The Church Tells DCP, Midgley, Ostler, McGregor, Scott Lloyd and The Mopologists To Quit Posting Online.

[drumdude]

I think he believes only one person from here is behind ALL of the critical posters there.


Because there's no way in Peterson's mind that a large group of people could ever disagree with his ideas. It has to be a lone insane person.

[Philo Sofee]

I think he believes only one person from here is behind ALL of the critical posters there.


Because there's no way in Peterson's mind that a large group of people could ever disagree with his ideas. It has to be a lone insane person.

He actually probably couldn't find, even oh, say... four other people on the entire planet who could possibly disagree with him on anything, especially on ideas about Mormon scriptures, in good conscience... so yes, it is only one misguided person from here who pretends to be about 64 different people over there disagreeing with him. That all sounds perfectly sane to me...

[drumdude]

peredehuit:. "There’s a Peterson Obsession Board? I assume this is tongue in cheek."

That's not its official name, but that's its fundamental nature.

For fifteen years or so, I've been a daily subject of mockery, indignation, malicious invention, and avid slander there. Day after day, week after week, month after month, year in and year out.

It's unspeakably weird.

It might be weird, but unspeakably? I think 50% of his blog, once you trim out all the copy/pasted fluff, is him opining on this very natural Internet phenomenon that happens to anyone who gets over a few hundred followers online.

Most influencers online are smart enough to simply disengage, but Peterson has such a small following that it would mean ending his tiny online career of professionally playing the victim.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I wonder if Torquemada ever felt victimized when people complained about his techniques?

- Doc

[Marcus]

It looked briefly as though Peterson might heed his church leaders' advice and stop with the bullying and degrading language, but no. Posted today:

I found this item in the Christopher Hitchens Memorial “How Religion Poisons Everything” File©, and thought that some here might find it delectably horrifying:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... vorce.html

[drumdude]

Defaming the dead isn’t technically against the CHI, is it?

[Fence Sitter]

Defaming the dead isn’t technically against the CHI, is it?

It depends on whether or not they have been dead dunked or not.

[drumdude]

For several years, I participated on the Peterson Obsession Board, trying to rebut the slanders and correct the blatant errors. It was absolutely futile and a total waste of time.

One or two of the more moderate and lucid participants there told me that, if I would simply go away, my more monomaniacal critics would eventually lose interest. I didn't believe it for a minute, and I said so. But, one day, I simply left. Quietly and without fanfare.

That was something like ten years ago. And yet, still now, on just about any given day, there will be multiple active threads focused on my stupidity, incompetence, dishonesty, and viciousness.

In ten years more -- barring my death and/or the death of the principal obsessives there and/or the disappearance of the Peterson Obsession Board itself -- I fully expect things to be much the same.

It's one of the oddest things I've ever seen.

Looking back through Daniel's time here, I rarely saw him actually engage anything. It seems most of the criticisms of him were completely true, and left with no argument against them, he exited. Of course he focuses on the 1 or 2 outrageous claims about him that were ridiculous, and tries to paint every legitimate criticism of him with that same brush.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

From the same comments section:

Dan, it seems pretty clear to me why you are a target of such vitriol.

Enemies of the Church are committed to the idea that its members are either fools or conscious frauds. You've shown yourself to be no fool. So the only alternative left to them is that you must be a fraud -- and they are incandescently enraged by it.

It's another good example of Bayesian priors going bad. If their Bayesian prior for someone being knowledgeable, honest, and a believer in the Restoration is 0.000, then if you are a believer, no amount of evidence can establish your honesty and intelligence. Indeed, the more your honesty and intelligence are put on display, the more enraging it is to them.

Actually, we have, in fact, applied the Rasmussen technique to the Bayesian analysis with regard to whether or not Daniel “serial plagiarizer” Peterson is a ‘fraud’ and it results in a …



chance he is a self-serving narcissistic fraud.

eta: A reminder that any time these fools act like poor put upon victims they gleefully create and promote hit sites like this:

https://www.nevillenevilleland.com/2021 ... satan.html

- Doc

[Marcus]

“Social media commenters: Your church has added strong wording to its General Handbook, condemning “threatening, bullying, degrading, violent, or otherwise abusive language or images online.”

No groups or individuals are specifically named, but there is no exception for those claiming to defend The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints . . . who frequently employ harsh rhetoric to attack church critics or Latter-day Saint progressives.”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/12 ... t-online/I

McGregor has decided not to follow his leader's orders:

Kiwi:
[quoting Billy Shears] "Correct. You merely called me an "inmate of the Sty". I presumed that was an anti-Mormon slur."

It's a reference to your natural internet home: the Mos Eisley of the internet, the Peterson Obsession Board, Scumbag Central, Shades's Sty.

http://disq.us/p/2lj62lw

Either that or he's taking the Peterson approach and silently adding this at the end:
"....except when I think I've been provoked, or when they deserve it, or when I want to, or... or...or..."