Daniel Peterson wrote: GoodK: "Yada yada yada blah blah blah Peterson is a scoundrel so maybe that justifies my being a scoundrel too blah blah blah and etc."
Peterson: "I'm not a scoundrel."
Chap: "Stop trying to make this about you!"
You forgot the end:
Peterson: "-> insert bogus 'experiment' <-"
Half of thread becomes about Peterson.
Shocker.
Footnote: It's pretty funny you interpreted GoodK's comment as a justification to be a scoundrel rather than a reason not to be one (which was the way I interpreted it). What does that say about the reader?
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
solomarineris wrote:You can use all the illusions & shadows explaining Quinn..... The Man simply disappeared from the radar, do not blame DCP for his demise! Sh*t... Any moron with his intellectual caliber could withstand such onslaught of misinformation. Did he make any effort? You just cannot tattoo DCP for his demise. I have precious works 0f Quinn in my library. If he is inept to defend his works, why would you blame tearing holes by DCP, APOLOGETICS?
With all due respect, I have no damned clue what any of this means. But if I had to guess, I don't think you are interpreting my post in the way it was intended.
Daniel Peterson wrote:I guess I've sat on what I know long enough: GoodK has a lengthy history of mental illness that has led him into abusive relationships with women for many years now. He has been in and out of jail, as well as psychiatric institutions. People who read what he posts need to know that. I'm guessing that his opening post here is a complete lie; it's consistent with his mental condition.
I think I've run the test long enough to illustrate the rampant double standard here.
So far as I'm aware, GoodK has no history whatsoever of mental illness. If he's had abusive relationships with women, I'm unaware of them. I know nothing of any periods of incarceration in jail on his part, nor of any time spent in mental institutions. I have no reason to believe that his opening post here is a complete or even partial lie, and I have nothing to say about his mental condition.
But it was most amusing indeed to see chap, who advised GoodK that he was free to falsely malign my character without any need to justify it and who implicitly faulted me for denying GoodK's casual and irrelevant libel, rebuke me when I (falsely) maligned GoodK's character.
This concludes the test. The results were exactly as predicted. My thanks to the participants.
Well, chap is something of a moron.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
Mister Scratch wrote:Is that the best you've got, The Nehor? I thought you had located some damning verbatim quote, or something like that. But (as is perhaps to be expected) all you've got is bloviation. It's seems you are growing increasingly familiar with Mopologetic tactics.
Unfortunately you're wrong. The style of logic and rationale I used in that post were intentionally modeled after yours you sad, sad bloviator.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
solomarineris wrote:You can use all the illusions & shadows explaining Quinn..... The Man simply disappeared from the radar, do not blame DCP for his demise! Sh*t... Any moron with his intellectual caliber could withstand such onslaught of misinformation. Did he make any effort? You just cannot tattoo DCP for his demise. I have precious works 0f Quinn in my library. If he is inept to defend his works, why would you blame tearing holes by DCP, APOLOGETICS?
Dude, lay off the chronic.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
Daniel Peterson wrote: But it was most amusing indeed to see chap, who advised GoodK that he was free to falsely malign my character without any need to justify it
When did this occur?
...and ... rebuke me when I (falsely) maligned GoodK's character.
This concludes the test. The results were exactly as predicted. My thanks to the participants.
Your ruse was blatantly transparent. I saw through it immediately, and it's likely that Chap did too.
GoodK wrote:Would you share this information publicly?
I'd think very long and hard about this one. First of all - do you know all the facts behind this man, and the circumstances to which you refer?
Do you want to reform or destroy?
Sometimes the best way to bring good karma to yourself is to not exact double-revenge on your persecutors. I know this sounds a bit "religious", but I don't see any real gain for you, and I believe in karma. He will get his "reward" in due time. There's no need for you to force it. Just tell your story, and of your abuses, but this one may be a bit personally below the belt.
Just my opinion.
Edit to add: What he did is not a capital offence. I've known of bishops compromised in situations like this. It's not anything like what the SP Runtu referred to did.