DiscussMormonism.com

So, as the saga of Doctor Scratch goes, there appear to be two camps – 1) those who believe he is nothing more than a harmless critic who uses satire to tweak defenders of the LDS Church and it’s doctrines; and 2) those who consider his tactics to be dishonest and damaging to the public reputation(s) of his target(s). It is no secret that I fall into camp number 2. Given that, I have, over the past year confronted Scratch multiple times specifically on his tactics. Frankly, I don’t care if Scratch hates The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or me for that matter; that’s his business. His proclivity for character assassination is another story.

At one point, during one of our several exchanges, Scratch posted my picture (linked from my professional profile on LinkedIn) in a thread on this board. The post including my picture and the following description of me as – “a guy who treats things like child abuse, stalking, long-running and deeply personal conflicts, and potential lawsuits as fodder for entertainment---a guy who, when called on his utterly rancid behavior, chooses not to try and make amends and apologize, but who instead tries to cover it up by claiming that he was "lightning up the mood"” (viewtopic.php?p=313054#p313054). To liz’s credit, the image was removed when I notified her of it.

Now, several months ago, when Scratch lost his ability to out people’s personal information on this board, he created his new blog - http://encyclopediaofmopologetics.blogspot.com/. His attack on me was his second blog entry - http://encyclopediaofmopologetics.blogs ... tribe.html.

Shortly after this blog post was put on the Internet, I sent an e-mail (through the blog e-mail address), and then a PM (through this board) requesting that my picture be removed. To his credit, at the time, Scratch removed my picture and replaced it with a humorous picture of a “Nanny.” At this point, I considered the matter resolved.

Months went by and Scratch recently resorted to his old tricks and engaged in an unprovoked attack on my character (here: viewtopic.php?p=368205#p368205), in which he referred to me as follows: “ttribe is not "honest and genuine" at all. I have messages from him in which he states rather plainly that he views his participation on the boards as a "war" or a "battle." If you think he's just about "honesty" and "genuine" interaction, then you've been duped. He is a hardened apologist, and I'm happy to prove this if need be.”

I responded to Scratch, in the thread, as follows: (viewtopic.php?p=368926#p368926) “What messages are these in which I've used these words?” It was at that point, I was quite sure that Scratch’s statement – “I have messages from him in which he states rather plainly…” might refer to our PM exchange over my picture (in which, by the way, I never used those words).

Now, I’m probably about to break a board rule – Scratch then threatened to re-post my picture on his blog unless I stopped my “board nannying.” I let him know, in no uncertain terms, that I didn’t believe self-defense against attacks on my character fell under any reasonable definition of “board nannying.” But, I let that thread fade away.

Now we arrive at today. In this thread - viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15065 – I responded to an argument of Scratch’s in which, I perceived, he was failing to recognize that there are cases of abusive behavior on LDS kids while he accused LDS of “bullying” homosexuals. During the course of this exchange, Scratch accused me of being a bigot (http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 24#p370424).

I asked for proof of this alleged bigotry here: http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 26#p370426.

Scratch ignored my request in a subsequent response to me. I reiterated my request here: http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 85#p370485.

To which I received this response in the thread: “And I think you know what's going to become of your board-nannying, ttribe. It's just going to further entrench you into a permanent status as a Mopologist. Speaking of which, I seem to recall that I have some editing duties to attend to....” (http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 00#p370500). Clearly, a confirmation of the threat. Shortly thereafter, my picture went back up on his blog.

So, now where do we stand? Well, I suggested we post up the PM’s (if we both agreed to it) so the entire board could see how this played out and the lengths to which Scratch will go to undermine the credibility of his enemies. Shades jumped into the fray and let me know, definitively, that even if Scratch and I agreed, we would not be allowed to post the contents of the PM’s.

Lesson to be learned – you can use the PM function to make any threats you want and if anyone tries to take these threats public, it’s the individual making the threats who’s protected.

Wisdom Seeker created a thread on this board in which he wondered aloud why more defenders don’t participate on this board. Well, Wisdom Seeker, consider this Exhibit A.

Okay, a couple of things here, ttribe.

You just posted a link to the very photo that you object to being circulated. I don't know how you can rightly square that, unless you see it as providing evidence for your assertions which I do agree with.

With regards to the PM's. I saw on the defamation thread, that you were warned against posting PM's.

I didn't read all of the exchanges and probably won't. But I know I did see a red warning to you from Shades.

ttribe, if someone is harrassing you via PM's, my suggestion is that you collect up all the PM's and send them to the mod team. In the interest of fairness, I would also send your own PM responses so that the mod team can get a more complete picture of what took place.

Have you tried doing that?

Jersey Girl wrote:Okay, a couple of things here, ttribe.

You just posted a link to the very photo that you object to being circulated. I don't know how you can rightly square that, unless you see it as providing evidence for your assertions which I do agree with.

There's not much I can do about it at this point. If I'm going to defend myself, I might as well make sure there's link to my rebuttal associated with my picture as well.

Jersey Girl wrote:With regards to the PM's. I saw on the defamation thread, that you were warned against posting PM's.

Indeed I was warned. I knew when I created this thread that there was a chance that the mods could decide I broke the rules and suspend me. I'm willing to live with it if I am able to defend myself.

Jersey Girl wrote:I didn't read all of the exchanges and probably won't. But I know I did see a red warning to you from Shades.

Well, Scratch wins then.

Jersey Girl wrote:ttribe, if someone is harrassing you via PM's, my suggestion is that you collect up all the PM's and send them to the mod team. In the interest of fairness, I would also send your own PM responses so that the mod team can get a more complete picture of what took place.

Have you tried doing that?

Nope. I didn't believe Scratch would carry through on his threat. I underestimated him.

ttribe,

You haven't broken the rules yet. You stand a good chance of breaking the rules if you post PM content. And I, personally, respect whatever it is that you choose to do. It's a damn shame that there are people around here who think that personal attack and/or defamation is an acceptable form of response.

Re: Belmont the talking ass. :-D

So, if you choose to break the rules and let the chips fall where they may, I support you. That is to say, if you believe that taking a stand on your own behalf is the way to go, I'm right there with you, buddy. There are times to let a thing go and a time to stand.

I'm just telling you, there might be a more excellent way for you to deal with it.

for what it's worth, I haven't seen anything in your comments on this board that leads me to question the condition of your character.

Do with it what you will.

Jersey Girl wrote:ttribe,

You haven't broken the rules yet. You stand a good chance of breaking the rules if you post PM content. And I, personally, respect whatever it is that you choose to do. It's a damn shame that there are people around here who think that personal attack and/or defamation is an acceptable form of response.

Re: Belmont the talking ass. :-D

So, if you choose to break the rules and let the chips fall where they may, I support you. That is to say, if you believe that taking a stand on your own behalf is the way to go, I'm right there with you, buddy. There are times to let a thing go and a time to stand.

I'm just telling you, there might be a more excellent way for you to deal with it.

for what it's worth, I haven't seen anything in your comments on this board that leads me to question the condition of your character.

Do with it what you will.

Thank you. I appreciate it.

I'll be back in a few minutes, tribe, to see if you've decided which way to go with this. I think that if you post the PM's here, you'd likely be suspended. I don't see where that's such a big deal. So, if you want to go that route, you would be able to come back.

I'm assuming, given what I know about human nature, that in your suspended absence, people will throw mud on you and you won't be able to respond.

Don't let that frustrate you.

I have to go check on a possibly dead cat now. I'll be back.

Ttribe....What, as a Mod, would you like me to do?

What do you think should be done?

Should I suspend Scratch for posting information on a blog that he owns?

Honestly, I think this is a situation where, if you are really worried about character assassination, or your career, you may want to think about contacting an attorney.

I'm not being glib. I just don't know what you expect me to do here.

Also....Jersey Girl is right. You have not broken any rules in your OP.

Jersey Girl wrote:for what it's worth, I haven't seen anything in your comments on this board that leads me to question the condition of your character.

And, Ttribe, for what it's worth....I agree with Jersey Girl's above comment as well. ;-)

Jersey Girl wrote:I'll be back in a few minutes, tribe, to see if you've decided which way to go with this. I think that if you post the PM's here, you'd likely be suspended. I don't see where that's such a big deal. So, if you want to go that route, you would be able to come back.

I'm assuming, given what I know about human nature, that in your suspended absence, people will throw mud on you and you won't be able to respond.

Don't let that frustrate you.

I have to go check on a possibly dead cat now. I'll be back.

I don't intend to post the actual PM's unless given permission. But, I did state in this thread that Scratch threatened to re-post my picture. That initial threat was made via PM and I was clear on that. Technically, that's a board violation.

ttribe wrote:...

1 - were it not for your (repeated) whining about this, i would never had gone to the blog you linked to...my guess is that most of us had no idea it existed until you brought it the boards attention...

2 - based on you posts, i imagined you as some whiny byu freshman...i am somewhat shocked by your middle-agedness...

ttribe wrote:I don't intend to post the actual PM's unless given permission. But, I did state in this thread that Scratch threatened to re-post my picture. That initial threat was made via PM and I was clear on that. Technically, that's a board violation.

No, it isn't. You didn't post the actual PM.

I will say, that you have "bent the rule about as far as it can be bent without breaking it". ;-)

Bottom line....no, I'm not going to suspend you.