Double Standard--Question for Will, et. al. from MAD

[_cksalmon]

I don't appreciate your attempt to drag me into your quarrel. Leave me out of it.

I have no quarrel with Schryver, really. As I've stated, I think he is probably incorrigible. My interest in his comments was greatly increased when he chose to bring FARMS into the picture. Thus, my badgering of you.

*dropping it*

[_Chap]

Chap deserves godhood and seventy virgins for this post alone.

I can think of no way of replying to this kindly remark without at least the appearance of falling into the errors for which Schryver has repeatedly and properly been castigated. So I shall preserve a modest reticence.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Thanks to Tarski and, in the end, to CKSalmon. This simply isn't of any interest, relevance, or concern to me -- though defending the Maxwell Institute and my friends there against potential slander is.

Well, duh. Don't you think you should familiarize yourself with an argument before taking sides on it?

That's my point: I haven't paid much attention to this argument. I'm not going to take sides in it. I'm not interested in it. But when I'm asked whether people at the Maxwell Institute love crude sexual references and/or follow this board with rapt attention, I'm quite capable of replying that, so far as I'm aware -- and I'm in an exceptionally good position to have noticed -- not a single one does.

And, having said that, I've said as much as I care to say, as clearly as I can say it. Beyond that, I haven't paid much attention to this argument, I'm not going to take sides in it, and I'm not interested in it.

I'll let you in on one last thing here, Will said nothing about the MI or its current administration and main participants. He's only spoken of FARMS. Since I don't believe FARMS exists anymore, I'd think his "FARMS friends" were made years ago probably.

FARMS still exists as a department or section of the Maxwell Institute.

Now, I do have to say that knowing Midgley has thrown around words like "queer" jokingly, that I could see him silently taking satisfaction in Will's crude humor. But honestly, that thought wouldn't have even entered my mind if Will hadn't just come right out and boasted about the laid-back FARMS crowd he migles with who like it served a little "off color" occasionally.

Well, if Lou Midgley is following anything here, he hasn't mentioned it to me. And I receive e-mails from him every single day -- he's part of the sinister cabal known as Skinny-L, after all! -- and I speak with him either on the phone or in person typically about once a week.

In any event, Professor Midgley is, as I've said, long since retired (from Political Science at BYU). He was never an officer of FARMS or of the Maxwell Institute, and was never part of the leadership of either FARMS or the Institute.

[_Gadianton]

though defending the Maxwell Institute...

Looks like a a tough job.

In any event, Professor Midgley is, as I've said, long since retired (from Political Science at BYU). He was never an officer of FARMS or of the Maxwell Institute, and was never part of the leadership of either FARMS or the Institute.

I guess that means he couldn't be one of Will's "FARMS friends" since FARMS is only composed of leaders and officers. It's really top heavy.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I guess that means he couldn't be one of Will's "FARMS friends" since FARMS is only composed of leaders and officers. It's really top heavy.

Well, if it's alleged that someone connected with the New York Yankees is a serial killer, and then it turns out that the killer simply used to sit in the right field bleachers for the occasional home game, that's rather different than saying he was a starting pitcher, a member of the coaching staff, or an executive with the team's general management, don't you think?

The Maxwell Institute has a very small staff and some leaders. Most of the writing is done by people who aren't on staff, aren't paid, have no say in the direction of the organization, may not even be personally known to the Institute's leaders, and don't represent it. There are several hundred such people. And there are several thousand subscribers.

Is the Institute responsible for the tastes and activities of its subscribers?

In any event, there is no evidence that Lou Midgley loves crude sexual references and/or that he follows this board at all, let alone faithfully.

[_Gadianton]

don't you think?

Absolutely. But it was never stated or insinuated that the two culprits Will is protecting are among FARMS leadership or among the most important contributors. Our best guess -- and don't blame us for guessing because anytime someone says "according to my sources" we naturally wonder who the sources are -- is to look at Will's previous name drops.

So while you're going into damage control mode to protect the beating heart of the MI:

Are the current leaders covered? (check)
Are the officiators covered? (check)
Are the key current staff writers covered? (check)

I'm simply trying to think of who Will knows that he'd associate with FARMS and figure out from there which one of those have exhibited borderline taste, language, and manners, as they'd be the most likely suspects. He might even be lying. In fact, if I were you, I'd call him to the carpet on it and at least demand via private message to make his list. But how to protect the Maxwell institute and at the same time protect the two bad apples let alone Will himself all at the same time and put all the blame on the nasty critics?

That's the real challenge of the apologist. So you'll probably continue to go that route.

I don't know, it seems like either Will has grown tired of our lesser intellects and our dirty trailer park and has retired again to his mansion in the Country with its vast stables like unto those of King Lamoni's of old, or that he's realized his mistake and is laying low now.

But maybe he's been warned about his implication of FARMS?

That's possible too.

[_Daniel Peterson]

But how to protect the Maxwell institute and at the same time protect the two bad apples let alone Will himself all at the same time and put all the blame on the nasty critics?

That's the real challenge of the apologist. So you'll probably continue to go that route.

What "blame" have I put on what "nasty critics"?

I've simply said -- repeatedly and then over and over again and then repeatedly again and then a few dozen times more, as it seems that I need to do in this gathering place of slow learners -- that it strikes me as quite unlikely that anybody formally associated with the Maxwell Institute follows this place regularly and that I simply don't believe that any of the leaders or the staff there have expressed a particular relish for crude sexual humor.

But maybe he's been warned about his implication of FARMS?

That's possible too.

And it opens up virtually limitless vistas for the spinning of paranoid fantasies!

[_Gadianton]

that it strikes me as quite unlikely that anybody formally associated with the Maxwell Institute follows this place regularly and that I simply don't believe that any of the leaders or the staff there have expressed a particular relish for crude sexual humor.

And your observation is even more redundant given that it seems no one on this thread believes Will for this very reason. Except me.

Have you PM'd Will yet on this?

[_Daniel Peterson]

And your observation is even more redundant given that it seems no one on this thread believes Will for this very reason. Except me.

That doesn't reflect positively on you.

Have you PM'd Will yet on this?

Anything from Will that I would feel free to disclose here is something that Will can easily disclose himself.

Why should I be Will's go-between?

I feel no need to serve as Will's messenger, any more than I felt the need to "distance myself" from him or to pronounce public judgment on him regarding issues that neither concern nor interest me.

Will is Will. I am not Will.

[_beastie]

Could it be that Will is really an exmormon mole? He almost seems to be working for the "other" side.