Pahoran: Make your case for libel against DCP or shut up

[_schreech]

I don't think so. I think he's just reckless and doesn't give a hoot. Maybe a bully, that that isn't a mental issue. I'ma bully. And I wouldn't judge a person entirely on the basis of internet posts.

I was finding "even one thing written by Dan anywhere that descends to the level of Kishkumen's cowardly, vicious attack on me (pahoran)" - this quote from the PM received by DJ seemed to fit the bill. A PM, talk about cowardly of DP...

[_Stormy Waters]

So now that you don't have anything to threaten Darth J with Pahoran, care to answer the OP?
Can you?
I didn't think so.

[_Kishkumen]

And, consistent with his utter hypocrisy, his own behaviour is far worse than what he so pompously "excoriates" in Dan.

Yet again, I invite you to find even one thing written by Dan anywhere that descends to the level of Kishkumen's cowardly, vicious attack on me.

I see nothing cowardly or vicious about me providing my honest assessment of your character here, where both of us maintain pretty equal levels of anonymity. In my honest view, your religiosity is the fig leaf that allows you to indulge yourself in the ugly behavior you regularly engage in here. Your activities here are consistent with your behavior on MDDB, and they are consistent with your risible, so-called "reviews" published in the Review. One can only assume that you are either cynically exploiting your putative religiosity for your own vile pleasure and entertainment, or that you are so blinded by naked zealotry that you lose all sense of decency as you lie continually in the pursuit of your cause.

In either case, you are eminently blameworthy and deserve to be called out for your ugly behavior.

[_Bob Loblaw]

The pompous Kishkumen arrogantly passed judgement upon Dan Peterson as deserving the constant harassment and abuse he receives here because he's so gosh-darned mean. Well Charlie Horse, if you open your other eye, can you even imagine Dan saying anything like that outburst of Dreck?

I can't even imagine me saying it.

Even if DCP were "harassed and abused" on this board, who cares? It's a little odd that people like you and he sniff that you're too good and pure for the likes of us, but you keep coming over and complaining. Why would Dr. Peterson care what a few members of an obscure message board think about him?

The problem isn't so much that Scratch is doing anything dastardly but that DCP obsesses over everything Scratch writes. Why does he keep taking the bait and then complaining when it blows up in his face time and again?

[_sock puppet]

The pompous Kishkumen arrogantly passed judgement upon Dan Peterson as deserving the constant harassment and abuse he receives here because he's so gosh-darned mean. Well Charlie Horse, if you open your other eye, can you even imagine Dan saying anything like that outburst of Dreck?

I can't even imagine me saying it.

Even if DCP were "harassed and abused" on this board, who cares? It's a little odd that people like you and he sniff that you're too good and pure for the likes of us, but you keep coming over and complaining. Why would Dr. Peterson care what a few members of an obscure message board think about him?

The problem isn't so much that Scratch is doing anything dastardly but that DCP obsesses over everything Scratch writes. Why does he keep taking the bait and then complaining when it blows up in his face time and again?

At least Pahoran makes his attacks on MDB here, where MDB posters can address and engage them.

DCP lurks here, then posts his complaints over at patheos. And DCP's acolytes get all upset if MDB posters retort her to DCP's MDB complaints posted on patheos.

Others lurk here, then go post elsewhere their criticisms of MDB and its posters, unbeknownst to most MDB readers.

Again, at least Pahoran comes here to make some of his complaints about here and MDB posters.

[_Chap]

Dear Pahoran:

I have never ceased to be impressed by your legal acumen, such as the thread in which you ludicrously---and mistakenly---asserted that churches cannot be taxed in a free country because churches are outside the purview of civil law.

Churches in particular are not taxed primarily because, in any ostensibly free country, they are not subject to the authority of the state. Anyone who claims to believe in "separation of church and state" but who advocates the taxing of churches is a liar.

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... on#p455869

Please let me know if you would like to discuss the hopeless ignorance of law that you demonstrated in the above statement. In the meantime, you have repeatedly asserted that Doctor Scratch has defamed Daniel Peterson, and that this supposed defamation is actionable. E.g., right here. You have stated that anyone on this board claiming to be a lawyer, like Sock Puppet (whom you specifically mentioned) should know not only that Peterson had been defamed by Scratch, but that it would be easy to prove this claim.

To quote something Chap said in a recent thread: hic Rhodos, hic salta. Make your case in support of your ongoing assertion that Scratch has libeled Peterson. Show the world how the cowardly anonymous posters here pretending to be lawyers don't know what they're talking about, while you do.

To keep it simple, we'll go with the definition of libel found in Section 558 of the Second Restatement of Torts. The elements of libel are:

(a) a false and defamatory statement concerning another;
(b) an unprivileged publication to a third party;
(c) fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and
(d) either actionability of the statement irrespective of special harm or the
existence of special harm caused by the publication.

We'll also use section 559 of the Second Restatement for a defintion of "defamatory communication:"

A communication is defamatory if it tends so to harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him.

Keep in mind that Peterson has already publicly conceded, on his now removed blog post, that he has probably not been harmed by anything Scratch has said.

Oh, and by the way, we can also defer to Utah law on defamation if you want, since Peterson is a resident of Utah.

So go ahead, Pahoran. You've told everyone how easy of a case this is. Here's an excellent opportunity for you to stun Peterson's detractors on this board into silence. On the other hand, you also risk making a complete fool of yourself. But given your confidence in your position and understanding of the law, I'm sure you have nothing to worry about. Oh, and by the way, we can also defer to Utah law on defamation if you want, since Peterson is a resident of Utah.

Put up or shut up, Pahoran.

Now that Pahoran's diversionary attack on Darth J. has failed miserably, we return to the studio.

Will Pahoran put up or shut up?

Bet you can't guess.

[_Kishkumen]

Again, at least Pahoran comes here to make some of his complaints about here and MDB posters.

True, but he also has much less to lose than DCP.

[_Bob Loblaw]

At least Pahoran makes his attacks on MDB here, where MDB posters can address and engage them.

DCP lurks here, then posts his complaints over at patheos. And DCP's acolytes get all upset if MDB posters retort her to DCP's MDB complaints posted on patheos.

Others lurk here, then go post elsewhere their criticisms of MDB and its poserts, unbeknownst to most MDB readers.

Again, at least Pahoran comes here to make his complaints.

True. But why are they so righteously indignant in the first place? I agree it's cowardly to throw rocks from the safety of his blog, but why keep coming over here to read what Scratch says about him? All he's doing is drawing more attention to Scratch and making himself look like a pathetic tween wondering why the popular kids don't invite him to their parties.

[_Bob Loblaw]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqQD4dzVkwk

[_Kevin Graham]

The fact that Pahoran had to lurk here in silence, refusing to address Darth J's points, in hopes that someone would make a comment which he could spin to change the subject as he plays the poor, persecuted victim, pretty much validate's Kish's assessment.

Pahoran is a coward among cowards and his despicable antics are well known to us all. No surprises here. He cannot debate points effectively and intelligently. He has to play the victim card for sympathy votes in almost every "debate" he pretends to engage. He's asserted in the past that I would have killed Joseph Smith among his assassins, had I been alive in that day. I know he's said plenty of other hideous things about other folks as well. On my old forum a poster told me Pahoran essentially called his wife a whore.