Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_Lemmie]

Peterson is a little more careful to threaten DM with only banning, not in real life consequences, as midgley did. DM’s response is masterful:

DanielPeterson Dr. Moore
an hour ago

You would be prudent -- if you value your ability to comment here -- not to call Professor Midgley a liar.

I too think that you're misguided and wrong. And if you call me a liar for holding that opinion, you'll be instantly gone.

Perhaps that would save time for both of us?

Reply
−
Avatar
Dr. Moore DanielPeterson
31 minutes ago

Well, Kiwi57 accused me of lying, as did you. I hear you suggesting that I am not among those privileged with the credentials to accuse others of lying on this board. Therefore, I won't.

I would not call you or anyone a liar for holding an opinion. Please return the courtesy.

I strongly assert that Dr. Midgley was not correct when he claimed that "this is nonsense" in reference to his preemptive reflection that the article might be perceived as an ad hominem attack on Grant Palmer.

In my opinion, that is exactly what the article was. That's my opinion. I respect that you disagree with it. I believe others share my opinion.

In reference to Kiwi's other comment, no I don't believe Dr. Midgley presented a cogent argument as to why his article was not an ad hominem attack. Saying that a pencil is not a pencil does not make it something other than a pencil.

Dr. Midgley challenged VB to produce one example of "counterproductive and harmful" writing in his history of defending the faith. I found one example and put it up for discussion. I would love to hear what Dr. Midgley thinks about this example.

In my opinion, the article referenced above was entirely harmful to Grant Palmer, being a calculated personal attack on his character, credentials and his integrity. Such an article presented as a "book review" is highly counterproductive to the reader - to the extent that it invested almost no space reviewing the content of the book, and almost all of the space attacking Grant.

Again, this was an invitation by Dr. Midgley to find one example, which I took up.

My assertion, once more, is that the article reviewing Grant Palmer's book represents a counterproductive and harmful piece of writing, made in an effort to defend the faith.

It is what some would call a "hit piece."

Upon reflection, it was not my intent to call Dr. Midgley a liar. But I di strongly disagree with his claim that "this is nonsense" - issued as a preventative foil to what he knew would be the likely response to his article. If a hit piece masquerading as a book review does not comprise a perfect example of agrumentum ad hominem, so be it, but it's is close enough for me.

If you, Kiwi57, or Dr. Midgley disagree strongly, then please address which part you disagree with?

Was the article a hit piece on Grant Palmer?
Are hit pieces harmful?
Are hit pieces productive?

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4586734802

[_Lemmie]

Midgley’s response is a pallid, error-filled, irrelevant sprawling rant on why discussing his ad hominem attacks on others in papers he’s written is not an ad hominem attack on himself, but rather just an insult. Oh, and he’s pleased that others have insulted DM. You can just hear him hysterically whimpering to himself that DM will rue the day that he insulted the mighty midge. ok, Lou.

Louis Midgley Dr. Moore:

I was not wrong, nor was I lying. Your opinion is, however a nasty attack on me. But it is not ad hominem. Why? The expression ad hominem identifies a logical fallacy. I will explain what amounts to this fallacy. If Mr. Cox were to assert that "Mr. Apple could not be a botanist because he is Jewish," that would be a logical fallacy. The reason is that being a botanist and being Jewish have exactly no logical relationship. So you have not launched an ad hominem attack on me, but just been insulting. Why should anyone, including me, care what a fake doctor thinks about something I wrote?

I intended to simply ignore your disgusting remarks. I am pleased that others have, for very good reasons, trashed you, and that you have shot yourself in your own foot.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4586734802

[_moksha]

I am pleased that others have, for very good reasons, trashed you and that you have shot yourself in your own foot.

Simple math question: If Dr. Midgley, walking on all seven feet, proceeded in a north by northwest direction at 20 miles an hour, how many of his own feet would he have shot after six hours?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Louis Midgley -> Kiwi57

2 hours ago edited

Well, the LOD went looking for something about which he could complain. Keep in mind that I teased out of the LOD that he is an MD,...

BYU professor. Mormon. Priesthood holder.

- Doc

[_Lemmie]

Louis Midgley -> Kiwi57

2 hours ago edited

Well, the LOD went looking for something about which he could complain. Keep in mind that I teased out of the LOD that he is an MD,...

BYU professor. Mormon. Priesthood holder.

- Doc

So just in this thread alone, it has been fully documented that on a Patheos.com site, at a minimum, Louis Midgley has gone to some effort to either collect in real life data about the following commenters, and/or threatened them with doxxing, and/or threatened that their in real life would be damaged if their identity were known.

Gemli
Dr. Shades
Dr.Velho Burrinho
Dr. Moore
SGDN

Keep in mind, the moderator of this Patheos.com blog is good friends with Midgley, and just last week, this moderator reminded a commenter that Midgley regularly harasses that he knows the commenter’s in real life name, through his moderator privileges. That right there explains why commenters may choose to remain anonymous.

[_Dr. Shades]

Midgley is threatening a new poster with in real life consequences, if he doesn’t delete his negative comments about a paper midgley wrote:

[SNIP!]

And of course, Peterson allows this harassment.

Hi Lemmie,

I can't find the quote. Do you think it was deleted, or am I just blind?

[_Lemmie]

Midgley is threatening a new poster with in real life consequences, if he doesn’t delete his negative comments about a paper midgley wrote:

[SNIP!]

And of course, Peterson allows this harassment.

Hi Lemmie,

I can't find the quote. Do you think it was deleted, or am I just blind?

try this, it’s the ‘view in discussion’ link, under the post, as given in midgley’s Disqus home. I’m on a tablet right now, and Disqus is so awkward, but it should load at the statement:

https://disqus.com/home/discussion/danp ... 4586951156

(Bolding in my original quote of this is mine.)

If anyone has advice on how to get the Disqus links to post better, please share.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Midgley is threatening a new poster with in real life consequences, if he doesn’t delete his negative comments about a paper midgley wrote:

[SNIP!]

And of course, Peterson allows this harassment.

Hi Lemmie,

I can't find the quote. Do you think it was deleted, or am I just blind?

It's still there, Dr. Shades. Boy, things are really nuts over there, right? There is a Chernobyl-grade meltdown underway, with Midgley practically frothing at the mouth in a rage. There are a couple of remarks that deserve further commentary, I think:

Have you really not noticed the monochrome character of your hate site? (It's been that way for years.)
Why is it that way? Because it's a place of even-handed and serious discussion? A haven of fairness? The denizens of your swamp like to flatter themselves that it's because of their incisive briilliance and the irresistible force of their arguments. Benighted TBMs, they fantasize, flee logic and light.
Believe that if you choose (and if you want your hate site to remain the dismal wasteland that it currently is), but they have the place to themselves because it's wearisome and exasperating to all but its unanimous herd of toxic inmates.

I guess he's claiming that there is greater diversity--however one wants to define it--on "Sic et Non"? Well, he is the one making the assertion so he's free to try to prove it. Suffice it to say it's a laughable claim, especially if we place it within the larger context of Mopologetics. E.g., how many of the "testimonies" on "Mormon Scholars Testify" are from women? People of color? Registered Democrats? "Mormon Studies" people? Socialists? How many women have authored the essays that have appeared in Mopologetic publications? How many LGBTQ+ authors have been published? (Has there even been a single one?) And what about the "Comments" section of "Sen"? Something like 2/3 of the content consists of Peterson, Midgley, and Kiwi gang-piling on Gemli. The majority of the commenters appear to be middle-aged, conservative, white Mormon men. And oddly enough, one tends to not find much diversity of thinking or ideology amongst that crowd. I wonder why that might be?

The other quote was this:

Moore: "DanielPeterson: 'And now a question for YOU: Are you in favor of sanitizing history and suppressing facts?' No."
But you don't want people to know the background of Mr. Palmer's book. Why not?
And you don't want them to know that his use of "Der goldne Topf" is indefensible. Why not?

And:

Moore: "The entire premise of the article is to assassinate Palmer's credibility as a historian-author."
He told the story behind Mr. Palmer's book. If that story damages Mr. Palmer's credibility, Mr. Palmer should have lived a different story.

Ah, I see. Good to know that DCP supports the good, honest reporting about the fact that he--Peterson--was paid more than $20,000 to serve as "Chair of FARMS." And also that he made anti-semitic remarks while on a bus in Israel as a youth (making fun of the Jewish marriage rites). And that he posted a picture of a black person being lynched as a "joke." And so on. Let's spread this information as widely as possible, shall we, since he "should have lived a different story"?

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Wow! Incredible!

SeN has now officially devolved into a parody of itself.

Dr. Scratch, I have no idea how you are going to be able to whittle down your annual Top Ten Happenings in Mopologetic's list to only 10 this year. I know it's only August, but I'm already looking forward to December.

[_Gadianton]

It's still there, Dr. Shades. Boy, things are really nuts over there, right?

Dr. Moore is absolutely destroying the arguments of the apologists in this thread. And he's really getting noticed. One of his posts got 18 up-votes, and most of those voters themselves hold doctorate degrees. This must be absolutely embarrassing for the apologists.

(quoting Mr. Midgley)"And his book has a history; he and his book cannot be separated" and "If my look at Palmer’s motivations and his own history of attempting to unravel the faith of the Saints is a personal attack, then the same is true of his treatment of Joseph Smith."

It's pretty darn clear that Midgley's work against Palmer was intended as a personal attack, and he's essentially admitted it.