SMPT in Claremont in Less Than Two Weeks

[_Yoda]

If I had pulled a stunt like Gadianton's -- for months -- there would be no defending me here. Let alone the kind of rather desperate reaching exemplified above.

I thought you'd say that. Not that I can blame you, of course, but here's another take:

If you (or anyone else) had done something like that and tried to get away with it, by, say, covering your tracks, we'd have evidence of attempted deception. In Gadianton's case, he knew from the very beginning that he wouldn't "get away with it" and never expected to do so. Ergo, in his case, it's a form of running satire, not strict deception.

It was pretty elaborate satire, though.....it lasted for months....actually close to a year. For those of us who really aren't up on all of these seminars and how they work, we really didn't "get the joke".

Now, who knows? I guess maybe that was part of it, too? Gad was trying to make any of us who weren't "in the know"....even those of us who have basically supported Gad in many of his previous arguments....look foolish. Well, he accomplished his task.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I don't really have hard feelings toward Gad....However, I will admit that from this point forward, I will basically not take ANYTHING he has to say seriously.

Come on now, Liz. You'll never take "ANYTHING" he says seriously? *ANYTHING*, *ever*? In the whole history of the messageboard, forever and forever, ad infinitum? That seems pretty reactionary and over-the-top---pretty black-and-white, absolutist, and "Sith-like," if you know what I mean.

What was confusing for some of us...at least those of us who are, perhaps, stupid enough to be somewhat trusting of folks here....is that prior to Gad's bringing up the subject of speaking at Claremont, he had expressed thoughts and feelings through his posts that were indicative of being, for lack of a better phrase, "a real person".

I don't think you're being fair at all, Liz. You have shown over and over again that you don't "follow" many of these inquisitions into Mopologetics. (I have often found myself trying to clarify your inquiries on things which, I'll admit, have gotten pretty complex.) You'll often say that you find the discussions "boring," or "lame," or whatever else. (E.g., the $20,000 payment, which you don't seem to understand the significance of. Whenever I've made an effort to clarify this issue, you just tell me to "shut up," or "drop it," or whatever else.)

So: I don't get why you'd feel that you were made to feel "stupid" here, Liz. I think that if you had taken a genuine interest in all these discussions on the history of Mopologetics, and if you hadn't just dismissed them as "lame" or "boring" or "repetitive or "dumb" or whatever else, that Gadianton's presentation might not have been so "blurry" for you.

I wonder if this is just an instance of people treating things too personally? I.e., were you interested in the actual content and meaning of Gad's presentation? Or, for you, was it more of an issue of, "Oh, hey, here's someone doing something in real life, and I want to be all friendly and caring and to show that I'm taking an interest in this person's in real life life, & etc."?

For what it's worth, Daniel Peterson is one of the few apologists who has consistently treated me with respect, even when we have disagreed, and has always been very willing to answer my questions.

This seems totally disconnected from everything you just said. What does your liking of DCP have to do with your feelings re: Gad's presentation? Or with criticism of Mopologetics more generally? You like DCP...so...Gad made you feel "stupid", and criticism of Mopologetics is "too bad"? I guess what I'm saying is that I don't get your point re: DCP. Yeah, sure, he's been nice to you, has shown an interest in your singing, etc., but so what? He has been genuinely cruel and horrible to hundreds of other people, myself and Harmony and GoodK among them.

Now, who knows? I guess maybe that was part of it, too? Gad was trying to make any of us who weren't "in the know"....even those of us who have basically supported Gad in many of his previous arguments....look foolish. Well, he accomplished his task.

Why do you think you were made to "look foolish"? Would you feel foolish if you thought that an apologist was going to present on Book of Mormon historicity at a major, academic history conference?

[_Dr. Shades]

Gad was trying to make any of us who weren't "in the know"....even those of us who have basically supported Gad in many of his previous arguments....look foolish.

How so? Gad was trying to prove a point about the insubstantiveness of Mopologetics, nothing more.

Well, he accomplished his task.

How do you figure? I didn't awaken to his modus operandi until much later, but now that I know the purpose of the exercise, I don't feel foolish at all.

[Guest]

edited, incorrect term.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Gad was trying to prove a point about the insubstantiveness of Mopologetics, nothing more.

Has he explained that that was his purpose?

If so, I haven't seen that explanation. And, even if he said so, can you take his explanation at face value? On what basis?

Besides, how was his stunt supposed to "prove" anything about LDS apologetics? You seem to be operating under a rather unconventional definition of "proof."

[_Dr. Shades]

Gad was trying to prove a point about the insubstantiveness of Mopologetics, nothing more.

Has he explained that that was his purpose?

No. He didn't need to; doing so would've been like explaining a joke: Doing so causes a loss of impact.

Besides, how was his stunt supposed to "prove" anything about LDS apologetics? You seem to be operating under a rather unconventional definition of "proof."

In that case, let me rephrase: His action was supposed to "illustrate" something.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

My mistake, what I intended to say was that it seems this is an explanation that was developed after the fact, not that Gad had this in mind from the start, but perhaps needed a way to explain his earlier fib. That is sheer speculation on my part, however.

[_Yoda]

I don't think you're being fair at all, Liz. You have shown over and over again that you don't "follow" many of these inquisitions into Mopologetics. (I have often found myself trying to clarify your inquiries on things which, I'll admit, have gotten pretty complex.) You'll often say that you find the discussions "boring," or "lame," or whatever else. (E.g., the $20,000 payment, which you don't seem to understand the significance of. Whenever I've made an effort to clarify this issue, you just tell me to "shut up," or "drop it," or whatever else.)

What I find tiresome are your repeated inquisitions on Daniel's character. You rehash the same issues over and over again. Inquisitions involving Mopologetics in general, can be rather fascinating. I often lurk on Kevin's threads involving Book of Abraham, or Beastie's threads involving Book of Mormon archeology (or the lack of evidence thereof). I also enjoy Uncle Dale's threads involving Joseph Smith's background. These are all hot button topics which apologists tackle, and it is very interesting to see how critics handle these issues. It is quite educational.

But frankly, Scratch, it seems like you have elevated Daniel to some czar level of importance in the world of apologetics, and are determined to "bring him down" simply because he has done some things that have pissed you off personally. I'm not saying that I agree with your treatment at MAD, or anything like that. If you recall, I was one of your most staunch supporters.

But this whole $20K business has been discussed to death. After YOU explained your perception, Jason, myself, and countless others who have actually dealt with professional situations where an employee is loaned to another department tried to explain to YOU how this worked. You continued on your crusade of persistently accusing DCP of fraud, lying about his income and possibly on his taxes, etc. Those are very serious accusations. And, the fact that there were multiple posters on this board who, whether you believe it or not, LIKE you and are FRIENDS with you told you to cease that argument because it made YOU look foolish seems to have completely escaped you.

I wonder if this is just an instance of people treating things too personally? I.e., were you interested in the actual content and meaning of Gad's presentation? Or, for you, was it more of an issue of, "Oh, hey, here's someone doing something in real life, and I want to be all friendly and caring and to show that I'm taking an interest in this person's in real life life, & etc."?

Actually, Scratch, you are 100% correct. That is EXACTLY what it amounts to. Pardon me for actually viewing posters here as real people with real lives. When Gad announced that he was speaking at Claremont, he seemed genuinely excited about it. He had stated in the past that he was involved in academia, so, yes, I did think that he was sharing something that he was doing in real life. I am genuinely interested and supportive of posters here who share what they are doing in real life. Is that not something we're suppose to do here? You word it like that's a stupid thing to do. Gad has always seemed like a nice person. He has also come across as a very knowledgeable individual about a variety of subjects. I congratulated him and was supportive of his accomplishment. As far as being interested in the subject matter of his presentation, yes, I was interested. He, however, remained very vague about the content, his reasoning being that he really couldn't discuss it in detail until the conference was actually underway.

Come on now, Liz. You'll never take "ANYTHING" he says seriously? *ANYTHING*, *ever*? In the whole history of the messageboard, forever and forever, ad infinitum? That seems pretty reactionary and over-the-top---pretty black-and-white, absolutist, and "Sith-like," if you know what I mean.

LOL! OK, Scratch....Lord knows, I don't want to be referred to as a Sith.

Let's just say that I will be leery of Gad's future comments, because the question that will always be in the back of my mind will be, "Is Gad speaking as Gad, or is he speaking as Dr. Robbers-Cassius Professor?"

[_Gadianton]

Coming soon to MDB: If I Did It: Confessions of a SMPT Imposter

[_Ray A]

Personally, I think Scratch's talents are being wasted. Get thine eyes on the MAD board, for lo and behold the harvest is ripe and ready to be reaped with the sickle. Forget the past, Scratch, nothing is going to change that. Your critical and scrutinising eyes need to focus on the present!

24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.
25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;
26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord. (D&C 112)