Ray A wrote:I'll eventually get around to Scatch and his distortions, but first I'll answer you, Jersey Girl. Dan's thread/post is not "filled with derogatory comments". Months and months of "scrutiny" and criticism of Dan, and mind reading, and endless negative comments about him here and on Scratch's blog, and one thread started by Dan in response to his main critic gets the thumbs down.
Bull. DCP's thread was not a "response" at all. Do you see any mention of "The Witchcraft Paradigm"? Or my review of "Apologetics by the Numbers"? Face it, Ray: he
does not respond to the posts which engage his actual work.
Scratch has tried to destroy the credibility of Dan Peterson (quite in vain), as have others here.
That is not correct, and in fact I rather think that it is not ever possible. I think Prof. Peterson is quite secure, safe, and comfortable in his BYU sinecure. He needn't fear anything so long as he does not criticize the Brethren, or deviate from orthodoxy.
I'll eventually point out how this is being done.
Great. I will wait for you to enlighten me.
Do you see that maligning as being any different then what you say Daniel's critics do?
Yes I do see a difference, because Dan's critics are obsessive, and won't leave him alone, and he's perfectly within his rights to defend himself. Do I really have to go through all the threads and posts? What Dan says about himself and his motives does not count, here, what his critics say, does. If he tries to clarify himself it makes no difference.
Again, how is this any different from what goes on on the fittingly named MADboard? Whatever DCP says is lapped up by his loyal following over there.
This is classic mind-reading. So if he says something in clarification about Quinn, for example, it makes not one iota of a difference - it's what his critics say that's important.
Please enlighten me, Ray. I have seen him call Quinn's work "tendentious and embarrassing." What "mind reading" does one really need to do to comment upon that?
Everyone jumps to Scratch's defence after his distorted mugging of DCP, and be patient, I will show in black and white how this distortion occurs, starting with Scratch's blog. I work long hours, so it will take some time.
I am patient. I will wait for you to enlighten me.
Daniel is reading this board, he is commenting on it, he is willing to transfer posts from here to there (another rule violation), yet he claims to "refuse" to post here. Why? He's obviously not "above" engaging in character assassination, so you tell me, Ray...what's the difference if it isn't control?
You know what Abraham Lincoln once said of Brigham Young? "If he leaves me alone, I will leave him alone." The obsessiveness demonstrated by Scatch and others towards DCP justifies his responses.
I see a clear difference between attacking arguments versus attacking character.
One man can only take so much distortion and remain silent.
I will be waiting patiently to see clear and conclusive evidence of this "distortion."
That so many fail to see those distortions just amazes me. I have left the subject alone for a long time because I thought it was just pathetic, and intelligent people would dismiss it all, and I'm sure they do. But maybe I need to point out the obvious, for some. To Shades' credit, he has not engaged, to my knowledge (or maybe I'm just having a senior moment), in direct character assassination of Dan.
Neither have I.
I frankly can't imagine Shades calling Dan an "a-hole", anywhere. I don't think he's obsessed, like Scratch. Do you see a difference?
When Scratch writes on this board regarding Daniel, Daniel has the option of responding directly to him. When Daniel writes regarding Scratch (or anyone else here who has been banned), Scratch does not have that option.
What is going on, Ray, is simply well...nuts.
Daniel has already posted on Mormon Discussions and he was not constantly attacked. He is currently attacking another poster on MAD who cannot respond in full public view. If he were to post here again regarding the events in question, Shades could easily request that posters refrain from posting and I believe, that the community would meet that request. If not, I assure you that if Daniel posted here in order to address his concerns with Scratch and was personally attacked I would be among the first to challenge which is more than Daniel is willing to offer Scratch.
Jersey Girl
I've already explained why Dan does not bother to repsond here. It's like swimming upstream. Pointless. What's the point trying to persuade people who have already made up their minds about Dan, and will not listen to what
he has to say about his motives and actions?
In case you haven't noticed, there is a contradiction in your claims. On the one hand, you claim we are "obsessed," and on the other, you say we "will not listen to what he has to say." Which is it?
Is he a homophobe? According to his critics, yes. Matter settled. If Scratch and Rollo say so, it is so.
Where have I said that he is a "homophobe"? Certainly, his gossipmongering about Mike Quinn's homosexuality doesn't paint him in a very positive light in that regard...
No need to listen to what Dan actually says!!
Please read my reviews of his two recent essays.
His book Offenders For A Word, comes to mind here. How anti-Mormons play word games to discredit Mormons. And that is what it is - word games. When I get to Scratch's blog, I will show how gross his distortions are.
The blog is for entertainment and information. It is not meant to be a "serious", scholarly engagement with anything. Do you not have a sense of humor, Ray?
Scratch has had all the freedom he wants here, and this BB is in "public view". What do you expect? That he should be able to go on MAD and state that he thinks Dan is a "decent guy", but also an "a-hole"? If you want to come into my house and politely express your disagreement with me, preferably over a beer :), no problem, but if you insult me, I will kick your ass out!
Your scenario does not make any sense, Ray. I did not disrespect or insult *anyone* while on FAIR. I was completely polite, and did not behave in any untowards way whatsoever. I defy you to find a single post of mine on FAIR that supports this completely ridiculous analogy. You know, I am starting to get pretty sick of your crap, Ray. There is a very simply solution for you in all of this: If you do not like my posts,
don't read them.
Do you know any human being who does not think like this? Do all of the obsessive nuts craving to post on MAD understand this? (I understand your situation, which you explained privately.) Scratch wants primary posting priveleges on MAD, so he can go there and mount his soap box, like a visitor mounting the dining table of his host and telling him he's an "a-hole".
Not correct. I have no interest in posting on MAD.
When he gets his ass kicked down the street he starts a blog about how unfair his treatment was. Yes, Scratch is the victim, no doubt. Dan has had many discussions with people who radically differ in opinion with him, and has even said that, personally, he likes some of them, on a personal level. He has expressed, several times, that as a person he likes Dan Vogel, but cannot agree with his views. Can you imagine Dan Vogel starting an obsessive blog on Dan Peterson? Does that help you to understand why I say that intelligent people will stay away from this amateur, gutter psychoanalysis?
Well, I guess you cannot count yourself as one of those "intelligent people," since you are nose-deep in it.
I also don't ever recall Brent Metcalfe being so insulting and demeaning to Dan. As far as I can tell, they have vast differences of opinion, but have been civil to each other. Scratch just wants the soap box. And when he stops his obsessive gossip talk and superficial mind-reading, he might get some respect from more balanced people.
Unlike you, I would never compare myself to serious scholars like Metcalfe or Vogel.
As for the MAD rules, they have the option of running their board how they want. It is their "house". If people don't like it, then they can leave. Simple as that. Everyone is biased. If you display a "spirit of antagonism" towards Mormonism, then what do you expect? A three course meal followed by endless servings of pavlova?
You know, Ray, it seems clear to me that you have been sitting here, boiling over with rage for quite some time. I remember clearly now how upset you were over discussions of the ironically named FAIRboard on the old version of MDB. It is obvious that you have been wracking your brain, trying to figure out a way to stop all this sort of discussion, which you hate so much. I also remember that you spent a good deal of time attacking Kevin Graham, who utterly and thoroughly kicked your ass. So, if you want to continue with your little boy whine-fest, I say: bring it on, because I will mop the floor with you too. "Boo hoo hoo! I'm poor little Ray! Wah, wah! The critics are mean to the apologists!" Keep on crying into your beer, Ray. When you actually have some substance, or a legitimate point, I will be waiting for you to enlighten me.