He appears to do so with those he regards more highly than he does you (or I).

Ah. So, "He is filled with hatred towards homosexuals" would be more acceptable than, "He is a homophobe"? My feeling is that "homophobic" is the more common, idiomatic term for a person who's opposed to homosexuality. But if people feel that the "hatred" bit is more accurate and acceptable, I'm amenable to change.

[_Mister Scratch]

I can confirm that "Kevin Graham" is a pseudonym. The person using that screen name at Mormon Think Tank and FAIR and ZLMB informed be two days ago that was, in fact, the case (it caught me by surprise). I would cut and paste here what he/she said, but as of yesterday I have been banned from MTT (or, as the mods there like to "technically" call it, my user I.D. has been denied access), and so I no longer have access to the thread where it was stated.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hi Wade,

So the much-touted MTT isn't that tolerant of divergent viewpoints either? Who'da thunk it!

Perhaps you should take a leaf out of Scratchy's book and start a blog in which you compile nasty and highly inaccurate "dossiers" on some of the dramatis personae over there.

But then again, perhaps hateful obsessing is not your style.

Regards,
Pahoran

What about the dossiers is inaccurate, Pah? I'm totally open to corrections. But then you don't really care, do you? Instead you're interested in feeding your superiority complex, and continuing to play gollum to the FAIRscholars. Keep sucking on that teat, Pah. Some day I'm sure you will get your just desserts.

You evidently missed Pahoran's point, while actually unwittingly underscoring it. Not bad for a single post.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hey Wade, incidentally, I was wondering: are you ever going to get around to answering the questions I posed to you on MTT? Regardless, I think that I will do a post reminding everyone about your splendid Center for Sexual Attraction Disorders. Would you like that?

[_Pahoran]

I am not aware that Ol' Scratch--to give the devil his due, as it were--however bitterly he resents being banned from FAIR, and however viciously he festers over it, has ever actually tried to post as a sock-puppet. Although I am aware that he has tried various and devious tricks to log on using spoofed IP addresses, but I have no knowledge of him attempting to post in that mode.

(bold emphasis added)

Keep on suckin' that teat, Pah. Here's yet another question for you: How would you know this? Does this mean that you're a mod? Or that the mods have been gossiping to you? Regardless, I suppose that some level of surveillance does indeed go on within the annals of the ironically named FAIRboard.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions with that rather reluctant confession.

No, I am not a mod, and no, nobody dobbed you in to me. However, I was told that the mods were having trouble with people attacking the forum with spoofed IP addresses--no indication of who or when or where. Then I saw a post from you, here, in which you said something equivalent to "It's getting harder for me to get into FAIR. I managed to log on using a proxy server but the mods keep closing my accounts." Interestingly, when I try to search for that in the forum search engine, I can't find it now.

Is that because the search engine is unreliable, or is something else going on here?

The fact is that using subterfuge to evade moderator action is an attack upon the forum. That you should choose to interpret defending against such attacks as "surveillance" shows that you have an extraordinarily egocentric world view. Evidently anything that isn't strictly according to your agenda and your wishes is sinister, if not downright evil.

But you really must be slipping. You didn't even manage to work in any of your usual manipulative counterfactuals, such as "orwellian."

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Mister Scratch]

I am not aware that Ol' Scratch--to give the devil his due, as it were--however bitterly he resents being banned from FAIR, and however viciously he festers over it, has ever actually tried to post as a sock-puppet. Although I am aware that he has tried various and devious tricks to log on using spoofed IP addresses, but I have no knowledge of him attempting to post in that mode.

(bold emphasis added)

Keep on suckin' that teat, Pah. Here's yet another question for you: How would you know this? Does this mean that you're a mod? Or that the mods have been gossiping to you? Regardless, I suppose that some level of surveillance does indeed go on within the annals of the ironically named FAIRboard.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions with that rather reluctant confession.

No, I am not a mod, and no, nobody dobbed you in to me. However, I was told that the mods were having trouble with people attacking the forum with spoofed IP addresses--no indication of who or when or where. Then I saw a post from you, here, in which you said something equivalent to "It's getting harder for me to get into FAIR. I managed to log on using a proxy server but the mods keep closing my accounts." Interestingly, when I try to search for that in the forum search engine, I can't find it now./quote]

For crying out loud, Pah. Get your facts straight. This is what, the umpteenth time your are utterly screwing something up? Are you a complete idiot, or just a compulsive whiner?

I'll gladly come right out and tell you what I've done. I have used a proxy in order to read FAIR. Are you even awared that the ironically named FAIRmods have actually gone so far as to ban people from even reading FAIR? Or is this yet another instance of you being a presumptuous moron who is too lazy to check facts?

I have never, ever "logged on" with a proxy server. In fact, unless I'm mistaken, the "logged on with a proxy server" was written by another poster. Coffeecat, perhaps. The fact that you are mistaking posters with one another doesn't exactly lend much creedence to your (and your sweet master, DCP's) totally unsupportable accusations above.

Is that because the search engine is unreliable, or is something else going on here?

Something else: namely that you are a presumptuous gollum and a jerk and that you're too lazy and/or stupid to properly check your facts. Do the schools down under really suck that much?

The fact is that using subterfuge to evade moderator action is an attack upon the forum.

What, reading? Cutting off information? Squelching critics? Which?

That you should choose to interpret defending against such attacks as "surveillance" shows that you have an extraordinarily egocentric world view. Evidently anything that isn't strictly according to your agenda and your wishes is sinister, if not downright evil.

What 'agenda'? And what "attacks"? Give me one example, Pah.

[_Pahoran]

5) No-one has ever been banned from the FAIRBoards for asking "hard questions," but for deceitful and/or uncivil behaviour.

If this were true, you would've banned eons ago.

Trouble with that is, there are always too many people ahead of me on the list.

Like you for instance.

You were banned for lying about your identity. "That's not me, that's another Mister Scratch on that other forum." "Really? Then why is that 'other Mister Scratch' identifying himself as you and describing his interactions on threads you started?"

That's odd. I don't recall having ever posted anything about that on FAIR. I tried to tell my side of the story but was prohibited from doing so by Nomos. May I ask where you're getting your information? Is this another case of mods sharing supposedly "private" information?

No. It's all available on FAIR's search engine.

The thread was called "FARMS Bashing." The saga begins with Daniel Peterson's post on July 24 2006 at 10:40 pm, wherein he posted:

Incidentally, Scratch, on another matter: While I was looking through a treasury of quotations today that I've saved from the Recovery Board, I came across this one, from you:

DCP is alive and ticking. Slippery Joe and Briggy are long gone, and so it's not quite the same to pick on them. There's something that is more satisfying---in a nebulous but reaffirming sort of way---about calling Peterson a lard ass and a douche bag, as opposed to talking trash about Polygamy Joe. -- "Mister Scratch," The "Recovery" Board (7 March 2006)

I'd forgotten about it. You're really quite eloquent, though.

Scott Lloyd then commented, on July 25 2006 at 10:38 am:

My, my!

And to think that Scratch objects to having his posts here filtered through the Queue.

Add on:

It can be so very enlightening, the stripping away of facades such as the following:

For the record, I am a member in full fellowship, and am in fact descended from a long line of LDS. I am interested in everyone being fully informed about the Church and its doctrines, and in avoiding, to the greatest extent possible, defections from the Church due to people feeling deceived or misled. My goal is not to "turn people against the Church"; my goal is to perfect the Saints.

In the interest of "full disclosure," being "fully informed," and all that, one is moved to ask: Who is the real Mr. Scratch: the earnest and solemn perfecter of the Saints with the long LDS pedigree, or the rabble-rousing, trash-talking, insult-spewing adventurer from the oddly named "Recovery" board?

I doubt that anyone here in this forum would have any doubt as to the true answer to that question.

Next Dan, on July 26 2006 at 03:59 pm:

I've just been informed that Mr. Scratch vigorously denies being the author of some grossly insulting lines, directed against me on the so-called "Recovery" board, that I quoted here the other day.

If he denies it, I'm happy to take him at his word.

It never entered my mind, frankly, that there might be two people, both critical of Mormonism, actively posting under the (to my mind, slightly uncommon) name of "Mr. Scratch."

I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Maybe I'm too proud to apologise, but clearly Dan isn't. Incidentally, have you ever apologised for so shamelessly lying to him?

I should live so long!

The next conment came from Nomos:

Thank you Dr. P for the apology... I'm sure Mister Scratch appreciates it.

Posters,

Unfortunately if someone is using a name that a poster uses here, on another board there is no way to verify, or disabuse others of the notion that it is the same person.

If this happens to you the only recourse is to take it up with the board where the offending posts are being posted. We can change your name here if that is desired, so that you are disassociated with the offending poster.

So for the record at FAIRboards: Mister Scratch is not Rollo is not Mister Scratch from RFM. Please don't report or confuse the three as such.

You sure pulled the wool over his eyes, huh? You must have been feeling pretty smug at that point.

And then the roof fell in.

On July 26 2006 at 10:58 pm, Dan wrote:

It's really difficult to tell the players without a scorecard. Here's part of an exchange that was posted just two days ago over on the so-called "Recovery" board, on a thread begun by our own "Mr. Scratch" to discuss a "sordid tale" of "perversion" at the MTC for which he was "looking for some confirmational anecdotal evidence":

Re: Sexual Perversion, the MTC, and the "Tree of Life"
Date:Â Jul 24 10:43
Author: Lost Soul
Mail Address:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mister Scratch!
Are you the same Mister Scratch from FAIR?
Good to see you here!


Subject:Â Re: Sexual Perversion, the MTC, and the "Tree of Life"
Date:Â Jul 24 16:43
Author: Mister Scratch
Mail Address:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup. I'm the same old Scratch from FAIR. Nomos put me on the queue after I proved that there is (unfortunately) no doctrinal or scriptural support for interracial marriage. Basically, BY's order that anyone participating in miscegenation deserved "death on the spot" is still in effect, at least given what the Brethren have said on the matter. The ban on interracial marriage has never been officially rescinded.
I pointed this out at length on my last thread over there, even showing that DCP was relying on the logical fallacy of the Bandwagon Appeal, and I got queued for my troubles. I would really like to go back and participate in the debate, but no dice.
Nomos accused me of playing "word games." But, of course, nobody was willing to offer up any solid evidence of that. They punished me because they didn't like what I had to say. Plain and simple.

There you are, over on the so-called "recovery" cesspit, complaining about being queued on FAIR, and boasting about how well you had argued your case. (You hadn't.) Thus, your denials were exposed as lies: the "Mister Scratch" on RfM was the "Mister Scratch" on FAIR. Dan ironically commented:

It would never have entered my mind that there might be two different critics of Mormonism actively posting on the so-called "Recovery" board under the (somewhat unusual) name of "Mr. Scratch." (Along with seeking anecdotal confirmation of perversions in the MTC, our Mr. Scratch -- or, perhaps, the other "Recovery" board poster of the same name -- also used the Pioneer Day weekend to accuse the Church of falsifying its history.)

The mods then inserted an interlinear comment:

Moderator: My apologies for getting caught up in Mr. Scratch's game. Messing with the moderators is not nice, Mr. Scratch. Nor is it a good idea.

Then Nomos posted, on July 27 2006, 10:23 am:

Well Mister Scratch, if that is who you are?!

Were going to save you the embarassment of being a split personality by deleting your account here.

If someone on RFM is playing games with your name, you need to take it up with them.

If this is what passes for recovery and honesty they can keep it over there.

-Nomos

There you are, Scratch. The whole sordid story. Do you perhaps imagine it makes FAIR look bad? The Mods? Dan?

Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, you appear to be a brazen liar and two-faced ratbag?

If anyone wonders about your fanatical obsession with FAIR--this explains it. If anyone wonders why you so bitterly resent Dan Peterson--this tells the tale. If anyone wonders why you so particularly obsess about Dan looking stuff up on RfM--now they know why.

You were caught, Scratchy. I am a great believer in repentance, and for that reason, I support the Church's stance on confidentiality regarding confessions and Church discipline. But this was not one of those occasions where confidentiality attaches. You did your sinning in the open, so your punishment was as well.

Now if you were showing any sign of putting it behind you, I'd be more than happy to let the matter rest; but you are not. You obsessively hate FAIR and all who are associated with it, and you are determined to get even; hence your obesessive hate blog. Hence your obsessive attack posts in this forum.

The first step to recovery is acceptance. Accept that you were banned from FAIR for good, just and sound reasons. Accept that they tolerated your shenanigans far longer than ever they should have. Accept that your attempted deception failed.

Accept it, learn from it, and move on.

Stop obsessing about FAIR.

Not sure whether Shades' committment to strict neutrality and freedom of speech will stand up to one of his darlings being thus exposed, I am saving this post.

Regards,
Pahoran

Yes, and where are my remarks in there, Pahoran? Did you conveniently edit out my side of the story or, no, wait... That's right. I never got to present it.

Here's a question: Where did Prof. Peterson get that very first quote? Can he provide a link to it? How, for instance, do we know that he didn't invent it out of whole cloth? Or that he didn't mix up a legitimate post from yours truly with somebody elses?

Here's another question: Why did Prof. P. see fit to post that "douche bag" quote in the first place? How and in what ways was it relevant to the discussion underway?

While I have been guilty of making jokes about Professor Peterson in the past, I was not the author of that "douche bag" quote. I was the victim of a patented DCP smear campaign, and all you've demonstrated here is that you've been engaging in gossip with the FAIRmods.

I'll repeat: I did not write that post. If you can offer up some real evidence that I did, then maybe we can talk. Until then, it would be awfully nice if you'd avoid making accusations that neither you, nor DCP can substantiate, my dear gollum friend.

Okay Snaga, so according to you, we are supposed to believe the following chain of events took place:

1) Dan invents a completely bogus post, right out of whole cloth, and attributes it to you.
2) Dan then publicly apologises to you for misrepresenting you.
3) You then post on RfM and identify yourself as "the same old Scratch from FAIR."

And now, here's the real kicker:

4) You now are active in this forum, with a spiteful, foul-mouthed, trash-talking posting style completely consistent with the "douche bag" post you so vehemently deny making.

Do you seriously expect me to believe that Dan deliberately invented a false accusation against you, and that you only subsequently developed a posting style that makes his accusation completely plausible?

Let's see. Dan as a false accuser--or you as a false denier. Dan as a false accuser--or you as a false denier. Dan as a false accuser--or you as a false denier.

Gawrsh, that's just so hard to figure out!!

Especially since you finished your post with a blatant falsehood. You said, and I quote again:

all you've demonstrated here is that you've been engaging in gossip with the FAIRmods.

That's a brazen, out-and-out lie. Everything I posted, above, is in the public threads. AS YOU PERFECTLY WELL KNOW.

Thus, I read your other assertion:

I was the victim of a patented DCP smear campaign

You want some cheese with that whine? I guess "a patented DCP smear campaign" exactly equals "exposing your deceitful and two-faced behaviour."

I go back to Scott's question: "Who is the real Mr. Scratch: the earnest and solemn perfecter of the Saints with the long LDS pedigree, or the rabble-rousing, trash-talking, insult-spewing adventurer from the oddly named 'Recovery' board?"

I conclude that not only is the rabble-rousing, trash-talking, insult-spewing adventurer the real you, he was always the real you, while the "earnest and solemn perfecter of the Saints with the long LDS pedigree" is and always was as fake as a Thai Rolex.

Look Scratch, you were found out. The more you try to cover up with these wild and spiteful accusations, the worse you make yourself look.

Just accept it. You'll feel better.

Regards,
Pahoran