The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Nomad
_Emeritus
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:07 pm

The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Nomad »

One of the things that has been claimed repeatedly about Will Schryver is that he routinely calls women on the board “sluts” and “whores".

To “prove” it, they have mined this quote from a post made by Schryver (in a reply to beastie) in June 2008:

“I hope you and your incestuous, whorish, slutish, circle-jerking clan have a wonderful weekend.”


Looks pretty ugly on the face of it, doesn’t it? But let’s trace the origins of that quote, and put it in its true context:

Schryver has often used the term “circle jerk” to describe what goes on here MDB. In my professional life, the phrase “circle jerk” is actually used quite often. I even doubt that some of the women who I have heard use the phrase know about the “other meanings” it has. For them, it simply means a staff meeting where a group of people stumbling and bumbling through some project pat each other on the backs and talk about how much progress is being made, etc. At the next meeting, the same thing happens, and the next one after that … until the project in question is finally completed three months late.

The Urban Dictionary gives this as one definition of “circle jerk”:

Circlejerk

a pompous, self-congratulatory discussion where little to no progress is made.

"Did you catch that board meeting? Man, what a circlejerk!"


It also gives this definition, which is how Schryver has always used “circle jerk” on this message board:

Sometimes used to describe an internet forum thread where forum members all give each other kudos (Or rep where a rep system is present) for some non-event that has occurred.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... circlejerk



So, one day back 2008, beastie wrote this:

I agree that FARMS is likely an incestuous community …

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 49#p168149


Will jumped on that real fast and replied:

Beastlie says that LDS apologists are incestuous! They have sex with their mothers, sisters and daughters.

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 13#p168213


beastlie then replied:

Oh, for heaven's sake.

See the bolded definition:
Quote:
in•ces•tu•ous
adj.
1. Of, involving, or suggestive of incest.
2. Having committed incest.
3. Improperly intimate or interconnected: "Press-politics relations are notoriously incestuous" Boston Globe.

I'm assuming, of course, that Will is quite familiar with this definition of the word, and is just being his normal mental 12 year old self.

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 78#p168278



To which Will then replied:

You mean you were using the term "incestuous" in a figurative sense?

Imagine that!

Imagine that someone might use a term that, if taken in its more literal sense, would certainly be considered ... well ... vulgar, but which, if viewed in a figurative sense, should rightfully be interpreted in an entirely different light.

What a novel concept!

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 39#p168339


Beastie has been had here. Bad. Really bad. And she knows it. But she’s going to try to save some face, so she keeps on:

I was using "incestuous" to mean exactly what the dictionary says it means. You know, like the word "intercourse" can be the sexual act or conversation. It's not a figurative use of the word. It's the actual meaning of the word.

If I wanted to use sexual terms "figuratively", I would talk about how the FARMs apologists like to give each other blow jobs in their self-congratulatory work. Using incestuous in the sense I did is not vulgar, but the blow job phrase would be vulgar. I'm just illustrating the difference between using a word that has a clearly defined meaning and using sexually explicit figurative language.

You're a vulgar person, Will. Whether or not that is problematic is an individual decision, but there is no doubt you are vulgar.

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 39#p168339


Calling Schryver vulgar right after talking about how FARMS apologists “like to give each other blow jobs” is something that will seem ironic to people outside this message board. I'm sure it won't even make a ripple here.

But apparently beastie doesn’t appreciate the fact that Schryver was using “circle jerk” exactly as the dictionary defines it, too. More likely she understands it, but she’s hoping she can make enough smoke here that no one else will notice.

Schryver back to beastie:

Yes, yes, yes. So we've heard.

But as long as we're offering dictionary definitions of popularly-used terms here in the GSTP™, here are mine:

(from http://www.merriam-webster.com/ )

whore
3: a venal or unscrupulous person

slut
1: a slovenly woman

Circle Jerk
(See here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... circlejerk )


I hope you and your incestuous, whorish, slutish, circle-jerking clan have a wonderful weekend.

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 83#p168483


Schryver turns the tables on beastie in a devastating blow! Using her own method of operation, he refers to the people at MDB as “interconnected unscrupulous men and slovenly women congratulating one another on some non-event that has occurred”.

From what I have been able to determine, this is only time that William Schryver has ever used any form of the words “whore” and/or “slut”. It’s perfectly plain to see, in context, that he wasn’t using those words towards any individuals, and he wasn’t using them in the way that has been claimed. He was using them to turn tables on beastie in a discussion about language. And he did it very, very well. Beastie was left looking silly.

But I’ve heard that Schryver calls women whores and sluts all the time!

The fact is, the evidence doesn’t back up this charge. It all comes back to this one post, and this post doesn’t say at all what has been claimed.

This, folks, is how to conduct a good smear campaign. Congratulations to all involved.
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Chap »

Nomad wrote: ... It all comes back to this one post ...


I think most of those familiar with Schryver will feel 'it' really all comes back to this one post.
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Buffalo »

Nomad wrote:One of the things that has been claimed repeatedly about Will Schryver is that he routinely calls women on the board “sluts” and “whores".


What's up, Will?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_Nomad
_Emeritus
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:07 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Nomad »

Buffalo wrote:
Nomad wrote:One of the things that has been claimed repeatedly about Will Schryver is that he routinely calls women on the board “sluts” and “whores".


What's up, Will?

If I remember right, Schryver and his wife are, at this very moment, in a jet flying to Europe for a couple weeks.

Now, how do you respond to the OP?
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _sock puppet »

"The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent"

?

Or the alternate clause after the colon would be: "Lessons Learned from NAMIRS"
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

William Schryver wrote:Now, how do you respond to the OP?


Hello,

Like this:

Image

V/R
Dr. Cameron "Meh" for Me
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _wenglund »

Nomad wrote: Now, how do you respond to the OP?


I am betting that the critical context you presented will have near zero impact in changing the minds of many of the antagonists here. I think it is clear from the multitude of anti-Will threads that this all has nothing to do with getting at the truth and trying to raise the level of discourse here. Rather, it is about propagandizing in whatever ways necessary to discredit and marginalize certain opposing voices--and this in the conspicuous absence of compelling counter-arguments.

The good news is, the propaganda is pretty much confined to a low credibility discussion board with a relatively few anonymous and no-name naysayers.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Kevin Graham »

The easiest and the best way to discredit William Schryver, is to give him the pulpit.

He'll discredit himself every time.

And that is all we have done. We quote him. The very words he has taken pride in saying, and the same citations for which he refuses to repent.

So stop whining about it now Will. You did this to yourself.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Hey dip****, I was there when you first said circle jerk. I immediately informed you that it also referred to a group of men in a circle, ejaculating on a woman. You laughed when I explained this, but that didn't stop you from using it. To the contrary, you subsequently referred to "orgiastic" circle jerks to make the point very clear that this is how you meant the phrase to be understood.

So take your spin doctoring elsewhere. We know what has been said. You can spin until you die of vertigo for all I care, but we know the truth. I prayed and God told me.
Last edited by YahooSeeker [Bot] on Mon May 23, 2011 4:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: The MDB Schryver Jihad: How to Smear Your Opponent

Post by _bcspace »

Looks pretty ugly on the face of it, doesn’t it? But let’s trace the origins of that quote, and put it in its true context:

Schryver has often used the term “circle jerk” to describe what goes on here MDB. In my professional life, the phrase “circle jerk” is actually used quite often. I even doubt that some of the women who I have heard use the phrase know about the “other meanings” it has. For them, it simply means a staff meeting where a group of people stumbling and bumbling through some project pat each other on the backs and talk about how much progress is being made, etc. At the next meeting, the same thing happens, and the next one after that … until the project in question is finally completed three months late.

The Urban Dictionary gives this as one definition of “circle jerk”:


Have to agree. The antiMormon denizens here fequently refer to masturbation. I usually take it to mean mental as in "all LDS critics engage in some form of mental masturbation in order to make their point". But of course with some posters, it's probably a literal reference.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
Post Reply