William Hamblin is a Pathetic Coward

[_Philo Sofee]

Did you keep all that? It might make for a fascinating read of a book.

Yep, I have it all documented. I saved the HTML pages from all those exchanges at the FAIR boards, though some of them may still be accessible in their archives. I know a lot of it has been deleted already.

Oh, and then there was the hilarious attempt by Schryver to pull one over on Dan Vogel. At the time Schryver was posting as "Provis" and no one had any idea who William Schryver was. But when he emailed me as Provis he signed his email with his in real life identity, phone number, address, etc. So a week later I get an email from Brent Metcalfe asking me if I had any idea who William Schryver is, and I told him it was the guy posting as "Provis." He then shared with me an email exchange that had been going on between Dan Vogel and Schryver, who contacted Vogel out of the blue wanting to interview him for a documentary film on apostates.

The creepiness about it all was that Schryver was emailing Vogel with cordial requests, being extremely friendly, presenting himself as if he were someone doubt the Church as well, while simultaneously attacking him in the most vicious manner as "Provis" on the forums. When Vogel called him out for being the same guy, William of course acted like he had no idea what he was talking about. Minutes later I get an email from Schryver asking me to keep his in real life identity on the down low, but it was too late. And so Provis became "William Schryver" on the forums after the cat was let out of the bag.

This is most bizarre.

[_Cicero]

In any event, the thing with Ostler is so disquieting because he has always seemed like a scholarly, even-keeled guy. It makes you wonder if the other "reasonable" Mopologists are like this, too. Would Kevin Barney do something like this, for example? The fact that he sits on the FAIR board with people like Professor P. and Allen Wyatt raises major questions for me. And what about somebody like Kevin Christenson? Is this the kind of guy who would go out of his way in an attempt to ruin your life? You can be pretty certain that the main reason that Bill Hamblin hates anonymity is because it takes away his and the Skinny-L crew's ability to go after people's lives.

I hope that Ostler apologized to Perry. It may be that he was banned before he had the opportunity to clear the air. If not, then he's every bit as low and underhanded as these other Mopologists.

I would be shocked to see Kevin Barney ever do something like this. It's just not his MO and he is not at all dependent upon apologetics financially.

Of course, I might have said the same thing about Blake before seeing this today. I too am very disquieted to learn that he went after somebody in such a personal and damaging way like that. It makes me want to throw out all of his books (sorry Narrator).

[_harmony]

This is most bizarre.

Bizarre is what Will does best. Well, besides vulgar. It's hard for him to top his vulgar, but his bizarre comes close.

What is REALLY bizarre is Dan and his wife going to Sunday School in Will's ward. That is really bizarre.

[_Kishkumen]

What is REALLY bizarre is Dan and his wife going to Sunday School in Will's ward. That is really bizarre.

Is it really? I think it less surprising with each new revelation and each new political blog post.

Birds of a feather, seems to me.

[_moksha]

Will is down? Since when?

Hasn't he had been laying on the MD ice since the the referee tossed him out for language unbecoming a player and shelving of his plan to attach a decoder ring to the hockey puck? You have to admit, that plan would have been a game changer.

[_MsJack]

Wow. Now I feel kind of bad for sharing that example re: Blake and Perry.

Blake is somebody that I like and respect. He can be a hard person to like. He can be bullish and condescending. But when we've been able to sit down and have a conversation (metaphorically speaking---we've only ever interacted on blogs and briefly in e-mail), it's been very enlightening, at least for me. He said things years ago which I sometimes still mull over today.

He's had a few outbursts online which left me with jaw dropped when I read about them. The Perry Robinson thing was one of them. I'm not even going to link to the others, out of respect for him. It's something that I decided was worth living with and not dwelling on in order to be on friendly terms with him.

You may be saying that one could say the same thing about Dan Peterson, so what's the difference? Why is Blake still on my "like" list, while Dan is someone I prefer to avoid? The difference, for me at least, is that in our conversations, Blake has made me feel like he actually cares about my opinion. He's been dismissive of opinions that were naïve and uninformed (and looking back, even I see how naïve they were), but he usually did it in a way that encouraged me to dig deeper and try harder. Dan never made me feel like he cared about my opinions, except for when I was supporting and defending Mormonism and Mormon apologetics, and when we disagreed, he quickly turned derisive. (For example, read Blake's interactions with the Faith-Promoting Rumor bloggers on this thread. He engages their concerns respectfully. I don't see him as coming off as particularly dismissive or condescending, even as he disagrees with a lot of what they say. Contrast that to Dan's response to Faith-Promoting Rumor blogger smallaxe.)

As for Kevin Barney: I've known that man for over ten years, I live one stake over from him now, he's visited my church with me, and I've never seen him be anything but respectful and polite to people.

[_Kevin Graham]

What is REALLY bizarre is Dan and his wife going to Sunday School in Will's ward. That is really bizarre.

Is it really? I think it less surprising with each new revelation and each new political blog post.

Birds of a feather, seems to me.

I have to agree. Recent revelations about how Dan's mind works on political matters has been very disappointing. He wasn't nearly as vocal in his political views back during 9/11. I remember the most he would say is that he supported President Bush's policy in the Middle-East, but then he'd shut his trap after that. Now he seems willing to go on long rants that seem to be nothing more than a regurgitation of FOX News talking points.

[_Kevin Graham]

Wow. Now I feel kind of bad for sharing that example re: Blake and Perry.

Blake is somebody that I like and respect. He can be a hard person to like. He can be bullish and condescending. But when we've been able to sit down and have a conversation (metaphorically speaking---we've only ever interacted on blogs and briefly in e-mail), it's been very enlightening, at least for me. He said things years ago which I sometimes still mull over today.

He's had a few outbursts online which left me with jaw dropped when I read about them. The Perry Robinson thing was one of them. I'm not even going to link to the others, out of respect for him. It's something that I decided was worth living with and not dwelling on in order to be on friendly terms with him.

You may be saying that one could say the same thing about Dan Peterson, so what's the difference? Why is Blake still on my "like" list, while Dan is someone I prefer to avoid? The difference, for me at least, is that in our conversations, Blake has made me feel like he actually cares about my opinion. He's been dismissive of opinions that were naïve and uninformed (and looking back, even I see how naïve they were), but he usually did it in a way that encouraged me to dig deeper and try harder. Dan never made me feel like he cared about my opinions, except for when I was supporting and defending Mormonism and Mormon apologetics, and when we disagreed, he quickly turned derisive. (For example, read Blake's interactions with the Faith-Promoting Rumor bloggers on this thread. He engages their concerns respectfully. I don't see him as coming off as particularly dismissive or condescending, even as he disagrees with a lot of what they say. Contrast that to Dan's response to Faith-Promoting Rumor blogger smallaxe.)

As for Kevin Barney: I've known that man for over ten years, I live one stake over from him now, he's visited my church with me, and I've never seen him be anything but respectful and polite to people.

Yes, Kevin is a stud. We should all try to be like him.

[_why me]

Let's clear this up once and for all: Who on this board wants to suppress anything that Schryver wants to publish? Anyone? If so, please explain why.

The will bashing here was extreme to say the least. But then again, any apologist that makes a difference got a bashing here. It is just the way it is.

[_Kishkumen]

The will bashing here was extreme to say the least. But then again, any apologist that makes a difference got a bashing here. It is just the way it is.

When he stops lying about things he did here, then the topic will undoubtedly change. It's not like this came out of left field.