Peterson: "Get a life" -- priceless!

[_Daniel Peterson]

True, unlike the likes of Peterson, I do have a very fulfilling life outside of message boards.

Precisely correct. As people who know me realize, I have utterly no life -- no interests, no friends, no family, no achievements, no activities, no responsibilities, no nothing -- apart from message boards.

While the other guys are out playin' with the football
I'm at home bangin' on the keys.
And it's got me
Right were I am. This is me
Playin' with Pal Joey.
I guess ya loathe what I do.
Good for you, and I'll try and sing right too.

(With not very sincere apologies to one of my least favorite old duos.)

[_Gadianton]

LoP,

You know darn well that you are twisting my words. Do these kinds of tactics of yours explain why you are a *former* member of the Society of Professional Journalists?

When I compliment Scratch's style, I'm complimenting his ability to engage the reader and make his material interesting. Peterson does a pretty good job in this regard, but some of the other apologists really give me a headache trying to follow them.

[_antishock8]

True, unlike the likes of Peterson, I do have a very fulfilling life outside of message boards.

Precisely correct. As people who know me realize, I have utterly no life -- no interests, no friends, no family, no achievements, no activities, no responsibilities, no nothing -- apart from message boards.

If you are what you say you are
A superstar
Then have no fear
Then Mr. Scratch is here
and the exmo's they wanna know
Oh oh oh oh

And you better wear your shades
The spotlights here can burn holes through the 'net
Down through the basement
Past the Indian graves
Where the tapirs laid
And out through Zar'hemla
Nearly misses air liners
Magnified times five
This is pointed at the Docta'
Ricochets off the moon and sets the forest ablaze
Now that's important to say
Cuz even with all of that
Most of us don't want it to fade
We want it to braid
Meaning we want it to grow
Meaning we want it to stay
Like the Docta' called
And they told him to wait
Un-strap him from the chair
And put him back in his cage
The audience ain't fazed
And they ain't gon' clap and they ain't gon' praise
They want everything back that they paid
Cuz they been waiting since then to see his lights dim

uh uh

If you are what you say you are
A superstar
Then have no fear
The Scratch be here
and the exmo's they wanna know
Oh oh oh oh

[_LifeOnaPlate]

LoP,

You know darn well that you are twisting my words. Do these kinds of tactics of yours explain why you are a *former* member of the Society of Professional Journalists?

Nope. I simply didn't renew membership based on time constraints, new job, and inability to contribute meaningfully while pursuing other things. I very well may become a member again, shockingly. (If they let me, of course! Here's to hoping Scratch doesn't contact them; or hey, Kevin Graham.)

When I compliment Scratch's style, I'm complimenting his ability to engage the reader and make his material interesting. Peterson does a pretty good job in this regard, but some of the other apologists really give me a headache trying to follow them.

Yes, deep thoughts can cause drowning. Scratch's tabloid controversy-laden suspicious, ridiculous style apparently does grab the attention of certain types of people. There is a niche for Scartch's style. For example, ratings for "Nancy Grace" in her 8 p.m. ET/5 PT time slot increased about 180% in 2005, continuing to climb since then. In '05 it represented the most growth of any cable news show that year. Her show is flamboyant, uses a lot of exclamation marks, drastic music, innuendo and condemnation. For some reason she has viewers (though the numbers pale to Bill O'Reilly and other windbag "news" personalities). People actually purchase and read the National Enquirer, too. They must have a penchant for making things interesting, I suppose.

[_John Larsen]

The Internet Mormon's M.O.:

1) Declare anti-Mormons are rude, then act rudely.

2) Declare anti-Mormons have no life, then spend life on anti-Mormon boards.

3) Declare anti-Mormons are stupid, then believe in Mormonism.

4) Ignore fellow Mormons' bad behavior, then point out all perceived slights against self or other Mormons.

5) Stomp foot, and exit in a huff. Come back. Repeat when embarrassed.

6) Ignore logic or doctrinal issues and engage in ad hom and red herrings. Get mad if someone follows suit.

True that.

[_Gadianton]

LoP,

I see that you will not be deterred from twisting my words. I'm really digging myself into a hole by continuing to respond to you. But I guess in my love for honesty, I'll try one more time. Simply put, good writing doesn't have to be boring. Scratch has a way at presenting important topics in a readable, interesting way. It's a real talent. If you want to continue to distort what I say, and make it look like the only writers who can grab attention are yellow journalists, please, go ahead. You may freely speak your mind on this forum. But I have nothing more to say on the matter for now.

[_Daniel Peterson]

True that.

Correction:

False that.

(Happy to help.)

[_LifeOnaPlate]

LoP,

I see that you will not be deterred from twisting my words. I'm really digging myself into a hole by continuing to respond to you. But I guess in my love for honesty, I'll try one more time. Simply put, good writing doesn't have to be boring. Scratch has a way at presenting important topics in a readable, interesting way. It's a real talent. If you want to continue to distort what I say, and make it look like the only writers who can grab attention are yellow journalists, please, go ahead. You may freely speak your mind on this forum. But I have nothing more to say on the matter for now.

I am personally addressing Scartch's style and substance. The National Enquirer was mentioned, not because of quality prose, but because of specious and lurid content. As pointed out, what one finds engaging writing another may find annoying, ham-fisted, bizarre, or downright obsessive and creepy.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Well, it is good you two have achieved a mutually symbiotic relationship even if it is not amiable.

Cet animal est très mechant. Quand on l'attaque, il se défend.

[_Mister Scratch]

Let's take the "racist" example. I defy you to supply a single example of me ever directly stating, "DCP is a racist." The fact is that you just aren't going to be able to find such an utterance.

This is excellent progress.

Let's make the situation very clear by your responding to a pair of related propositions:

"I, Mister Scratch, have no reason to regard Daniel Peterson as a racist." Yes [ ] No [ ]

"I, Mister Scratch, have no reason to regard Daniel Peterson as an anti-Semite." Yes [ ] No [ ]

When you've clearly responded to these two propositions, we can move on to other areas.

I would honestly and whole-heartedly respond "no" to both options. That said, I cannot speak for the many other people who have observed your behavior on these boards. Moreover, as per your own logic, you would be considered a "racist" on the basis of the fact that you (in your own words) caution people about interracial marriage. Feel free to elaborate on this subject if you have the nerve.

Thinking things over a bit, I probably should state that *some* things I have observed among certain Mopologists certainly *are* "racist" and/or "anti-semitic", notably Professor Hamblin's RfM tirade. I certainly hope he apologizes for that.