Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I'm afraid that this will probably be my last response to [Rollo Tomasi] until this evening:

[Rollo Tomasi], though obsessively persistent (in the manner common to chronic Scartcholeptics), is persistently wrong.

I was never paid $20,000.00 per year, nor anything even close to that figure, for my services as chairman of the FARMS board.

The Form 990 still says otherwise.

In the meantime, I note that Jason Bourne doesn't seem to be convinced by [Rollo]'s [statements] regarding the IRS document. Jason Bourne is right on this matter.

Even Jason admits he doesn't know for sure one way or the other.

[Rollo] is, as is his habit, wrong.

Doubtful, given your track record.

As for the multitudes who are, no doubt, following this marvelous exchange with bated breath, they should simply mentally repeat my response whenever they read something on the topic from [Rollo].

As they should with mine.

I simply have other obligations.

We all do.

But, frankly, if I determine that it works to have the audience here simply repeat my response in their minds, I may find it possible to decrease my responses to [Rollo] on this topic to one dose in the morning and one in the evening, or perhaps even merely to one a day.

Gonna take a poll?

I think this would be very healthy for [Rollo], as it would reduce his dependency on me.

My only dependency is on the truth. Consequently, I could never be dependant on you. ;)

[_Mister Scratch]

Out of curiosity, I typed "Scartch" into Google. I had wondered if it was merely DCP's invention, or if there was a precedent. When I typed it in, I learned, thanks to the Urban Dictionary, that this is apparently a vulgar sexual euphemism of some kind. Is DCP unaware of this? Or is he deliberately calling me filthy names?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Out of curiosity, I typed "Scartch" into Google. I had wondered if it was merely DCP's invention, or if there was a precedent. When I typed it in, I learned, thanks to the Urban Dictionary, that this is apparently a vulgar sexual euphemism of some kind. Is DCP unaware of this? Or is he deliberately calling me filthy names?

Wholly unaware of it.

Of course, it's the first article of the creed of Scartchodoxy that I'm a liar, so I expect that my saying so won't get me off the hook.

Guilty!

As always!

[_Mister Scratch]

Out of curiosity, I typed "Scartch" into Google. I had wondered if it was merely DCP's invention, or if there was a precedent. When I typed it in, I learned, thanks to the Urban Dictionary, that this is apparently a vulgar sexual euphemism of some kind. Is DCP unaware of this? Or is he deliberately calling me filthy names?

Wholly unaware of it.

Of course, it's the first article of the creed of Scartchodoxy

You've been informed that this term is vulgar....and yet you are going to continue to use it? Interesting.

[_Daniel Peterson]

You've been informed that this term is vulgar....and yet you are going to continue to use it? Interesting.

I just did a search for the term, and haven't even managed to confirm your claim.

Anyway, what do you expect? For two or three years now, you've been portraying me as a wholly unprincipled villain, a "gossipmongering degenerate." Does your reaction here mean that you don't really believe what you say? (I've always suspected that.)

[_Mister Scratch]

You've been informed that this term is vulgar....and yet you are going to continue to use it? Interesting.

I just did a search for the term, and haven't even managed to confirm your claim.

Oh? Well, then by all means, please continue to engage in your potty-talk, Professor P.!

Anyway, what do you expect? For two or three years now, you've been portraying me as a wholly unprincipled villain, a "gossipmongering degenerate."

That just isn't true. I've posted your own words and commented upon them. If anything, you have "portrayed" yourself as a "gossipmongering degenerate". Really, how else are honest, clear-eyed readers supposed to interpret your l-skinny behavior, your Mike Quinn comments, and your insinuations regarding Robert Ritner? Are we supposed to think you were doing these folks any favors, or that you had their best interests in mind? Are we supposed to believe that you were acting charitably, and in the proper spirit of Christ's teachings? What, in your view, is the most accurate characterization of the way you behaved? If there is some "portrayal" or "spin" going on, then I'm sure you'll be able to provide an accurate, incontrovertible description of the "gossipmongering" behaviors.

Does your reaction here mean that you don't really believe what you say? (I've always suspected that.)

I'm not sure what this means. Don't believe what, your hyperbolic and absurd twisting of what *I* say? No: I don't believe that at all. Do I believe that you have done bad things, and that you should apologize and atone for them? Yes, absolutely.

[_skippy the dead]

For what it's worth, I looked up the Urban Dictionary reference mentioned. It would appear to be nothing more than a typo - the actual "in context" use employs "scratch", not "scartch." If you search Urban Dictionary for "scartch", you'll see three uses, all of which are obviously typos.

Plus, I have a hard time picturing Prof P being that, um, current with urban slang (without meaning to offend the professor, of course).

Just my two cents.

(by the way - I have read only the only first and last pages of this thread - are all 20 pages made up of the same stuff? Yikes!)

[_Daniel Peterson]

Yes, all twenty pages are made of the same stuff.

It's fascinating, in a psychopathological sort of way. Other than that, it holds essentially no interest whatever.

If anything, you have "portrayed" yourself as a "gossipmongering degenerate".

LOL. That's a direct quote from you, you befogged loon.

Really, how else are honest, clear-eyed readers

What would you know about such readers?

supposed to interpret your l-skinny behavior,

Honest, clear-eyed readers who aren't among the fifteen or so people on the closed Skinny-L list would instantly recognize that they're in no position whatever to comment on Skinny-L.

your Mike Quinn comments, and your insinuations regarding Robert Ritner?

As carefully culled and spun by you, or as they were actually made and intended?

Are we supposed to think you were doing these folks any favors, or that you had their best interests in mind? Are we supposed to believe that you were acting charitably, and in the proper spirit of Christ's teachings?

What would you know about charity and Christlikeness in your dealings? I've never seen so much as a trace of either in your treatment of me over the past 2-3 years.

What, in your view, is the most accurate characterization of the way you behaved?

Fundamentally different from the way you've sought to portray it.

If there is some "portrayal" or "spin" going on, then I'm sure you'll be able to provide an accurate, incontrovertible description of the "gossipmongering" behaviors.

I have. For two or three years, intermittently. It's done no good at all. It serves no purpose. You're obsessively malevolent, and there's nothing I can do for you.

your hyperbolic and absurd twisting of what *I* say?

I've quoted you directly.

Do I believe that you have done bad things, and that you should apologize and atone for them? Yes, absolutely.

And I think -- quite seriously -- that you may well be insane.

[_Daniel Peterson]

The following is a standard response: Master Scartch has devoted himself since at least 2006 to publicly defaming me while maintaining his anonymity. I flatly deny virtually every allegation Master Scartch has ever made against me, and this one is no exception. I regard Master Scartch as an obsessive and malevolent loon, and have decided to refrain from further gratifying his weird fixation on me and those connected with me. Attempting conversation with him over the past many months has accomplished precisely nothing, and is, plainly, a complete waste of my time, especially given the fact that it's his self-described "mission" and "amusement" to be "perceived" by "Mopologists" as "full of hate." (Scartch, MDB, 1 October 2008)

[_Ray A]

For what it's worth, I looked up the Urban Dictionary reference mentioned. It would appear to be nothing more than a typo - the actual "in context" use employs "scratch", not "scartch." If you search Urban Dictionary for "scartch", you'll see three uses, all of which are obviously typos.

I checked it up too and it's definitely a typo, which should be "scratch that Kitty".

Webster for "scartch":

The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search bar above.
Suggestions for scartched:

1. scratched 2. screeched
3. scorched 4. scratcher
5. scarphed 6. scratch pad
7. screecher 8. scarred
9. scared 10. scratchers
11. screamed 12. sacred
13. saccharide 14. secured
15. secateur 16. suckered
17. secreted 18. screechers
19. screaked 20. scorcher

The only place I was able to find the word "scartch" was in the Peterson Dictionary of Slang Words.