Once again I've missed the fun...

[_beastie]

Pahoran stated:

Note that I've corrected your gratuitous expression of spite. For the balance of this thread, I invite you to try to restrain your vindictive instincts, pervasive and controlling though they are.

When I said he was one of "your lot" I meant ideologically, not in terms of his forum membership. He and I are both still members here, but I certainly don't count myself as one of "your lot."

So are you just going to keep asserting this despite the fact that you've been proven incorrect?

by the way, was your previous post meant to be an example of someone who can keep the "personal" out?

[_The Nehor]

I've been doing freelance editing for the last decade. He won't have to reach far.

The Nehor is a pro. You have just been schooled by him.

I should be clear that I am not saying his writing was terrible. It was better then most fanfic out there but thinking it is near-perfect is ridiculous. I wouldn't publish it.

Then again, erotica and harlequin romance novels are almost universally horribly written so his work by that standard might be good.

[_Kishkumen]

I should be clear that I am not saying his writing was terrible. It was better then most fanfic out there but thinking it is near-perfect is ridiculous. I wouldn't publish it.

Well, you do, after all, have your standards. And I doubt this genre is really your "thing" anyway.

Then again, erotica and harlequin romance novels are almost universally horribly written so his work by that standard might be good.

Yeah, well, I wouldn't know, surprisingly enough.

[_Pahoran]

So are you just going to keep asserting this despite the fact that you've been proven incorrect?

What's been proven incorrect?

by the way, was your previous post meant to be an example of someone who can keep the "personal" out?

I'm not talking about a completely sterile discussion in which people forget all about the history that exists between posters. I'm talking about an environment in which 60+ page threads devoted to "exposing" the misdeeds of an individual are simply unheard of, because (a) they would never get traction, and (b) the moderation wouldn't allow them.

The fact is that this forum's one and only claim to fame is that the moderation here is more lenient than that of the board upon which it battens. For years, the denizens used to congratulate each other that even the Mormon apologists would soon flock here just to have the so-much "better" discussions that must ensue.

That hasn't happened, mostly because of the general tone of the place. But now it will never happen, for the very good and sufficient reason that the word is out: Any loyal Latter-day Saint who posts here is painting a target on his back.

Are you guilty because a MAD poster sent in real life information about me to other people and said I was a mentally ill sexual predator?

And how many pages did that thread run to, Runtu?

Regards,
Pahoran

[Guest]

I would hope he would give the unanimous opinion of three professional writers some credit.

I can add my voice and make it four.

COBOL? I'm so sorry you went through that.

That was the second programming language I learned years ago, after FORTRAN. Just don't ask me anything about either one.

[_beastie]

Bumping up for Pahoran, who apparently doesn't read replies on his own thread

...So let's see if I've got this right.

From what I've heard, some years ago, when he was still one of your lot, SeattleGhostWriter wrote some "erotica" which was placed on an Internet site he didn't control.

Later on, he repented and returned to the Church, but was unable to get his material removed from that site.

Then Polygamy Porter decided to follow the example of the muck-raking diva and go after SGW. In the process, he posted copyrighted photos of SGW and his family.

Am I on track so far?

You are completely off track.

As SGW's cached myspace profile demonstrates here:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... ogle.co.uk

SGW was actually writing erotica at the same time as he was an active Mormon. Not only does he talk about receiving a calling as ward missionary on the profile, but he also states:

As an up and coming author, I am attempting to develop a new form of Hardboiled Detective mystery with Erotica as the backdrop. I enjoy all things sensual, intense, passionate, intimate and seductive while attempting to accomplish the goal of hooking the reader into the world of words where they transform into a very intense descriptive realm the reader can be lost in.

And in the next paragraph:

Also, am interested in meeting other people who are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon), and those who enjoy writing, have a taste for classic literature, and those who enjoy good philosophical discussions.

I know that SGW claimed on MDD that he was "out of the church" at the time he wrote erotica, but either he has an incredibly poor memory or was trying to save face.

AFAICT, all of this provoked nothing more than cheers, hoots of glee and assorted barnyard noises from the usual suspects. SGW then issued a take-down notice to the board, and the webhost, purely for the copyright images.

The Webhost then took the board offline for a couple of days.

I know that insincere expressions of regret are all the rage around here -- Ms Jack is almost as skilled at them as she is at dishing the dirt -- but I'm not jumping on that bandwagon. All I can say is that it couldn't have happened to a more deserving bunch.

But I do have a suggestion: How about, instead of creating spiteful vendettas against individuals, you change the culture here so that you can discuss ideas and events, and leave personalities out of it?

Interesting concept!

In the meantime, I have a question; two, actually:

Who was the MDB moderator (or "upper echelon someone" ) who offered drugs for sexual favours? And who orchestrated the cover-up?

Regards,
Pahoran

You are again incorrect, as is the moderator who keeps repeating the story. No one was offered drugs for sexual favors. The person in question, who was emotionally troubled and told other stories, including some about active members, as well, never claimed that as far as I know, and I am familiar with her claims. I don't know where Nemesis is getting his information, but it is twisted and distorted.

Of course.

by the way, as soon as you leave personalities out of it, then you're welcome to preach.

[_Runtu]

And how many pages did that thread run to, Runtu?

Regards,
Pahoran

I'm just saying that behavior of individuals, especially off-board, does not make us all "collectively guilty." I've apologized for what I did that was wrong, but I'm not going to take responsibility for everything that anyone else said or did here or elsewhere, particularly those things I'm on record as condemning.

I've been the subject of some pretty nasty threads over on MADB, and I certainly don't hold everyone over there responsible for it (the one that got me banned was a doozy). I would hope you don't hold all of us responsible for a few bad actors.

[_why me]

Whether or not SGW wrote erotica whether good or bad is not the point. The point is: certain posters on this board took delight in posting it and commenting about how bad it was. And the comments were without mercy.

This is certainly not a good trait coming from exmo posters. The sense of glee and spite coming from the keyboard was over the top. But of course there was this feeling of revenge from certain posters. And that was the point. Not his erotica but the mocking of an individual.

Now for good erotica one must go to Anais Nin and her short stories contained in two volumes: Delta of Venus and Little Birds. There is a difference between erotica and porn and Nin wrote wonderful erotica.

[_cksalmon]

So are you just going to keep asserting this despite the fact that you've been proven incorrect?

What's been proven incorrect?

This, for example:

From what I've heard, some years ago, when he was still one of your lot, SeattleGhostWriter wrote some "erotica" which was placed on an Internet site he didn't control.

Later on, he repented and returned to the Church, but was unable to get his material removed from that site.

[_why me]

I'm just saying that behavior of individuals, especially off-board, does not make us all "collectively guilty." I've apologized for what I did that was wrong, but I'm not going to take responsibility for everything that anyone else said or did here or elsewhere, particularly those things I'm on record as condemning.

SGW was not correct when he implied collective guilt. I was guilty of nothing and being rooted into the collective guilt ideas was not fair at all. One must always be careful in claiming collective guilt because innocent people can be hurt. We see this with Isreali retaliation against palestians. If a son or daughter commited harm against Isrealis, the parents home was destroyed. Such is collective guilt. It only creates more retaliation and hurt.