Schryver's Article Is Going To Be Published, Somewhere?

[_jon]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it won't be the Ensign, Egyptologist Weekly, National Geographic or anything associated with the Smithsonian.

Will has promised publication before and we all know how that ended, let's just hope this time it gets to see the light of day, even if he has to 'publish' it on MAD...

[_beastie]

I admit it. I was part of a mass conspiracy. We all meditated at the exact same time every day, creating a massive force field that penetrated Will's skull (and yes, that was a difficult task). We then took control of his mind and will and forced him to write things like "Emma was the champion (b)itch of the restoration."

Mea culpa.

[_Doctor Scratch]

for what it's worth, I've been given the impression by one of my "sources" that someone very high up in the Church hierarchy has been pulling strings on Schryver's behalf. This is why he (i.e., Schryver)--essentially a nobody--was given access to the papyri. It wouldn't surprise me if the apologists at the MI have been "ordered" by one of the apostles to proceed with publication of Schryver's article. If my "informant" is right and Will has a "benefactor" of this magnitude, I imagine it would have been quite a spectacle to watch Hoskisson / Bradford et al. explain to the Brethren that they kibboshed the article due to Will being a misogynist, and their fears of a media blow-up.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

for what it's worth, I've been given the impression by one of my "sources" that someone very high up in the Church hierarchy has been pulling strings on Schryver's behalf. This is why he (i.e., Schryver)--essentially a nobody--was given access to the papyri. It wouldn't surprise me if the apologists at the MI have been "ordered" by one of the apostles to proceed with publication of Schryver's article. If my "informant" is right and Will has a "benefactor" of this magnitude, I imagine it would have been quite a spectacle to watch Hoskisson / Bradford et al. explain to the Brethren that they kibboshed the article due to Will being a misogynist, and their fears of a media blow-up.

Doctor,

Very interesting post. It sounds like the MI has just been neutered by one of the apostles. I can't imagine that the MI is pleased about being forced to publish Schryver's article.

[_sock puppet]

Hey Everybody Wang Chung,

Unfortunately, it still does exist. However, its numbers are dwindling and according to various internet traffic sites, the viewship has been on a slow, steady and consistent decline for the last two years.

Sounds like their business model is working.

* * * * *

Peace,
Ceeboo

Indeed, given that their objective is to try and stop people from thinking about and discussion Mormonism.

[_Dr. Shades]

for what it's worth, I've been given the impression by one of my "sources" that someone very high up in the Church hierarchy has been pulling strings on Schryver's behalf. . . It wouldn't surprise me if the apologists at the MI have been "ordered" by one of the apostles to proceed with publication of Schryver's article.

Huh, that's interesting. I thought that Will's article was going to be published on his website.

[_Some Schmo]

for what it's worth, I've been given the impression by one of my "sources" that someone very high up in the Church hierarchy has been pulling strings on Schryver's behalf. . . It wouldn't surprise me if the apologists at the MI have been "ordered" by one of the apostles to proceed with publication of Schryver's article.

Huh, that's interesting. I thought that Will's article was going to be published on his website.

Isn't it a little disingenuous to call putting his article on a website "publishing?" That's like calling nailing fliers of a lost dog on a telephone poll "publishing."

Publishing, to me, generally suggests the product is worthy of reading, or that there are actually people out there who think it's good. I doubt this qualifies.

[_Doctor Scratch]

for what it's worth, I've been given the impression by one of my "sources" that someone very high up in the Church hierarchy has been pulling strings on Schryver's behalf. . . It wouldn't surprise me if the apologists at the MI have been "ordered" by one of the apostles to proceed with publication of Schryver's article.

Huh, that's interesting. I thought that Will's article was going to be published on his website.

I'm sure that he'll try to avoid doing that as much as possible. It would be devastating to the Mopologetic community if he went that route, after all. So much of the apologists' claims are based on a series of carefully managed and constructed appeals to authority, and any blog posting by Will would totally lack everything that the apologists' think is necessary. For example: peer review. I'm sure that everyone from Scott Gordon to Matt Roper is assuming that critics will drop nuke after nuke on Will if his essay fails to undergo a peer review, and obviously, a mere blog posting wouldn't have this. I guess you could have John Gee or somebody pop in to say that he "reviewed" it, but that would never happen. I'm sensing that the MI apologists--many of them, anyhow--still want to keep Will at arm's length. And Gee is among the touchiest of the Mopologists. Brian Hauglid would be a candidate for the peer review, but Hauglid was the one who ratted Will out over MsJack's devastating critique.

No--he's likely going to aim for a print publication of some kind, and if he's actually got GA-backing of some kind, as some "insiders" seem to suspect, then that's what we can expect.

I suppose the wild card in all of this is FAIR. He could publish it through FAIR somehow, perhaps as a kind of pamphlet or brochure, though obviously this is a huge step down in terms of respectability and prestige.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more that publication via FAIR seems like the most likely scenario. It would allow the MI apologists to wash their hands of Will at the same time that they give winking support to his theories. And whatever backlash happens over Will's misogyny would get absorbed by the morons at FAIR--a bunch of "amateur-hour" volunteers that the upper-tier Mopologists can afford to throw under the bus. Of course, as I indicated at the beginning of this post, a FAIR publication would really represent a "cut-rate" sort of affair: it would lack the "academic" or "scholarly" stamp that the TBMs ascribe to the MI. I mean, let's face it: even the lowest-tier Mopologists must think that the FAIRwiki is basically just a dumpster for cut-rate apologetics. Everyone knows that the "legit" stuff comes from BYU. I'm pretty sure that most apologists think that the folks running the FAIRwiki are a bunch of hacks and losers--people who just didn't have what it takes to score a sinecure with the Maxwell Institute.

[_Dr. Shades]

Hmm. In your opinion, what would "publishing with FAIR" look like? They don't have print publications that I'm aware of, so what do you envision?

[_Doctor Scratch]

Hmm. In your opinion, what would "publishing with FAIR" look like? They don't have print publications that I'm aware of, so what do you envision?

I would envision some kind of pamphlet or brochure, Dr. Shades--a sort of "For Young Men Only" for the paranoid Book of Abraham Mopologetics crowd. But I sincerely hope this isn't what happens. I would greatly prefer a Maxwell Institute-sponsored publication.