DiscussMormonism.com

The award for best use of bile, go to -- yes -- Mr. Scratch -- for four separate events:

To doubleagent on April 1, 2009: "How that must gall you! "

To rcrocket on March 25, 2009: "How that must gall you."

To Peterson on March 14, 2009: "Does that gall you, or something?"

To Peterson on August 31, 2008: "Boy, it must really gall you."


The award for best fishing expedition -- yes -- for an apology, goes to Mr. Scratch!


To Peterson on March 16, 2009: "I hope that our dear Father who Art in Heaven will cause The Good Professor to realize that an apology is necessary."

To Hamblin on Feb. 27, 2009: "If I were you, I would urge Prof. Hamblin to issue a public apology on FAIR."

To SHIELDS on Jan. 31, 2009: "One wonders why SHIELDS didn't delete the material, let alone issue an apology."

To Peterson on Jan 27, 2009: "I've said it before and I will say it again: a simple apology, for your bad behavior online and in print (in the FARMS Review) would permanently end my career on the messageboards."

To Smac on Jan. 10, 2009: "No typical Mopologist would ever offer up a mature, well-meaning, sincere retraction/apology . . . ."

To Lifeonaplate, Dec. 8, 2008: "I'm afraid I cannot accept your apology."

To Peterson on Dec. 1, 2008: "No apology has, as of yet, come forth from the Chief Apologist."

To the Church on Nov. 7, 2007: "I'll happily retract and apologize profusely if you can produce one single instance of the institutional Church ever offering up a sincere apology."

To Wade on Dec. 1, 2006: "You are a liar, and you are going to need to repent for this one, my friend. An apology is in order, too."

To Plutarch on Nov. 7, 2007: "I'll be waiting, very patiently, for that apology."

To Wade on Dec 27, 2006: "An apology would be nice, Wade."

To Wade on Dec. 31, 2006: 'Face it: you were dishonest, and you owe me and others an apology. You have been called to repentance."

To Peterson on Feb. 7, 2007: "I will continue to wait for an apology, just as I have ever since he unethically smeared me on FAIR."


Frankly, I gave up after this one; there were so, so many demands for apology I just gave up. (Indeed, the indexer doesn't even index the word "apologize" as too common -- thanks to Scratch.) I wish you all would shut the heck up about telling Scratch to shut up. He's the greatest.

s

I demand an apology for having to read that post.

It looks like the malevolent stalker has a malevolent stalker.

John Larsen wrote:It looks like the malevolent stalker has a malevolent stalker.

Except that Mister Scratch isn't quite as narcissistic as DCP so rcrocket is going to have to work extra hard for attention.

I'm glad no apologies are forthcoming. Where would Superman be without Lex Luthor?

Besides, before someone can sincerely apologize, the words "I was wrong" have to float through his/her head, and that phrase doesn't exist in the mind of an apologist.

Some Schmo wrote:Besides, before someone can sincerely apologize, the words "I was wrong" have to float through his/her head, and that phrase doesn't exist in the mind of an apologist.

Even "I could be wrong" would be a nice change.

Some Schmo wrote:I'm glad no apologies are forthcoming. Where would Superman be without Lex Luthor?

Which one's Supe, and which one's Lex? It works both ways....

cinepro wrote:

Some Schmo wrote:I'm glad no apologies are forthcoming. Where would Superman be without Lex Luthor?

Which one's Supe, and which one's Lex? It works both ways....

I'll leave that up to each individual observer for that exact reason.

harmony wrote:

Some Schmo wrote:Besides, before someone can sincerely apologize, the words "I was wrong" have to float through his/her head, and that phrase doesn't exist in the mind of an apologist.

Even "I could be wrong" would be a nice change.

I was wrong once. I avoid it as much as I can.

cinepro wrote:Which one's Supe, and which one's Lex? It works both ways....

That's a good question. All I know for sure is that crocket is Jimmy Olsen.