Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_moksha]

Louis Midgley Moksha • 16 hours ago
Moksha: Your constant urge to sneer and mock the faith of Latter-day Saints very often gets you saying things like "Gemli sounds pretty wise. I hope he can be appreciated for that wisdom." This is your comment above on the comment by Charles/tavs, who immediately upvoted your remark.

So I have three questions for you, both of which should be answered by a simple YES or NO:

1. Do you or do you not think that gemli sounds wise, and should be appreciated for his wisdom?

2. Did tavs/Charles describe accurately what gemli has constantly been preaching more than a thousand times on sic et non?

3. Do you now see why Professor Peterson commented as he does immediately below and why I tried to call your attention to the problem that you caused for yourself in the comment immediately below that of Professor Peterson?


Moksha Louis Midgley • 14 hours ago

1. Do you or do you not think that gemli sounds wise, and should be appreciated for his wisdom?

That is what I said based on that paragraph above. Gemli expresses himself well. I have admiration for Gemli and I suspect you do as well (even if you show it in a Punch and Judy manner).

2. Did tavs/Charles describe accurately what gemli has constantly been preaching more than a thousand times on sic et non?

Gemli gave Tavs a big vote of confidence.

3. Do you now see why Professor Peterson commented as he does immediately below and why I tried to call your attention to the problem that you caused for yourself in the comment immediately below that of Professor Peterson?

No, your message to me seemed really off and was drawing me into ideas and conversations that I was not party too. Once again, I have not been quoting Dawkins nor espousing atheism. I am a believer.

Louis Midgley Moksha • 13 hours ago • edited
Moksha: (1) You clearly do not grasp the fact that Charles/tavs does not have a clue what gemli has been preaching. If you are not an atheist, (2) you simply have not paid attention to gemli. (3) Instead, you have been far too busy mocking and sneering at Latter-day Saints, while still being what a "believer."

Moksha You might or might not realize that you have yet to provide evidence of exactly what what or why you believe something. If you are at least a nominal Latter-day Saint, you have forgotten that that you made a covenant with God, that you renew if and when you partake of what we call the sacrament, to both defend and build the Kingdom of God.

Now you may mean by "believer" merely that you believe in God. If this is the case, you have still not understood gemli.


Louis Midgley Louis Midgley • 3 hours ago • edited
Please notice that ten hours have passed and Moksha has not responded. He clearly has not been following what gemli has been preaching, and hence does not grasp the mistakes that tavs/Charles makes. And Moksha is also more than a bit shy about his own faith in God.


Moksha Louis Midgley • 3 minutes ago
Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by Sic et Non.

Louis - Please notice that ten hours have passed and Moksha has not responded. He clearly has not been following what gemli has been preaching, and hence does not grasp the mistakes that tavs/Charles makes.

Sorry if I have left you slathering without a bone to chew on.

And Moksha is also more than a bit shy about his own faith in God.

This blog has its own topics and there is really no occasion for attestations of faith. I am a bit leary of posting a testimonial since I understand you like to stick pins in such information and try to later use it against people. by the way, Partaking of the Sacrament and verbal and poisoned pen attacks are not only unrelated, they are antithetical to one another.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Mormon priesthood holder, BYU professor, and peckerhead extraordinaire Louis "de Torquemada" Midgley continues his inquisition:

"Louis Midgley talking to Louis Midgley

It has now been twenty hours and still no reply from Moksha. Could it be that Moksha will not trouble his buddies on the POB by revealing his own faith? Or that he does not have much in the way of faith?"

Also, he misses a HUGE opportunity by calling this site the Midgley Obsession Board, or MOB. What a dingus.

- Doc

[_Lemmie]

Mormon priesthood holder, BYU professor, and peckerhead extraordinaire Louis "de Torquemada" Midgley continues his inquisition:

"Louis Midgley talking to Louis Midgley

It has now been twenty hours and still no reply from Moksha. Could it be that Moksha will not trouble his buddies on the POB by revealing his own faith? Or that he does not have much in the way of faith?"

Also, he misses a HUGE opportunity by calling this site the Midgley Obsession Board, or MOB. What a dingus.

- Doc

Could it be that his buddies would never be so rudely intrusive as to do what Midgley does?

Or that he does not have much in the way of faith?"

[_Lemmie]

Moksha to Midgley:

I am a bit leary of posting a testimonial since I understand you like to stick pins in such information and try to later use it against people.

This should be a cyber stalker warning sticker, attached to every post Midgley writes.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Peckerhead extraordinaire Louis "de Torquemada" Midgley loves to point out when others have innocent typos. For example he 'sticks it' to gemli here:

"Louis Midgley gemli

Dear dogmatic gemli: Three points:

1. You fail again to address my comment, despite your opinion that "all you have heard from some unidentified theists" "is a lot of whistling pas the graveyard [sic]...""

The irony, of course, if anyone would consistently do to the peckerhead what he does to others they'd find themselves ushered out of Dowsin' Dan's living room. Regardless, a quick glance at a few of his posts and you see he suffers from sloppy writing as well (I'll have to highlight his grammatical lapses with *** since I can't seem to get the boards functions to work on my 'puter):

- Charles/tavs is begging for the boot, especially since he did not donates *** five hundred dollars to the Interpreter Foundation, as he agreed to do.

- Moksha You might or might not realize that you have yet to provide evidence of exactly what what *** or why you believe something.

- Moksha: I would and have also pointed out that many if hot *** most people live on "borrowed light."

- Sledge: Please don't believe every wild rumor you hear. Why? The fact is that Bill Hamblin never once entered Sanda *** Tanner's bookstore.

- And this denial probably also includes the "etc.etc." *** of Tavs/Charles

- And even Ayer himself, who became a *** intelligence officer in the British secret service, and spent his time during WW II *** in New York city *** living the good life

- Muslims just take this a bit to *** far for my own taste in these matters.

- This is known as scientism, it *** it not?

- And human's *** record their experiences

So on and so forth, or, as the peckerhead would say it, "So forth and so on."

- Doc

[_moksha]

Moksha to Midgley:

I am a bit leary of posting a testimonial since I understand you like to stick pins in such information and try to later use it against people.

This should be a cyber stalker warning sticker, attached to every post Midgley writes.

No more postings with Loopy Lou, because I have been banned from SeN. It is a bit of a relief because I no longer have to suffer the endless cycle of nastiness and insults which are the end product of LDS apologetics, and I can at some point discuss my feelings about that experience.

[Jersey Girl]

Dr. Peterson's message to Moksha (and the Shades Board)

"Partaking of the Sacrament and verbal and poisoned pen attacks are not only unrelated, they are antithetical to one another."

“O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!" (Robert Burns)

I'm afraid, Moksha, that I'm going to have to bid you adieu. I genuinely wish you well.

Your comments here, which (you surely have to admit) have mostly been devoted to chiding certain other commenters on this blog and to jabbing LDS "apologetics" and the beliefs and culture of the Latter-day Saints more generally, have inescapably been received in the context of the place on the Web from which you come. That has tainted them, and you. And it has provoked division, and evoked a spirit here that I heartily dislike.

Most recently, my integrity has come under attack because an evidently well-heeled participant on your message board made a substantial donation to the Interpreter Foundation some time back on the understanding that I would attempt to dampen the fires of hostility toward that message board on the part of its longstanding targets (who, by the way, continue to be victims of daily vituperation and defamation there). He mistakenly believes me to have reneged on that understanding, and publicly accuses me of dishonesty. I dislike being called dishonest.

I've previously shown the exit from Sic et Non to at least two other people from your message board, and I believe that doing so had a discernible salutary impact on the level of discourse here in Sic et Non's comments section.. Now I'm doing the same to you and to tavs/Charles.

I'm more sorry about your departure, I'll admit, than I am about that of tavs/Charles. But I regret both.

However, I believe that things will improve here in your absence, with this blog and your message board as strictly separated from one another as I can make them. My goal, as it is the donor's, is to reduce criticism, even mention, of your message board here to a bare minimum. (I ask the cooperation of commenters here to that end.)

Of course, under the indulgent eye of that one-time Interpreter donor, you -- and others, including the donor himself -- will still be entirely free to chide us, deride us, mock us, criticize us, misrepresent us, denounce us, and lament our wickedness back at your message board, where doing so is a principal daily focus. So it's not as if you'll be completely muzzled.

Again, I wish you well.

Dr. Peterson was nice in wishing me well and I appreciate that. He is right about the free speech nature of this board. It is open for me to post, and for him to frequently read. I actually thank him for making this post since at least now I know that the final straw was affirming to Dr. Midgley that, "Partaking of the Sacrament and verbal and poisoned pen attacks are not only unrelated, they are antithetical to one another", and not due to some horrendous ceremony where Lou and Kiwi dressed up as ancient Cureloms and cackled at the moon in supplication to ban me.

[_Gadianton]

That’s too bad Moksha. I noticed all the junior tier appears United in voting off non-TBMs. They really have little confidence i their beliefs.

The bottom line for dan probably is Lou is becoming an increasing embarrassment and anything to keep the alligator’s teeth from snapping he’s got to try.

You’d think having the Holy Spirit as a constant companion would help cool their jets, but no, God boils within their veins as molten anger.

[_I have a question]

Dr. Peterson's message to Moksha (and the Shades Board)

“O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!" (Robert Burns)

I'm afraid, Moksha, that I'm going to have to bid you adieu. I genuinely wish you well.

Your comments here, which (you surely have to admit) have mostly been devoted to chiding certain other commenters on this blog and to jabbing LDS "apologetics" and the beliefs and culture of the Latter-day Saints more generally, have inescapably been received in the context of the place on the Web from which you come. That has tainted them, and you. And it has provoked division, and evoked a spirit here that I heartily dislike.

Most recently, my integrity has come under attack because an evidently well-heeled participant on your message board made a substantial donation to the Interpreter Foundation some time back on the understanding that I would attempt to dampen the fires of hostility toward that message board on the part of its longstanding targets (who, by the way, continue to be victims of daily vituperation and defamation there). He mistakenly believes me to have reneged on that understanding, and publicly accuses me of dishonesty. I dislike being called dishonest.

I've previously shown the exit from Sic et Non to at least two other people from your message board, and I believe that doing so had a discernible salutary impact on the level of discourse here in Sic et Non's comments section.. Now I'm doing the same to you and to tavs/Charles.

I'm more sorry about your departure, I'll admit, than I am about that of tavs/Charles. But I regret both.

However, I believe that things will improve here in your absence, with this blog and your message board as strictly separated from one another as I can make them. My goal, as it is the donor's, is to reduce criticism, even mention, of your message board here to a bare minimum. (I ask the cooperation of commenters here to that end.)

Of course, under the indulgent eye of that one-time Interpreter donor, you -- and others, including the donor himself -- will still be entirely free to chide us, deride us, mock us, criticize us, misrepresent us, denounce us, and lament our wickedness back at your message board, where doing so is a principal daily focus. So it's not as if you'll be completely muzzled.

Again, I wish you well.

You can buy anything in this world for money...even Peterson.

[_Lemmie]

Most recently, my integrity has come under attack because an evidently well-heeled participant on your message board made a substantial donation to the Interpreter Foundation some time back on the understanding that I would attempt to dampen the fires of hostility toward that message board on the part of its longstanding targets (who, by the way, continue to be victims of daily vituperation and defamation there). He mistakenly believes me to have reneged on that understanding, and publicly accuses me of dishonesty. I dislike being called dishonest.

I've previously shown the exit from Sic et Non to at least two other people from your message board, and I believe that doing so had a discernible salutary impact on the level of discourse here in Sic et Non's comments section.. Now I'm doing the same to you and to tavs/Charles.

So Peterson boots two people, but kiwi and Midgley just find other targets, and Peterson himself throws gasoline daily on “the fires of hostility toward that board,” as Dr Moore recently documented, and somehow SeN gets nasty again. DCP blames others, again, and refers to his own dishonesty repeatedly, even though he “dislike[s) being called dishonest.” Go figure.