Lance Starr Defends Ad Hominem Attacks

[_stemelbow]

Well, then we clearly have something in common, because I hope for better from you.

First of all, I would like you to starting placing things in their proper context. In this case, the proper context was a discussion the apologists were having concerning the way they have engaged others in their publications. So, it seems to me that you have failed to understand that my comments were made in that context, whereas you have sought to apply them wherever you like to score your cheap shot.

Cheap shot? That's just silly. You complain that they don't behave civil and polite. YOu don't' behave civil and polite, quite often. So I got a bit of a chuckle in a sad way out of it. I said something in hopes you see the hypocrisy and change your methods. It's just more sad that you are trying to take your foot out of your mouth rather than just conceding the obvious hoping to move away from the very tactics you often engage in.

My second hope for better from you is that you engage others honestly, rather than trolling us. You see, I have a hard time believing that your entire career here consists of one silly mistake after another, such as the one I have pointed out in this very post. You consistently get things wrong in ways that serve to muddy the waters, and I contend that this is entirely deliberate on your part.

This is uncivil behavior and very impolite, Kishkumen. I didn't get anything wrong. You mourned that others don't behave civil and polite. But you don't quite often either. It's hypocrisy. That's not getting anything wrong. That's pointing out the obvious. That you wish to nuance your criticism by suggesting "well if LDS folks behave uncivil or impolite in some sort of publication, like a blog, then they are really bad. But other than that, uncivil and impolite behavior in adult society is quite a virtue, afterall that's how I do it." It's just silly, Kishkumen. Wake up.

So, we do have something in common, in that we both claim to hope for better from the other. The difference is that I am probably sincere, because I am tired of your trolling, whereas your crusade is the trolling I wish would end.

If your participation is truly sincere, in this thread, then perhaps there is no hope. You wish to ignore the bad behavior of you and your buds in favor of criticizing others for the same type of bad behavior. There is definitely much insincerity in that. And yet, you and your buds attempts at bullying others who post here until they submit to your guys' ways or until they leave is just plain absurd. Call me insincere all you like. I don't see how it changes things for you.

[_Chap]

I notice that stemelbow has come back into the Forum in Which He May Not Be Named.

But I have him on ignore! Feels good.

[_Kishkumen]

If your participation is truly sincere, in this thread, then perhaps there is no hope. You wish to ignore the bad behavior of you and your buds in favor of criticizing others for the same type of bad behavior. There is definitely much insincerity in that. And yet, you and your buds attempts at bullying others who post here until they submit to your guys' ways or until they leave is just plain absurd. Call me insincere all you like. I don't see how it changes things for you.

stem, this is just a mass of vomit, as far as I can see. It is you regurgitating one stupid misconception after another and then piling them in a little box that says "hypocrisy," according to your misconception of it. You are behaving like a simpleton. Most people understand this. Heck, I am fielding emails in which pro-LDS folk are telling me that you really are probably just this dense.

So, let's just cut the crap. You say I am a horrible hypocrite. I say you have no idea what you are talking about. Never the twain shall meet, believe me. I am not going to accept your simpleton's vision of who I am and what I do, and you will not wise up to the simple truth that context and facts actually do matter when assessing claims.

So, OK, you are sincere. Fine. You could be the sincerest doofus in the world, and that would not move me any closer to your perspective. I will never agree that slamming LDS people in the Review wasn't a vile, vicious, and dubious activity, particularly as perpetrated through a quasi-academic print journal published on BYU campus. I will continue to marvel at the blindness and lack of self-reflection that allows a person to feel justified in taking on the job of self-appointed inquisitor, because that is just how I roll.

If you can't see the difference between publishing defamation against LDS people from BYU campus and criticizing such an activity from a lonely discussion board on the internet, with less than zero standing or official connection with the LDS Church, then you are truly hopeless. And I have no use for your opinion on the subject. Your "argument" (such that it is) is stunningly stupid.

[_sock puppet]

If your participation is truly sincere, in this thread, then perhaps there is no hope. You wish to ignore the bad behavior of you and your buds in favor of criticizing others for the same type of bad behavior. There is definitely much insincerity in that. And yet, you and your buds attempts at bullying others who post here until they submit to your guys' ways or until they leave is just plain absurd. Call me insincere all you like. I don't see how it changes things for you.

stem, this is just a mass of vomit, as far as I can see. It is you regurgitating one stupid misconception after another and then piling them in a little box that says "hypocrisy," according to your misconception of it. You are behaving like a simpleton. Most people understand this. Heck, I am fielding emails in which pro-LDS folk are telling me that you really are probably just this dense.

So, let's just cut the crap. You say I am a horrible hypocrite. I say you have no idea what you are talking about. Never the twain shall meet, believe me. I am not going to accept your simpleton's vision of who I am and what I do, and you will not wise up to the simple truth that context and facts actually do matter when assessing claims.

So, OK, you are sincere. Fine. You could be the sincerest doofus in the world, and that would not move me any closer to your perspective. I will never agree that slamming LDS people in the Review wasn't a vile, vicious, and dubious activity, particularly as perpetrated through a quasi-academic print journal published on BYU campus. I will continue to marvel at the blindness and lack of self-reflection that allows a person to feel justified in taking on the job of self-appointed inquisitor, because that is just how I roll.

If you can't see the difference between publishing defamation against LDS people from BYU campus and criticizing such an activity from a lonely discussion board on the internet, with less than zero standing or official connection with the LDS Church, then you are truly hopeless. And I have no use for your opinion on the subject. Your "argument" (such that it is) is stunningly stupid.

Reverend, I don't think stem has the ability (or willingness) to understand your kiss-off post.

[_stemelbow]

You say I am a horrible hypocrite.

I've never said that. I say you have acted the hypocrite here. that you are hypocritical (aren't we all at some points in life). But I have never said you are a horrible hypocrite.

I am not going to accept your simpleton's vision of who I am and what I do, and you will not wise up to the simple truth that context and facts actually do matter when assessing claims.

This is it. You complain that some LDS are impolite and uncivil. You are often, 'round these parts, impolite and uncivil. I notice the hypocrisy here. You do not. I think you've tricked yourself. I point it out for your sakes. I hope you realize the error and it evokes change.

I will never agree that slamming LDS people in the Review wasn't a vile, vicious, and dubious activity, particularly as perpetrated through a quasi-academic print journal published on BYU campus.

That is not my position. Indeed, you are misrepresenting it again.

I will continue to marvel at the blindness and lack of self-reflection that allows a person to feel justified in taking on the job of self-appointed inquisitor, because that is just how I roll.

you roll many ways. Let's be real. I'm sure in many other areas of your life you aren't half as mean, hostile and unhappy as you let on here.

If you can't see the difference between publishing defamation against LDS people from BYU campus and criticizing such an activity from a lonely discussion board on the internet, with less than zero standing or official connection with the LDS Church, then you are truly hopeless. And I have no use for your opinion on the subject. Your "argument" (such that it is) is stunningly stupid.

Are you joking? Can't tell. I have many times said I do see a difference. I did not say there was no difference.

Now, let's clarify, as if I haven't many times in the past, yet you continue to misrepresent. There are LDS who behave poorly, and some of the things written by some LDS that have been publish qualify as examples of LDS behaving poorly. That has nothing to do with how hypocritical you sound when you complain about LDS folks behaving just like you do. You keep wanting to dismiss things as "it's okay for me and my buds to behave poorly because we don't publish stuff. My complaints are limited to LDS folks who publish stuff" (even though that is not true). you complain all the time about LDS folks who behave like you do, as bad as you do, who don't publish things.

[_sock puppet]

Now, let's clarify, as if I haven't many times in the past, yet you continue to misrepresent. There are LDS who behave poorly, and some of the things written by some LDS that have been publish qualify as examples of LDS behaving poorly.

Link us to posts here or otherwise on the internet where you have called these behaving poorly LDS on the carpet?

[_Kishkumen]

This is it. You complain that some LDS are impolite and uncivil. You are often, 'round these parts, impolite and uncivil. I notice the hypocrisy here. You do not. I think you've tricked yourself. I point it out for your sakes. I hope you realize the error and it evokes change.

I realize I am not always nice. Some of the things I say are really quite biting. OK. I agree.

So what?

It doesn't mean that I have no standing to criticize an activity that is substantively quite different from my own "unpleasantness."

This is what you seem to believe, but it is not true.

you roll many ways. Let's be real. I'm sure in many other areas of your life you aren't half as mean, hostile and unhappy as you let on here.

You have no idea how I feel about much of anything, stem. Please don't ascribe feelings to me. You aren't qualified to do so. When I attended my Sunday meetings yesterday, I was happy as happy can be. I am still happy. You haven't managed to spoil that.

That has nothing to do with how hypocritical you sound when you complain about LDS folks behaving just like you do.

Stem, I really don't care how I sound to you. It means nothing to me. Do you expect anyone to toss and turn at night wondering how they "sound" to you? Other than perhaps your family and friends? This is a trivial concern, and certainly unworthy of anyone else's notice.

"Gee, how does that sound to stem? My goodness, I don't want him to get the wrong impression!"

The problem is, stem, that you have given almost no one (maybe liz and a couple of other extremely forgiving souls) here any good reason to give a tinker's damn about what you think on any subject, let alone worry about how it feels or sounds to you.

So, it's settled, in my book. I don't care about your opinion of my posts, which seems to be stunted somewhere in grade school moral reasoning, and you think I need to be taken to task according to your simpleton's standard of goodness, or, at least, you feel you should warn me that my words might "seem" or "sound" hypocritical to some lazy thinker or simpleton out there.

OK! Thanks!

Next topic!

[_stemelbow]

I realize I am not alway nice. Some of the things I say are really quite biting. OK. I agree.

So what?

It doesn't mean that I have no standing to criticize an activity that is substantively quite different from my own "unpleasantness."

This is what you seem to believe, but it is not true.

I don't know where you're getting your thoughts about what I believe. I think you have failed to pay attention to what I've said. You comments were directly complaining that some people don't behave civil and polite--at times. I found that hypocritical since you have, quite often, failed to behave civil and polite. I do not suggest you can't complain that others are uncivil nor impolite. Go ahead. But, I do add a caution, once you do that you come off looking more hypocritical then thoughtful, well, at least for me. I suppose Sock Puppet will support you no matter what. That's just how he rolls. He's cute like that.

You have no idea how I feel about much of anything, stem. Please don't ascribe feelings to me. You aren't qualified to do so. When I attended my Sunday meetings yesterday, I was happy as happy can be. I am still happy. You haven't managed to spoil that.

I didn't ascribe feelings to you. I told you how you come off here, noting that I'm sure you are really quite different in real life. It would seem I was correct in my assessment.

Stem, I really don't care how I sound to you. It means nothing to me. Do you expect anyone to toss and turn at night wondering how they "sound" to you? Other than perhaps your family and friends? This is a trivial concern, and certainly unworthy of anyone else's notice.

"Gee, how does that sound to stem? My goodness, I don't want him to get the wrong impression!"

I think you have probably nailed why many LDS have not paid attention to you guys, and that seems to be a growing thing. There are some that pay attention but when they do, they tend to be turned off because of the hypocrisy and hostility.

The problem is, stem, that you have given almost no one (maybe liz and a couple of other extremely forgiving souls) here any good reason to give a tinker's damn about what you think on any subject, let alone worry about how it feels or sounds to you.

That's fine. Perceive as you must. I hope you guys feel good about doing so. I personally wish I was wiser and better able to converse with others. But, that hasn't stopped me from trying.

So, it's settled, in my book. I don't care about your opinion of my posts, which seems to be stunted somewhere in grade school moral reasoning, and you think I need to be taken to task according to your simpleton's standard of goodness, or, at least, you feel you should warn me that my words might "seem" or "sound" hypocritical to some lazy thinker or simpleton out there.

OK! Thanks!

Next topic!

It's too bad this is going right past ya. I would hope some change would start somewhere. Heck, why not start with one of the folks who is most prolific 'round these parts? Didn't work? Oh well. Can't say I didn't try.

[_Blixa]

[_Kishkumen]

It's too bad this is going right past ya. I would hope some change would start somewhere. Heck, why not start with one of the folks who is most prolific 'round these parts? Didn't work? Oh well. Can't say I didn't try.

I feel exactly the opposite way. I am happy that I think absolutely nothing of your tedious lectures. It is validating.

Fare thee well, stem.