The Origin of FAIR/MAD

[_Bond...James Bond]

Doc Peterson,

If it makes you feel any better, I don't even know the basics of this quote Quinn thing, and furthermore, I don't think I want to know. I'm too busy waiting for Harry Potter 7 to worry about something you did or didn't do years (decades?) ago.

[_Ray A]

Actually, my real problem is I've allowed you to pull me down this rabbit hole again! How adroitly you change the subject from the real subject of the thread to a discussion about yourself. You always were a clever devil! Well done! Well done indeed.

He was included in the OP, and maligned in the OP, so this is about him too.

Re the bold part (my doing). I don't think he was in the rabbit hole in the first place. Maybe you need to do like me and take some time to get to know him better. Change of opinion is possible.

[_harmony]

Actually, my real problem is I've allowed you to pull me down this rabbit hole again! How adroitly you change the subject from the real subject of the thread to a discussion about yourself. You always were a clever devil! Well done! Well done indeed.

He was included in the OP, and maligned in the OP, so this is about him too.

Re the bold part (my doing). I don't think he was in the rabbit hole in the first place. Maybe you need to do like me and take some time to get to know him better. Change of opinion is possible.

Sadly, I think unless you intend to admonish him with the same recommendation, it would be an exercise in futility. His protestations notwithstanding, I think it beyond the realm of possibility that he'd be interested in lunching with the bunch, should I choose to announce my next trip through Salt Lake. And why should I extend the invitation, when I'd wager he'd find an excuse to bow out, should I even offer to buy his lunch? He doesn't suffer fools gladly, you know. He grinds them/us up. He says I am overweening and unjust. I am arrogant and jaundiced. I am completely to blame for his arrogance. Or something like that. He really has an amazing gift for self-denial. Nevermind that his reputation is known universally throughout the LDS world on both sides of the blanket, and I am certainly not the first nor will I be the last to comment on it. Such is the price of fame, I guess.

[_Ray A]

Sadly, I think unless you intend to admonish him with the same recommendation, it would be an exercise in futility. His protestations notwithstanding, I think it beyond the realm of possibility that he'd be interested in lunching with the bunch, should I choose to announce my next trip through Salt Lake. And why should I extend the invitation, when I'd wager he'd find an excuse to bow out, should I even offer to buy his lunch? He doesn't suffer fools gladly, you know. He grinds them/us up. He says I am overweening and unjust. I am arrogant and jaundiced. I am completely to blame for his arrogance. Or something like that. He really has an amazing gift for self-denial. Nevermind that his reputation is known universally throughout the LDS world on both sides of the blanket, and I am certainly not the first nor will I be the last to comment on it. Such is the price of fame, I guess.

I will do a separate thread about this in about an hour or so, barring interruptions. You're welcome to comment on that, so we can, for your benefit too, shift a more personal discussion of Dan elsewhere, since you seem to feel that he's takes everything over like Genghis Khan :)

[_Daniel Peterson]

arrogant prick-hood . . . prickiness . . . vicious arrogant prick-hood . . . arrogant prick

Whatever.

I simply used calm, cool logic on you, harmonyserenitydillpickleswazing. Like a surgeon's scalpel. Rather relentlessly, it's true. And you absolutely hated it.

Plainly, you still do: "Arrogant prick-hood prickiness vicious arrogant prick-hood arrogant prick!"

[_Daniel Peterson]

I think it beyond the realm of possibility that he'd be interested in lunching with the bunch, should I choose to announce my next trip through Salt Lake. And why should I extend the invitation, when I'd wager he'd find an excuse to bow out, should I even offer to buy his lunch? He doesn't suffer fools gladly, you know. He grinds them/us up. He says I am overweening and unjust. I am arrogant and jaundiced.

Ask Shades, sometime, how insulting I've been to him when he's visited my house. Ask Don Bradley about how I insult him to his face. Listen to Dan Vogel's account of my personal viciousness to him over the years. Ask Runtu whether I'm willing to have lunch with him. Have Uncle Dale tell you the horror story of my snarling at him over lunch last month.

Or don't. Whatever.

I am completely to blame for his arrogance.

LOL.

Nevermind that his reputation is known universally throughout the LDS world on both sides of the blanket

Your background is in sociology, if I'm not mistaken. I'd love to see the survey data supporting this claim.

I am certainly not the first nor will I be the last to comment on it.

Just, perhaps, the most un-self-critically judgmental.

[_Dr. Shades]

Sadly, I think unless you intend to admonish [DCP] with the same recommendation, it would be an exercise in futility. His protestations notwithstanding, I think it beyond the realm of possibility that he'd be interested in lunching with the bunch, should I choose to announce my next trip through Salt Lake. And why should I extend the invitation, when I'd wager he'd find an excuse to bow out, should I even offer to buy his lunch? He doesn't suffer fools gladly, you know. He grinds them/us up.

Harmony, I think it would be apropos to recognize the difference between a person's online persona vs. his or her real-life persona. It might be a mistake to assume one is always indicative of the other. For example, didn't you tell us about meeting "Ed" in real life, regardless of how he hounded you online lo these many moons ago? Same concept here.

I encourage you to read this post in a thread started by Ray A.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

In Quinn's case it didn't sound so benign: among DCP's "circle" he tells us that Quinn's sexual orientation had been well known for years.

You're attempting to blacken my reputation by making this sound really sinister.

Not at all. I'm simply trying to expose what I think was horrible treatment of Quinn by Church leaders and the Mormon scholarly community.

Back when a fairly prominent liberal member of the Mormon studies "community" mentioned Quinn's homosexuality to me and to Todd Compton (the first time either of us had heard of it, as far as I recall; I'm certain of this for myself, and pretty sure regarding Todd), neither one of us was any kind of a "player" in Mormon studies.

Why would it even come up?

I don't learn about things by speaking about them. I learn by hearing about them (or, as the case may be, by reading about them or by observing them).

So folks were talking to you about Quinn (i.e., your friend in So. Cal., others in your "circle," and, last but not least, your friend who spoke with Quinn's SP). Still sounds like gossip to me.

My friend is an old friend of Quinn's former stake president. They ran into each other and, as normal people are occasionally known to do, talked with one another. The subject of Quinn was mentioned -- Quinn was much in the news at the time, if I'm not mistaken -- and my friend's friend said something that led my friend to conclude that his friend was aware of Quinn's homosexuality. That's as much as I know about it, but I suspect there isn't much more to know.

The backpedalling continues .... Under this version, your friend only 'assumed' the SP was talking of Quinn's sexual orientation.

You're attempting to create a scandal where none exists.

No scandal, just gossip unbecoming any Christian.

That's not a very honorable thing to do, and it puts your constant insinuations that I'm at best indifferent to damaging the reputations of others in a distinctly ironic light.

More 'pot calling the kettle black' smokescreen.

[_harmony]

Harmony, I think it would be apropos to recognize the difference between a person's online persona vs. his or her real-life persona. It might be a mistake to assume one is always indicative of the other. For example, didn't you tell us about meeting "Ed" in real life, regardless of how he hounded you online lo these many moons ago? Same concept here.

I encourage you to read this post in a thread started by Ray A.

I am well aware that Dr Peterson's off line persona is reportedly profoundly different from his on-line persona, Dr Shades. What I find interesting is that he's claiming they are the same. He's objecting to my judgment of him as, among other things, an arrogant prick who doesn't live his religion. He listed a laundry list of characteristics that I have no way of knowing, since we are not acquainted off line. I reminded him that it wasn't his off-line persona I called an arrogant prick who doesn't live his religion; it's his on-line persona that I (and many others) judge to have taken arrogance to a new height.

Perhaps he doesn't see the irony of his own on-line behavior. Perhaps self reflection isn't part of either persona. He judges my on-line persona just as harshly (jaundiced, arrogant, overweening, unjust, unlearned, and that's just from yesterday) as I judge his. The list of his negativity is long and varied and covers a multitude of subjects. He doesn't know me off line either, yet he feels qualified to judge my on-line persona. He does the same thing for which he's criticizing me.

You remember the thread Don Bradley started, wherein he told us we just didn't understand Dr Peterson's sense of humor? That he was simply being funny when he insulted us? Gee, I guess I still don't get it, because "funny" wasn't the word that immediately came to mind when I was reading Dr Peterson's posts yesterday. Usually I understand humor, even humor I don't necessarily agree with, but I admit this was beyond me.

Sauce, goose/sauce, gander, Shades. He doesn't know me off line either. You may, one day, but I doubt he ever does.

[_Some Schmo]

The mere thought of certain posters here and of their all-conquering arguments (I'm thinking particularly of PP, Schmo, and the dreaded Mercury) fills me with such terror that I have to resort to my smelling salts and my lovely little folding Chinese paper fan.

I knew it! Wow, for once, he said something honest. First time for everything, I guess. Nice.

by the way, you use one of those little folding Chinese paper fans? Do you like Broadway Musicals too? You like picking out curtains? Do you spend a lot of time in men's locker rooms?

I think I'm beginning to understand why he'd be smearing Quinn. I bet you're a big fan of SWK's too, huh?