DiscussMormonism.com

beastie wrote:Oh, it's all an act, dahlin. Will is always on stage, glowing in the spotlight, taking yet another bow, imagining the adoring crowd.

So I suggest adding another category:

Biggest Drama Queen Apologist: Will Schryver

Agreed. That's why I don't take him seriously at all.

Some categories have obvious winners.

Angriest apologist: Weston Krogstadt. Droopy. It's a tie.

Least substantive apologist: Zakuska.

Rube Goldberg award for most convoluted [and long-winded] attempt at apologia: Droopy.

Lifetime achievement in hubris: LOAP, for giving an account of "his" cab ride with Jan Shipps, and omitting the fact that Lamanite was also in the cab. (See the comment from Sione).

Most predictable apologist: cjcampbell.

Most vulgar apologist: Droopy.

Most embarrassing apologist: Gazelam.

Most intelligent apologist: David Bokovoy.

Most honest apologist: Paul Osborne. Jason Bourne (if he considers himself one). I would also nominate Chris Tolworthy for a Bob Beamon leap from apologist par excellence to vocal ex-Mormon.
>
>
>

Angriest apologist - Pahoran

Least substantive apologist - Nehor (I'm actually voting Nehor in this category as a kick in the butt. He actually has a very solid gospel understanding, but instead, is content to drop one-liners. I think that Nehor has more to offer than he is showing.)

Rube Goldberg award for most convoluted attempt at apologia - Droopy(See his exit post for examples. )

Lifetime achievement in hubris - Jullian (Do I really need to elaborate? )

Most predictable apologist - Bob Crockett (Everyone is a hypocrite and an anonymous coward)

Most vulgar apologist - Will Schryver (the only apologist giving multiple references to circle jerks)

Most embarrassing apologist - Will Schryver (for being consistently voted as the most vulgar, and for referring to circle jerks on multiple occasions)

Most intelligent apologist - Dan Peterson

Apologist whose posts you enjoy reading - Gaz, BCSpace (I disagree with them on a regular basis, and have had heated discussions with both of them, but they always bring interesting insights to the board. They also stay on topic, and have a solid gospel knowledge.)

Most honest apologist - Asbestosman (I have a lot of admiration for Abman. He defends the Church, but he also isn't afraid to point out where the Church flubbed up.) I would also put Jason in this category as well...but I'm not sure he would consider himself an apologist.

WilliamSchryver wrote:Harmony is just bitter that the daily circle jerks in the Great and Spacious Trailer Park™ are the closest she has come to a bona fide sexual experience in over 40 years.

I simply cannot understand how her husband has resisted the urge to off himself for so long. Of all the men in human history who have felt compelled, no matter the cost, to “stick it out” with a bitch of a wife – Joseph Smith included – if anyone deserves the reward of 72 virgins in heaven, it’s that poor man.

Who peed in your corn flakes this morning, Will? You might want to check that jug... it only looks like milk on the outside.

Look across the aisle, the next time you're in the temple (although if your bishop saw your post, it would probably be a while). I'll be one of those women, put on earth solely to show you exactly how pitiful a male speciman you really are.

Angriest apologist: Louis Midgley. cf. Scratch M.

Least substantive apologist: J. Adams at MAD. I understand the votes for Nehor and others, but, I think since the heavy-handed moderation at MAD, there is a new strain of apologist that most of us have never experienced.

Rube Goldberg award for most convoluted attempt at apologia: John Gee. cf. Scratch M.

Kerry is a close second. I liked Ray's nomination of Droopy, but ultimately Droopy has been rejected by his would-be fellow apologists, to fail miserably at yet another thing that he loves. So not sure it would be fair to pin them with Droopy.

Lifetime achievement in hubris: I just can't decide.

Most predictable apologist: DCP. cf. Scratch M.

Most vulgar apologist: Tie--Bill Hamblin and John Tvedtnes. A big cf. Scratch M.

Most embarrassing apologist: JSkains. LeeU.

Most intelligent apologist: Richard Bushman. cf. Scratch M. I've also described Bushman as the most dangerous, professional apologist living.

Apologist whose posts you enjoy reading: This is very hard. Probably Bill Hamblin's.

Most honest apologist: Is there such a thing? cf. Scratch M.

I enjoyed the nomination of Asb. The problem is at this point, I have a hard time considering him an apologist per se.

Angriest apologist: The Light of Christ radiates from Pahoran like a moral beacon.

Least substantive apologist: Does Zakuska count, or is he not even substantive enough to be an apologist?

Rube Goldberg award for most convoluted attempt at apologia: Zemah.

Lifetime achievement in hubris: Droopy recipe: simmer a thesaurus in bitch sauce for 15 years, serve flambe.

Most predictable apologist: "you're intentionally misreading me" should be wenglund's new name.

Most vulgar apologist: selek. For someone who supposedly despises the practice of homosexuality, that guy sure has a strong fixation on all things anal.

Most embarrassing apologist: RobOsborn. He's just... dumb. Kudos to him, though, for being able to post with all that drool on the keyboard.

Most intelligent apologist: maklelan. You can be wrong 60% of the time and still be pretty bright, after all.

Apologist whose posts you enjoy reading: Dan Peterson, when he's on point (which is rare, but that's not usually his fault).

Most honest apologist: Lamanite, by far.

Ray A,

Most embarrassing apologist: Gazelam.

Can you elaborate please? Its an honor to be nominated of coarse.


Liz,

Thanks for the mention in regards to enjoying my posts. You yourself always bring an even hand to the conversations here, and have reigned me in on numerous occasions when my emotions get the better of me.

Gaz

Oh Jesus, I forgot about Gazelam. I might have to rethink my nominations for "least substantive" and "most embarrassing".

Is someone going to turn this on the critics?

Yong Xi wrote:Is someone going to turn this on the critics?

Take a look here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8764