"GoodK" is short for "Good Kimberly Ann" for when she's posting on MA&D, I.e., the opposite of when she posts here on MormonDiscussions, when she's "Evil Kimberly Ann," right?
Clever, but no.
I'm not GoodK, though I am Good Kimberly Ann. I'm never evil!
moksha wrote:Just thinking out loud: If a poster is that good on the MAD board, can they survive for long?
GoodK scored a very impressive point over Prof. P. on the "antimormon" thread, and was warned by the MAD moderating team on another thread. As to whether s/he will be banned, I think it's too early to say. It's also worth bearing in mind that MAD booted out many of the most interesting critics long ago, and that they likely want to keep some of the good remaining ones around. (I'm thinking in particular of Jaybear, who has really shown some pretty amazing staying power.) Certainly, if GoodK scores too many embarrassing points against the Mopologists, then s/he will be banned.
Your observation is mostly correct but I do believe Juliann and her hardline symphathizers are trying very hard to sanitize MADD from the subversive/reactionary/critical elements.
Such a bunch of hilariously entertaining posters, with our dear Dr. DCP's addition, of course.
bcspace wrote:GoodK? She got smacked down pretty hard on the Adam thread (by me). GoodK is also not doing very well in the "conviction" thread. I can't speak to the antiMormon thread because I am not really particpating there. Just another amatuer wanna be. Can't you send someone better?
Smacked down pretty hard? Wow. I certainly don't recall being smacked down. I remember making the great "DCP" almost cry...
KimberlyAnn wrote:The new lightning rod over on MAD seems awfully familiar to me, and though I don't want to out anyone, a little speculation can be fun.
I can't quite put my finger on who's posting as GoodK, but I feel fairly certain it's someone with whom I'm familiar from this board or RfM.
No matter who is posting as GoodK, she/he is providing plenty of entertainment over on MAD!
KA
I don't think I know you, but maybe. I am certainly not a previous poster hiding behind the name GoodK. I'm just a newbie, but I'm so excited my posts have proven this entertaining.
So begins GoodK's career in polemics!
Moniker wrote:I have no desire to be "good". Yet, I did have an earnest desire to find out who GoodK is. Why would anyone think that was GIMR or Kimberly Ann?
I have a pretty good suspicion who it is.
Cute.
I'm GoodK. I hate to put a damper on all the mystery surrounding my real identity... just refer to me as the man(or woman) who defeated Dan Peterson, or as I like to call him, The Professor Dumbeldore of Mormon "apologetics"!
Moniker wrote:I have no desire to be "good". Yet, I did have an earnest desire to find out who GoodK is. Why would anyone think that was GIMR or Kimberly Ann?
I have a pretty good suspicion who it is.
Cute.
I'm GoodK. I hate to put a damper on all the mystery surrounding my real identity... just refer to me as the man(or woman) who defeated Dan Peterson, or as I like to call him, The Professor Dumbeldore of Mormon "apologetics"!
Welcome Good K.
I think you mean Tweedledum, not to be confused with the good Professor William J. (I am not a crook) Hamblin's Tweedledee.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
Moniker wrote:I have no desire to be "good". Yet, I did have an earnest desire to find out who GoodK is. Why would anyone think that was GIMR or Kimberly Ann?
I have a pretty good suspicion who it is.
Cute.
I'm GoodK. I hate to put a damper on all the mystery surrounding my real identity... just refer to me as the man(or woman) who defeated Dan Peterson, or as I like to call him, The Professor Dumbeldore of Mormon "apologetics"!
Oh shoot! Well there goes all the intrigue and paranoia.
Welcome GoodK!
Dr. Peterson frequents this board every so often so you might interact with him again. Glad you made your way over here. :)
Moniker wrote:I have no desire to be "good". Yet, I did have an earnest desire to find out who GoodK is. Why would anyone think that was GIMR or Kimberly Ann?
I have a pretty good suspicion who it is.
Cute.
I'm GoodK. I hate to put a damper on all the mystery surrounding my real identity... just refer to me as the man(or woman) who defeated Dan Peterson, or as I like to call him, The Professor Dumbeldore of Mormon "apologetics"!
That Dumbledore line allows you to rightfully claim "I'm Spartacus!"
Last edited by Anonymous on Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
asbestosman wrote:Also, I'm curious about the 60% you're referring to. I just kinda skimmed that those threads. What was particularly Ed-Deckerish? The whole glass-looker thing? Can't say I'm a fan of that either.
Overall, the 60% was spread out (it wasn't relegated to only one topic). As for the Ed-Deckerish aspect, it mainly occurred in the glass-looker thread, wherein a claim would be made, evidence would be provided countering that claim, fingers would be placed in ears and the same claim would be made again, evidence would be provided countering that claim, fingers would be placed in ears and the same... Also, there was a lot of "I never said that" only two to three posts after he/she actually said exactly the thing he/she was then claiming to have never said.
I don't know if much of it was just an act, or if they were in a particularly antagonistic mood, but it was kind of boggling to read two posts (by him/her) that were so "spot on" and then read three posts that were just plain embarrassing.
I can live with 2 out of 5 I suppose... That 1826 thread wasn't my best work, I'll admit. But it was a dizzying thread... I'm not even sure what the outcome was for that thread before it got shut down besides "you can't prove he was convicted, and if you could, it doesn't mean anything."
