The Origin of FAIR/MAD

[_Mister Scratch]

Wow, talk about Epic length posts! Too bad there is not a double column feature for these size posts. It would make reading them much easier.

While I am glad Mr. Scratch and Dr. Peterson are talking, I wish it could be done in an amicable way sans any name calling.

Sorry. So long as he's committed to a crusade of malicious slander and character assassination against me, we're not exactly going to be friends. I regard him with contempt, as he clearly does me.

I don't regard you with contempt, Prof. P. I regard you with fondness and respect. (Though I admit I am a bit amazed---and sometimes amused---at some of the things you do, and have done.)

[_Daniel Peterson]

If that's true (which I cannot seriously believe), then the situation is one-sided.

I absolutely do regard you with contempt.

And I don't do that very much. It will probably serve you as a badge of honor here on this board.

[_Mister Scratch]

As for discussions of Tom Murphy's work in the FARMS Review, I stand behind them. And they in no way resemble your continuing campaign of character assassination against me. Lay not that flattering unction to your soul.

Oh, then perhaps you'd like to point me to the place where I relied on completely fabricated evidence to support my interpretations, sort of like what you did with juliann's baloney? Further, I read the Murphy-on-Echohawk quote that was posted by Pentatach/CI. It is *you* and your friends who are guilty of twisting evidence and misreading.

Who's hiding?

You are. You obsessively track others -- particularly me -- in order to discover or invent materials that you can use to further your crusade of personal destruction.

Bull. I read many posts, and report on the ones that are the most interesting. That many of them happen to have been written by you isn't my fault at all. Unlike your pals, such as juliann and Allen Wyatt, I have not "invented" any materials.

Further, you *do* hide certain bits of information. For example, you have been rather mum on certain question pertaining to your involvement with the SCMC,

There's nothing to hide. I've publicly recounted the entire story of my entire involvement with the Strengthening Church Members Committee. There's nothing more to tell.

Wrong. Who was the GA whose bidding you were doing? Was a report filed? Were you given a dossier on the man you interrogated for 4+ hours? I, for one, still have many, many questions about the SCMC.

That you want to spin it into a massive conspiracy that will sear the screen is none of my concern, and I'm not inclined to make things up to help you in your quest.

No "conspiracy"---just the truth, ma'am.

[_Mister Scratch]

If that's true (which I cannot seriously believe), then the situation is one-sided.

I absolutely do regard you with contempt.

And I don't do that very much. It will probably serve you as a badge of honor here on this board.

I am truly sorry you feel that way, Prof. Peterson. Please do know that I like you a great deal, and would love to see you continue to participate on the board. You are one of the great ones, in terms of Mopologetic history. I really believe that.

[_Polygamy Porter]

If that's true (which I cannot seriously believe), then the situation is one-sided.

I absolutely do regard you with contempt.

And I don't do that very much. It will probably serve you as a badge of honor here on this board.

I am truly sorry you feel that way, Prof. Peterson. Please do know that I like you a great deal, and would love to see you continue to participate on the board. You are one of the great ones, in terms of Mopologetic history. I really believe that.

Awwww shucks! Danny is taking his bawl and heading home... *sigh*

Either that or he is headed over to the ICU at the MAAD board?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Oh, then perhaps you'd like to point me to the place where I relied on completely fabricated evidence to support my interpretations, sort of like what you did with juliann's baloney?

I don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about.

I've never written anything as Juliann. I've never edited and published anything by Juliann. I'm responsible for what I do, for what I write, for what I edit, and for what I publish, but I'm not responsible for what other people post.

Further, I read the Murphy-on-Echohawk quote that was posted by Pentatach/CI. It is *you* and your friends who are guilty of twisting evidence and misreading.

I've never written anything under that name. I've never edited and published anything under that name. I'm responsible for what I do, for what I write, for what I edit, and for what I publish, but I'm not responsible for what other people post. We are not a collective personality.

Who was the GA whose bidding you were doing?

None, so far as I'm aware. I was asked to help out over the telephone by the secretary of the committee, whom I have never met. He told me that he was acting as a personal favor to members of the family, who were very concerned about this person and whom he knew. They had called him, asking for help. I've never heard from him, so far as I can recall, before or since.

Was a report filed?

Not so far as I know.

Were you given a dossier on the man you interrogated for 4+ hours?

I "interrogated" nobody. We had a conversation.

And, no, I was never given a "dossier" on him.

I, for one, still have many, many questions about the SCMC.

If so, you'll have to ask somebody else. I simply don't have the dirt that you're looking for.



Well, this is beginning to take too much time, and I've already made the statements I wanted to make.

So I'll be heading out. Best wishes to all.

[_Analytics]

But I don't specialize in spinning sources and twisting history in order to assault and malign the character of other people, and I certainly don't do it from behind the cover of anonymity. You, on the other hand, do.

Kind of ironic that you'd accuse him of this on this thread when he lays out such a solid case about how Murphy was maligned.

[_moksha]

Well, this is beginning to take too much time, and I've already made the statements I wanted to make.

So I'll be heading out. Best wishes to all.

If you ever feel like it, look in on the Celestial forum here at MD. The nature of that forum is much less contentious.

[_Polygamy Porter]

Well, this is beginning to take too much time, and I've already made the statements I wanted to make.

So I'll be heading out. Best wishes to all.

If you ever feel like it, look in on the Celestial forum here at MD. The nature of that forum is much less contentious.

He is not interested in any forum where the mods treat him the same as all other posters.

[_Gadianton]

It's too bad this thread has devolved into a fight about Free Thinker who wasn't one of the main characters in this story at all.

Scratch, this was an amazingly well-done piece of research. You seem to have understood the unfolding better than I even did when I was there. Some might say it was a waste of your talents to give this event so much care, but hell, anyone who wants to understand the dynamics of ZLMB/FAIR/MAD, if that happens to be their interest, isn't going to find a better source than some of the stuff you're coming up with.

It's funny to look back and see my appeal to FT and recall that I frequently would address FT rather than those who I was actually debating with because some of the apologists were so embarrassingly bad at what they did (and i'm not refering to Jan or Rchivst here who often were more just TBM posters rather than apologists) that I felt FT, if he were lurking, would easily see the truth of the matter and it gave me satisfaction for him to know that I knew, that he knew. I was surprised by his summary comments. I won't say critics have never been out of line, but in this case they weren't.

I have a real-world best friend who on occasion has put me into difficult positions where I've had to be dishonest (towards people it would matter to) in order to cover. Brent Metcalfe, Dan Vogal, Dr. Shades, and others who get some notoriety as "anti-Mormons" are easy for me to back up and endorse because I never have to worry about getting sucked in to a situation where they compromise integrity in order to score points. Whether they succeed or fail, they do so with exceptional honesty. If I were an apologist, I'd have to really, really be careful who I lend my support to.