From My Informant: Did Brian Hauglid Betray Schryver?

[_Kishkumen]

There may be, but it is ten times more accurate than any of the factions Scratch has made up (Oaks / Packer factions... really?)

I don't doubt that there are factions in the leadership of the LDS Church. I don't know that Scratch's are accurate, but they are not impossible or even terribly implausible. Pahoran's factions are, simply put, hilarious but fictitious. Maybe the same holds true for the Oaks and Packer factions. In that case I would say that they are pretty equal.

Then you shouldn't do it.

I generally don't "stick it" to the Church of Jesus Christ. First of all, I don't know that such a thing exists. Second, I generally try to avoid "sticking it" to the LDS Church, but I will agree that I have said things that are unflattering and unfair. You are welcome to call my attention to instances in which you think I am being unfair, and I will reconsider my position.

Why? Let people do what they want to do. You don't believe any more, so why care?

Just because I do not believe as you do does not mean I am not a Mormon and do not have any opinion or care about Mormon discussions. We might just as well cite Will's argument that you should not be involved in this on the grounds that he judges you incompetent at it.

[_Pahoran]

Pahoran is a yellow-belt wuss otherwise he wouldn't be running away from me.

You are delusional. I am not running away from you.

I've been trying to get him to address the crucial matters while he is here,

No. You are arrogantly presuming to determine what I'm supposed to regard as "the crucial matters," and then arrogantly demanding that I give them enough attention to satisfy you.

Like you're that important.

but he refuses, and even admitted he is running from me.

I "admitted" no such thing. You are making that up out of whole cloth, as you habitually do.

I visit the threads that interest me, and post such comments as seem me good. The fact that you insist on yapping along behind me does not mean I am running away from you, and indeed your ridiculous assumption that I am borders on the delusional.

And now he wants to start threads over at MAD (where he knows I cannot respond!) accusing me of being some woman on a forum I haven't been on in over a decade. Why? Because he needs to derail.

You're frothing at the mouth, Magdalena. How can a thread I start on another forum possibly "derail" any discussion here?

So now that you're running over to this thread Pahoran, address a few questions and prove you're not a coward.

I don't need to prove anything to you, Magdalena; and if you think you can manipulate me with childish taunts of "Chicken!" then you'd better think again.

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Doctor Scratch]

It's very interesting, amidst all that's been going on, that Pahoran sees fit to attack/insult Kevin by calling him a female name. (I guess Pah has decided that feminizing Kevin is a better means of assaulting him than Pah's usual class/race-based insult? I.e., "The Cracker"?) I daresay that this is quite a misstep on Pahoran's part, though it clearly speaks volumes about the sort of person he is.

[_beastie]

This ranks as one of my favorite posts of all time. It is an instant classic. I laughed long and hard. Pahoran, you're indubitably a third degree black belt polemicist--and I totally mean that as a sincere compliment. Kudos.

Uh oh. You called Pahoran a polemicist.....

Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!

[_Doctor Scratch]

Nah, not really. I think QFL is appropriate, but there are real problems with the characterization (caricature is more accurate).

There may be, but it is ten times more accurate than any of the factions Scratch has made up (Oaks / Packer factions... really?)

I personally don't know for certain whether there really is an "Oaks Faction" or a "Packer Faction." That's simply what I was told. (And actually, it was later clarified to be the "Nelson Faction" rather than the "Oaks Faction.") It does seem plausible given what we know both about the history of the Church and the personalities of these two apostles. Plus, it's just naïve to think that the Brethren agree 100% on issues pertaining to apologetics.

Regardless, what I can tell you with a great deal of confidence is that there are General Authorities who have serious concerns about the tone of Mopologetics.

[_Kishkumen]

Uh oh. You called Pahoran a polemicist.....

Danger, Will Robinson, Danger!

Well, as Daniel Peterson has pointed out, polemics is not a dirty word. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. I think it is a different kind of exercise than apologetics, which Pahoran generally does not do, but it seems to be an important part of what passes for LDS apologetics.

[_beastie]

Well, as Daniel Peterson has pointed out, polemics is not a dirty word. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. I think it is a different kind of exercise than apologetics, which Pahoran generally does not do, but it seems to be an important part of what passes for LDS apologetics.

For your enjoyment...

viewtopic.php?p=456463#p456463

[_Simon Belmont]

That's simply what I was told.

I don't doubt you were told that. The real question is this: why do you believe everything you are told?

[_Kishkumen]

That's simply what I was told.

I don't doubt you were told that. The real question is this: why do you believe everything you are told?

He doesn't. He reports what his informants tell him, and, yes, there are real informants. They are actual people who are not figments of the Good Doctor's imagination.

[_Simon Belmont]

He doesn't. He reports what his informants tell him, and, yes, there are real informants. They are actual people who are not figments of the Good Doctor's imagination.

Oh, I don't doubt they are actual registered members of MDB who PM Scratch. But I happen to have reliable information that says they are playing him for a fool, because they know he will post whatever they tell him.