Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Locked
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _Trevor »

Some Schmo wrote:And to whatever male posters are sexually harassing the ladies behind the scenes, well... grow the f*** up. Holy Christ.


Given the number of married men on this board and the few who profess a deep faith in Mormonism or Christianity, I confess I am somewhat surprised by all of this. There was a stretch of time that I was behaving in a somewhat flirtatious fashion out in the open, and I decided it was better to knock that off.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_rcrocket

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _rcrocket »

Pokatator wrote:You are the hypocrite here and everyone knows it.


How so? I wouldn't confuse calling a spade a spade with being a hypocrite. How is one portion of my life inconsistent with another, or one post inconsistent with another?
_rcrocket

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:
Nor do I ever recall any apology; perhaps you did so publicly while I was not participating, but I would hazard a guess that any apology was coupled with a nasty personal jab.


For heaven's sake, I apologized on the very same thread on which I originally made the joke.

by the way, I do regret making the comment about bob's wife thinking about England. That was said in a moment of anger. I apologize to bob for that, but not for the rest of my observations about the "Ms. Scratch" incident.


http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... t&start=42

I have no interest in continuing to participate on this board for various reasons, but the endless back and forth with people like Bob is exhibit A.


That's fine.
_Yoda

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _Yoda »

Schmo wrote:And to whatever male posters are sexually harassing the ladies behind the scenes, well... grow the f*** up. Holy Christ.


Very well spoken, Schmo! :)

Missed ya, buddy!
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _Pokatator »

rcrocket wrote:
Pokatator wrote:You are the hypocrite here and everyone knows it.


How so? I wouldn't confuse calling a spade a spade with being a hypocrite. How is one portion of my life inconsistent with another, or one post inconsistent with another?


I guess I could use other labels other than hypocrite.

You took a little joke about England and blew it way out of portion and now play the victim. You dish it out and then you can't take it.

You blame your marriage and family problems on a message board.

You pretend not to know how to edit a sig line and then edit your sig line. You call that consistent?

You make the mistake of revealing your identity to the world and chastise everyone else for your problems from doing so. By the way any attorney with 2 brain cells that aren't arguing would advise people to stay anonymous on the internet.

I don't need to go on. You are a farce.
I think it would be morally right to lie about your religion to edit the article favorably.
bcspace
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _asbestosman »

Pokatator wrote:By the way any attorney with 2 brain cells that aren't arguing would advise people to stay anonymous on the internet.

An attorney with even more brain cells might try to goad his opponents into revailing their online identities so that it's easier for him to swoop in for the kill.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_rcrocket

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _rcrocket »

Pokatator wrote:I guess I could use other labels other than hypocrite.

You took a little joke about England and blew it way out of portion and now play the victim. You dish it out and then you can't take it.

You blame your marriage and family problems on a message board.

You pretend not to know how to edit a sig line and then edit your sig line. You call that consistent?

You make the mistake of revealing your identity to the world and chastise everyone else for your problems from doing so. By the way any attorney with 2 brain cells that aren't arguing would advise people to stay anonymous on the internet.

I don't need to go on. You are a farce.


I think you should use words other than "hypocrite." You just don't agree with me.

I don't blame my marriage and family problems on a message board and never have. If I have marriage and family problems (really who doesn't) they haven't been revealed to me. I make a lot of joking comments about my seven year old weeping and getting upset about posts people have made about me, but those who can't see them as jokes I suspect have pencil necks and pocket protectors.

I never have made any mistake about revealing my identity. I have used my own identity since before internet message boards and have been consistent ever since. I don't advise people to be anonymous and I have cited opinions which suggest that anonymity leads to boorish and sociopathic behavior.

That little joke about "England," my wife and children bother me not in the least. I don't really care what folks say about me -- GoodK reporting me to state bar, Beastie outing personal details of my life. But, I do like to point out inconsistencies in folks' posts, Beastie in particular. I hope nobody takes offense at that.

Indeed -- it is true -- I cannot use a signature line on this Board. Dr. Shades has disabled that from my account. Free speech my rear end. But I can understand his point of view, my faking to be a mod all the time.

You should not confuse my pointing out personal hypocrisies and illogical posts with me being offended or upset. [Perhaps you can point me to any post where it appears that I have become upset, or have demanded an apology, or any such other silly thing like many of you do.] That, simply, is not the case. Anybody wanting to out me and say nasty things about me -- please feel free to do so. I laugh at you. I laugh at me.
Last edited by _rcrocket on Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_rcrocket

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _rcrocket »

Mister Scratch wrote:I challenge you to a debate on any Mormon subject of your choosing (other than simply debating about this board or the other one, which is what Scratch did when I challenged him to a debate, and unsuccessfully so I might add). I only ask that the personal jabs be left behind.


You lost that debate, Bob. What an embarrassment for you! Also, you chickened out and ran after you were challenged on the issue of FARMS Review's editorial policies.


I just don't recall any such loss. So, no embarrassment here. And, I am not an expert on FARMS Review policies. I only see other journal's policies, and they are remarkably similar to FARMS -- some of them at least.

My offer to debate you on any issue dealing with Church history remains. But, please, don't force me to debate what somebody said or didn't say on this or the other board.
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _Pokatator »

[Mod Scottie note: New mod rules. Personal attack deleted.]
I think it would be morally right to lie about your religion to edit the article favorably.
bcspace
_rcrocket

Re: Harassment On Mormon Discussions.

Post by _rcrocket »

You're indeed welcome. I look for humor on this board, although I don't expect a lot of good feelings when people are so polarized.
Locked