Book of Mormon apologetic of last resort?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Incidentally, I may well be the only participant on these boards who has actually met Pahoran in the flesh.

I've spent a fair amount of time with him in New Zealand, on several quite separate occasions. I've been in his home, met his wife, driven with him, and eaten with him. So, to a lesser extent, has my wife.

I've found him a very pleasant and kind person.

Now, let the attacks begin!

[Guest]

I've found him a very pleasant and kind person.

Well, I've met Pahoran online where he is not a very pleasant and kind person. He's actually one of the most vicious people I've encountered. Since he is talking with real people and isn't talking with computer generated bots, that is a part of who he is and how he relates to others just as much as his personal relationship with a fellow apologist.

[_The Nehor]

I've found him a very pleasant and kind person.

Well, I've met Pahoran online where he is not a very pleasant and kind person. He's actually one of the most vicious people I've encountered. Since he is talking with real people isn't talking with computer generated bots, that is a part of who he is and how he relates to others just as much as his personal relationship with a fellow apologist.

Wait a minute....are you suggesting that Scratch, Antishock, Gadianton, and Porter are all real people? I'll never sleep well again. Thanks a lot.

[_beastie]

Beastie snarled,

LOL! That brings back memories.

Sort of. Pahoran tended to get off easier than other people in the same position would. Really, his cumulative behavior would've resulted in a much harsher dealing for most other posters.

Yes, I agree, Pahoran got off much easier. It was a constant bone of contention between me and the other mods. Pac readily admitted a personal bias and fondness for Pahoran, and just would not agree to anything other than a temporary banning or slap on the wrist. I frequently pointed out to them that as long as Pahoran was treated with kid gloves, when everyone knew he was the most inflammatory poster on the board, and had been for a long time, then the even-handed moderation of the board would (rightly) come under criticism. So I should have qualified my statements about the moderating team/Pahoran. But still, far more even handed than FAIR/MAD.

As far as apologists who have publically rebuked Pahoran, I recall Kerry Shirts on occasion telling Pahoran - once calling him by his first name - very politely telling him to knock it off. In private, the most common response I got seemed to be that Pahoran is a force of logic and argument (and Pahoran really is to Mormonism what Droopy is to politics. So let that sink in.) who just goes a little too far at times.

He may have, but he also defended Pahoran's inexcusable behavior at times, like here:

Pahoran

My favorite Pahoran thread, which I can't currently locate much to my chagrin, is where he tried to build a case that exmormons are prone to violence against Mormons by referring to an australian murder case where an excommunicated Mormon killed his family. Zoobie kindly provided lots of details about that case to me, and it turned out that Pahoran left out come inconvenient details - like that the man was a diagnosed schizophrenic who was still a bizarre believer of sorts. He'd been ex'd not due to apostasy but due to violent behavior in the past.

I've spent a fair amount of time with him in New Zealand, on several quite separate occasions. I've been in his home, met his wife, driven with him, and eaten with him. So, to a lesser extent, has my wife.

I've found him a very pleasant and kind person.

I have no doubt this is true. Most people manage to be pleasant and kind in real life, even if they behave like inflammatory buffoons on the internet. And, of course, the fact that you're on Pahoran's side should not be ignored.

But the point I made is beyond refutation, in my opinion - Pahoran easily behaved far, far, far worse than Kevin ever did (and I do not deny that Kevin does behave badly at times), and yet very few (Kerry Shirts, perhaps, from EA's memory) ever publicly rebuked him. In fact, when critics complained about him, other believers often were quite effusive in their praise (see the thread I linked at the beginning of this post). I came to conclude that believers really enjoyed Pahoran because he had the nerve to engage in the outrageous sort of behavior they would like to themselves, but could not quite bring themselves to do, so they enjoyed it vicariously through Pahoran.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Wait a minute....are you suggesting that Scratch, Antishock, Gadianton, and Porter are all real people? I'll never sleep well again. Thanks a lot.

Stay calm. I can't imagine he was suggesting that.

You and I may be Mormons, but, even so, he can't possibly imagine that we're that gullible. I think he was pulling your leg.

[_MsJack]

I've met lots of people, perfectly nice and pleasant people in real life, who could be extremely volatile on the Internet. Being a nice guy in real life doesn't mean much where forums behavior is concerned. Anyone who's on this thread saying Kevin's too volatile to talk to on the Internet, well, I can tell you he's a pretty damn nice guy in real life. It is much, much easier to be an ass to someone through a computer screen than it is in real life. Do I need to post my E-Thugs picture again?

Several of the mods at ZLMB felt that Pahoran needed a harsher punishment. At the time I'd have kicked him if it'd been my call to make, and I'm someone who very, very rarely got into arguments with Pahoran myself. Watching him interact with others, it wasn't hard to see who was regularly looking for new ways to break ZLMB's rules. But it wasn't my call to make, it was Pacumeni's, and in the end Pacumeni always stuck up for him and wanted to just give him some kind of warning.

Things have changed over the years and truth be told, I no longer have a problem with people being sarcastic, snide, or rude in their posts. Makes it more entertaining, and why do we bother with these discussions if not to be entertained?

But I do have a problem with double standards, saying one person breaks the rules too much and has to go while looking the other way when someone else does the same thing. And I don't see how anyone can deny that there have always been double standards in play where Pahoran is concerned.

[_Daniel Peterson]

In my case, just to be clear, it's not a matter of "double standards."

I simply don't see myself as an internet judge. I respond where I want to, when I want to, to whom I want to respond, regarding whatever I want to respond to.

I'm happy to let moderators be moderators.

[_beastie]

In my case, just to be clear, it's not a matter of "double standards."

I simply don't see myself as an internet judge. I respond where I want to, when I want to, to whom I want to respond, regarding whatever I want to respond to.

I'm happy to let moderators be moderators.

So then my original statement was pretty much correct, wasn't it? Fellow apologists most likely wouldn't have had a problem with Kevin's behavior, had he toed the party line (or, in your personal case, the Islamic party line). This has been adequately demonstrated through our test case, Pahoran.

[_Ray A]

I've met lots of people, perfectly nice and pleasant people in real life, who could be extremely volatile on the Internet. Being a nice guy in real life doesn't mean much where forums behavior is concerned. Anyone who's on this thread saying Kevin's too volatile to talk to on the Internet, well, I can tell you he's a pretty damn nice guy in real life. It is much, much easier to be an ass to someone through a computer screen than it is in real life. Do I need to post my

True dat.

[_MsJack]

I'll just say this much: I agree that it's not DCP's job to take Pahoran to task. It's the job of the moderators, and the fact that he's still there at MADB when critics get banned for the slightest hint of an infraction is proof enough of the bias there. But what does DCP care? He's just a guy that posts there.

And if DCP and Pahoran did disagree on anything so that it required him to engage Pahoran in arguments as he had to do with Kevin for Islam, perhaps then he would have felt the same way about Pahoran's behavior as he does about Kevin's. But that's just not the case.