People have waited a quarter century for Metcalfe, who has long promised but never delivered even a single line of KEP analysis.
This is a lie. Will and others love to exaggerate this point for some reason, but Metcalfe has made no "promise" and the earliest I was aware of him ever mentioning a book was in late 2001. Since that time he has had some serious life changes that have seriously limited his time to dedicate to such an endeavor (i.e. he was employed by Microsoft working 50+ hrs/week, went through a divorce, etc).
People waited 6 years while Brian Hauglid prepared his mildly annotated transcription of the Abraham manuscripts.
This is another falsehood. No one ever waited for a "mildly annotated transcription" of anything, even though that is what we got. On the contrary, and thanks to three years of hype by Will Schryver himself, everyone anxiously awaited a volume that consisted of detailed apologetic arguments relying on text critical analysis; arguments which, we were told on numerous occasions, would decimate for good the critical view on a number of points. That never happened. Will would slam Metcalfe for failing to keep a promise he never made, but fall into denial when he tells us for years that Hauglid will publish XYZ, and then he changes his mind in mid-publication. Hauglid apparently wants no part of this anymore, and I can't say I blame him. As Mr. Schryver gradually enforced himself onto the scene as an expert (as opposed to his three year claim of being nothing more than an interested bystander who wants to document the debate from afar), Book of Abraham apologetics has been turned into a very dirty enterprise. I doubt you could even google those words and not come up with Schryver's name. Who the hell wants to be associated with that? While Hoskinsen and Skousen undoubtedly know nothing of Schryver's online behavior as the self-anointed spokesperson for Book of Abraham apologists, Hauglid and others know it well.
I have been in possession of the high-res scans of the documents for a little over one year now. I’m inclined to think it reasonable for me to take at least a year or two to more formally articulate what already constitutes the single largest body of substantive analysis of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers put forth in the almost half century since they and the Joseph Smith Papyri burst into the public consciousness (an admittedly dubious distinction, perhaps, considering the virtual vacuum of analysis that preceded my FAIR conference presentation).
You've claimed to have had those "Hi-Res scans" much longer than a year. You shoud really work on getting your story straight, Will. Especially since you're the one who is notorious for false advertisement, empty promises and blatant deception. You have a lot of making up to do.
But then, my standards are not your standards; my ways not your ways.
Very true. As a true scholar who actually knows what he is talking about, Kish has standards. As a babbling fool who likes to pretend to be a scholar, you have none. The very idea of FARMS treating you as a serious scholar ready to pump out volumes of wasted paper on your idiotic KEP arguments, over the course of the next decade, is pretty damn hilarious, and from my view, just too good to be true. I hope the various efforts to get you thrown off their publication list, fails miserably. Having FARMS stamp their approval on your work would be one of the greatest moments in anti-Mormon history, and they could never, ever, pretend to have credibility again. The only thing that could possibly be better is if Dan adds you to his list of Mormon "scholars" who testify on his silly website.