Boy, was I wrong

[_Droopy]

I didn't want to return to this cesspool, but personal integrity demands it of me. I recently learned that Will's NAMI (or whatever the journal's name is) articles have been given the boot.

This means that not only was I terribly wrong about the influence of this "backwater" board on LDS apologetic decision-making, but Scratch's network of informants is evidently not entirely incorrect in what they expose.

Clearly, the threats and smear campaign from many here at MD worked in silencing Will Schryver even among his own. I didn't think that was possible, but I obviously seriously under estimated the power of this mob--which is ironic given how the mob prides itself on free speech and has complained long and hard about censorship in certain quarters. At least this is one way to avoid having to confront Will's arguments.

Now that Will is out of the way, it will be interesting to see who next gets targeted for lynching.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, Will is a warthog. Good for nothing but kicking up dust. Get over it.
I resisted and ignored most of the anti-willistics until I read his recent 'lost tooth' account of how he openly shamed a young lady at a home town dance as a teenager. The fact that he bragged about it today when he could have just said it differently tanked him from all respectable considerations. That little girl probably had a crush on him and he probably knew it. He openly exulted in verbal child abuse of the most heinous sort and was gleeful about how she became a tramp later in life. A trophy? Predator! Criminal!

If you want to stake a claim as a serious apologist, man, have the guts to pick something significant and not the most obscure insignificant object in LDS history. Dust. Just dust.

One thing Will does know how to do is push the buttons of people like you and a number of others here. He knows their expectations of him, both real and imagined, and he fulfills them when the opportunity presents itself.

I'm sure Will has a great deal of fun running all of the sainted, holier-than-thou liberals and the apostate Goof Troop here that prides itself on its moral piousness -- when digging for dirt against apologists, but who are notably unconcerned with the same when flapping their wings among themselves -- through the paces, over and over again, of their own sanctimonious pseudo-anguish and moral outrage at Will's few off color comments and personal jabs at others (while conveniently ignoring the longstanding tradition -- by many of Will's staunchest moral finger waggers -- of four letter calumny and savage ad hominem well poisoning that has arguable defined much of what has gone on here since this board's inception).

Will has the power to bring them out of the woodwork, all chitinous legs flailing, at any time he so chooses, and there is doubtless a method behind the madness. Interesting that Will doesn't leave well enough alone and cease mentioning his claimed treatment of or comments regarding females in his past, so interesting, in fact, that I have little doubt that what he's really doing here is just throwing chum in the water and watching the feeding frenzy.

It makes me actually wonder just how accurate some of the comments Will has made regarding his own behavior really are, and how much of what he says is simply bait for the hungry piranha.

[_harmony]

I don't, and never have viewed the world as anything close to that. I am grateful that much of the world is not cesspoolish like this place. To me, most people around the world know how to behave in ways that are healthy, mutually edifying, and not socially repelling. And, I wish the same for the participants here.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Let's start with Will, then. A reformed Will, one who is healthy, edifying, and socially attractive, would be such a change, a person might be justified in thinking he'd finally converted!

Then we can progress to you, Wade, and to Pahoran and to Droopy and to...

Somehow I doubt that's going to happen though.

[_wenglund]

Okay, help me understand where you're coming from here, Wade:

A) Schryver makes multiple posts that some folks find offensive.

Yes, on a board that reeks of offense from a broad range of parties, people here targeted a few posts by Will that they found offensive, and devoted thread after thread to smearing him.

B) The powers that be at NAMI are (allegedly) troubled enough by Schryver's posts (coupled, possibly, with concerns expressed by Brian Hauglid and/or David Bokovoy) that they decide they don't want to publish Schryver's stuff at this time.

I have no idea what all was considered by NAMI, nor do I have any idea what all went through the minds of the powers that be at NAMI when making their decision, nor do I care since it isn't any of my business.

C) (Oh yeah, MsJack compiled a lot of Will's more objectionable posts into one convenient location with links to the original discussions so Will's posts could be read in their complete and proper context.)

That was certainly a small part of the threats and smear campaign.

Your reactions:

A)

B)

C)

I must have missed where I reacted that way.

Have I got that about right?

I will let you tell me since you evidently think you know me better than I know myself.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Droopy]

Let's start with Will, then. A reformed Will, one who is healthy, edifying, and socially attractive, would be such a change, a person might be justified in thinking he'd finally converted!

Then we can progress to you, Wade, and to Pahoran and to Droopy and to...

Somehow I doubt that's going to happen though.

Or, we could start with "Harmony" (whoever she is) and try to figure out how she keeps getting those darned Temple recommends when she can't honestly give the appropriate answer to a substantial portion of the recommend questions, not to mention being, for all intents, thoroughly apostate intellectually from probably 97% of the doctrines taught by the Church on any subject - privately, in any event (and here).

Its always good to get the beam out of our own eyes first, is it not?

[_wenglund]

Let's start with Will, then. A reformed Will, one who is healthy, edifying, and socially attractive, would be such a change, a person might be justified in thinking he'd finally converted!

Then we can progress to you, Wade, and to Pahoran and to Droopy and to...

Somehow I doubt that's going to happen though.

Ironically, a healthy, edifying, and sociably attractive mind would start with itself.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Droopy]

A) Schryver makes multiple posts that some folks find offensive.

Or claim to. Doesn't it strike you as odd to have people like Kishkumen, Graham, and Polygamy Porter wagging their fingers at Will for being "offensive?"

Further, we are talking about, as Will himself pointed out, a tiny, indeed vanishingly small fraction of all the posts he's made in as many years.

B) The powers that be at NAMI are (allegedly) troubled enough by Schryver's posts (coupled, possibly, with concerns expressed by Brian Hauglid and/or David Bokovoy) that they decide they don't want to publish Schryver's stuff at this time.

Bokovoy has some personal vendetta regarding Will that, at all events, has nothing to do with his Book of Abraham work, and which appears to have started a couple of years ago on the "United Firm" thread at the MADboards. I have no real idea of its intricacies.

C) (Oh yeah, MsJack compiled a lot of Will's more objectionable posts into one convenient location with links to the original discussions so Will's posts could be read in their complete and proper context.)

Yes, and we all went over those, and while objections can certainly be made to some of that material, for the most part, it was a "move along, nothing to see here" extravaganza.

Compared to what goes on in here on a daily basis, Will's stuff is pure Vienna Boys Choir.

[_Droopy]

I didn't want to return to this cesspool, but personal integrity demands it of me.

Kudos. It takes a big man to crawl back in here and tell us we're all dicks.

There must be some mysogyny hidden in here somewhere. Its certainly offensive, is it not?

Harmony, where art thou?

[_Droopy]

You really think anyone here was responsible? You really believe those folks over there pay attention to what goes on here?

If so, HEY TOMMIE, Beer is a mild barley drink and can be of our own making with a home brew kit.

Now we'll see if the tubby one has a 'revelation' clearing up the word of wisdom.

Another PP sockpuppet?

[_Nightlion]

Will has the power to bring them out of the woodwork, all chitinous legs flailing, at any time he so chooses, and there is doubtless a method behind the madness. Interesting that Will doesn't leave well enough alone and cease mentioning his claimed treatment of or comments regarding females in his past, so interesting, in fact, that I have little doubt that what he's really doing here is just throwing chum in the water and watching the feeding frenzy.

It makes me actually wonder just how accurate some of the comments Will has made regarding his own behavior really are, and how much of what he says is simply bait for the hungry piranha.

I am almost as flattered now that Droopy replied to one of my posts as when Dr. Scratch finally took a shot.

Chum chuckin' huh? I for one was not a ws hater, and even after he threatened to curse me in some actual priesthood official sort of way I suppose.

He has insulted me for years on end. I was not a reader of much of his sex-capades. I happened to read the 'tooth missing or not really missing' post and was convicted that he was indeed the Satan's spawn others believed of him.

Now I have read other notorious posts. Some are just as damning. This chum chucking you propose is the dumbest rationale imaginable. ws has plenty of imagination to push buttons without making a complete Jackass of himself.

And now you have made a complete Jackass of yourself, Droopy. I would have rather you did not, first reply and all that. I can imagine the possibility that ws has offered to sacrifice himself without restraint to wholly dominate this board as a tactical maneuver to marginalize the REAL THREAT to the Church that has a presence here.

If you could now make yourself as rare as the Dr remains I would count myself doubly blessed.

[_Droopy]

But I don't believe "turn the other cheek" means "turn a blind eye to sinful behavior and don't say a word about it." I would say that the Bible instructs us to do just the opposite.

Let any apologist here make the same claim, regarding apostasy and the nature of many traditional critical attacks on the Church, and the necessity of an apologetic response, and see what happens.

Jack's campaign was, indeed, a campaign, and in the whole 'c' word controversy, more than one here was caught with guile.

The hypocrisy, as with the plodding, phony sanctimonious outrage, thickens and gels.