DiscussMormonism.com

antishock8 wrote:

Dr. Shades wrote:Not to rain on anyone's parade, but The Nehor has indeed been known to make substantive posts from time to time.

CFR. Give me three.

Check out the atheist thread. He's doing quite well on the last page.

harmony wrote:[

You and I clearly have different notions of what "substantive" is and is not.

antishock8 wrote:You and I clearly have different notions of what "substantive" is and is not.

I'm sure that's quite true. Certain of it, as a matter of fact.

Just to be clear this is what "substantive" means to me when I use it in context of a discussion board thread:

substantive: having a firm basis in reality and being therefore important, meaningful, or considerable; being on topic and prompting thought

The scatology and coprophagia continue over on the aptly named MADboard. According to a tipster, Bill Hamblin announced (perhaps jokingly, but who knows?) that he contrived to have installed a kind of special "oracle" in honor of DCP:

William J. Hamblin wrote:A few years ago I donated some money to BYU, and they allowed me to dedicate the "Daniel C. Peterson Memorial Urinal" in the bathroom near his office, complete with his picture painted on the porcelain. Dan was noticeably touched by the honor.

Wow. Is Hamblin saying that DCP relishes the thought of a vicarious "golden shower"? Personally, I find this sort of thing revolting, and think that Dr. Hamblin should feel embarrassed about stooping to this level.

Dr. Shades wrote:Not to rain on anyone's parade, but The Nehor has indeed been known to make substantive posts from time to time.

Of course he has. What? Is someone planning to compensate posters for R&D of their posts?

Mister Scratch wrote:

William J. Hamblin wrote:A few years ago I donated some money to BYU, and they allowed me to dedicate the "Daniel C. Peterson Memorial Urinal" in the bathroom near his office, complete with his picture painted on the porcelain. Dan was noticeably touched by the honor.

Wow. Is Hamblin saying that DCP relishes the thought of a vicarious "golden shower"? Personally, I find this sort of thing revolting, and think that Dr. Hamblin should feel embarrassed about stooping to this level.

ewwww...I haven't had supper yet.

Dr. Shades wrote:Not to rain on anyone's parade, but The Nehor has indeed been known to make substantive posts from time to time.

Well with nearly 7,000 posts, on this board alone in under two years, he's bound to get in one or two meaningful ones.

Looks like he's read and studied Peterson's book: How To Live Life On Message Boards. The author seems to have busy all day at the other board racking up another day of 30+ posts.

Life's real demanding teaching at BYU!

Now we know that Daniel was not set apart as an apologist. I am not surprised. It doesn't mean that no apologist was ever set apart to act as a defender of the faith. In the end, however, I don't think it matters a whole lot. It would be far wiser for the LDS leadership to leave apologetics as they are, tools that you keep around as long as they serve the right purpose, but which you can drop as soon as their usefulness has passed.

Trevor wrote:Now we know that Daniel was not set apart as an apologist. I am not surprised. It doesn't mean that no apologist was ever set apart to act as a defender of the faith. In the end, however, I don't think it matters a whole lot. It would be far wiser for the LDS leadership to leave apologetics as they are, tools that you keep around as long as they serve the right purpose, but which you can drop as soon as their usefulness has passed.

The Brethren are wise to keep a safe distance. Plausible deniability and all that. LOL