What is the Mopologetic "skinny-l" Listserve?

[_Mister Scratch]

Who all is on the list?

There's nothing secretive about it. There are, I would guess, roughly ten or twelve people on the list. Maybe more. (Not everybody on the list participates actively, I'm guessing.)

But I'm not even slightly inclined to lift so much as a finger to try to satisfy your obsessive curiosity about such things, nor to help you compile your rather creepy "dossiers."

I'm just interested in getting a clearer picture of what this list is all about. Based on the evidence I have, it looks like it is basically a means for you and some other highly unpleasant LDS apologists to mock and ridicule critics, and to boast and laugh about your various little "victories," such as baiting people into using profanity. Would you say that my characterization is accurate? I mean, even if you don't tell us anything further about "skinny-l", I would imagine that you are deeply embarrassed about some of your behavior on it.

And why are you so reluctant to tell us who else participates? You, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak & et. al. frequently berate people for anonymity.... Surely you don't want to be branded as a hypocrite. Come on now, it can't be that difficult to name the remaining six or so members. So far we have:
1. DCP
2. Hamblin
3. Midgley
4. Novak
5. Pahoran

I think other likely candidates include:
---S. Barker
---C. Peterson
---J. Tvedtness
---K. Shirts

But who else? What apologists live in Missouri and Oregon?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Based on the evidence I have, it looks like it is basically a means for you and some other highly unpleasant LDS apologists to mock and ridicule critics, and to boast and laugh about your various little "victories," such as baiting people into using profanity. Would you say that my characterization is accurate?

Of course not.

And why are you so reluctant to tell us who else participates?

I'm perfectly willing to name names. Just not to you and your cronies. If you want to compile creepy "dossiers" on those you've targeted for discrediting, do the work yourself.

You, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak & et. al. frequently berate people for anonymity.

We do?

I find your personal campaign of obsessive anonymous character assassination repulsive, but you're a special case.

... Surely you don't want to be branded as a hypocrite. Come on now, it can't be that difficult to name the remaining six or so members. So far we have:
1. DCP
2. Hamblin
3. Midgley
4. Novak
5. Pahoran

I think other likely candidates include:
---S. Barker
---C. Peterson
---J. Tvedtness
---K. Shirts

But who else? What apologists live in Missouri and Oregon?

Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne.

[_cksalmon]

Not everything is meant to be a joke.

Indeed. I was referring to SHIELDS and your and Midgley's "scholarly" exchange with White. "I'm sorry you broke your arrogance meter. Was it a gift from your mother?--DCP"

No, not proud. Just concerned that, if Mr. White was planning to post a truncated account of the exchange (as he has been known to do), people have a chance to see the entirety of it. And it would have been even better if people had known the entire history leading up to that particular encounter.

Here is everyone's chance to see the entirety of it: http://vintage.aomin.org/BYUNotes.html.

(as he has been known to do)

Okay. Wouldn't surprise me. Document this charge and I'll readily accede to the evidence. But, again, we have the entire exchange that I referenced via the hyperlink above.

I'm not at all reluctant to admit that I've occasionally found Mr. White irritating. I'm not alone in that. (The extraordinarily mild-mannered Dr. Paul Owen, for example, though an evangelical Protestant himself, is anything but a fan of Mr. White's, as a search on the web will quickly show.)

You find James White irritating. And?

SCREED is still ridiculous. And neither you nor Midgley acquitted himself as a scholar in that exchange.

That's the unfunny joke. Not that you intended your behavior to be laughable. I get that.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Okay. Wouldn't surprise me. Document this charge and I'll readily accede to the evidence.

Compare the Hamblin/White exchange on Psalm 82 as it appears on SHIELDS and the truncated version of it that appears on Mr. White's site.

And neither you nor Midgley acquitted himself as a scholar in that exchange.

Not every utterance of a scholar is intended to be scholarly.

[_TrashcanMan79]

So far we have:

-snip-

5. Pahoran

-snip-

For those of us following along, Pahoran is actually Russell C. McGregor, right?

I seem to recall this being the case, but my memory has failed me before....

[_cksalmon]

Okay. Wouldn't surprise me. Document this charge and I'll readily accede to the evidence.

Compare the Hamblin/White exchange on Psalm 82 as it appears on SHIELDS and the truncated version of it that appears on Mr. Whilte's site.

I assume you have links? I suppose I'll search for them, but I'm not sure why you wouldn't just provide them.

And neither you nor Midgley acquitted himself as a scholar in that exchange.

Not every utterance of a scholar is intended to be scholarly.

That sounds familiar....

I suppose that some utterances of scholars are from the devil, some are from man, and some just might be from God. As long as they're not embarrassing.

[Guest]

I assume you have links? I suppose I'll search for them, but I'm not sure why you wouldn't just provide them.

One is on the SHIELDS site, and the other is on Mr. White's Alpha and Omega site.

What's the problem? I would have to look them up. You can look them up precisely as easily as I can.

[_cksalmon]

I assume you have links? I suppose I'll search for them, but I'm not sure why you wouldn't just provide them. ]/QUOTE]
One is on the SHIELDS site, and the other is on Mr. White's Alpha and Omega site.

What's the problem? I would have to look them up. You can look them up precisely as easily as I can.

The problem is that there are eleven pages of links on SHIELDS devoted to James White. None of the titles refers to Psalm 82.

I have easily found the exchange on AOMIN. Not so on SHIELDS. So, again, perhaps you might find it in your heart to provide a link to the documentation supporting your allegation.

And, more specifically, I'd like to see what James White left out. I assume that much has been made of this on SHIELDS. A link would be appreciated.

[_Daniel Peterson]

It's easily found:

http://www.shields-research.org/Critics/A-O_Min.htm

"Letters to a Mormon Elder, the Uncensored Version":

* Correspondence with James White
and Dr. William Hamblin (BYU):

* Letters One through Ten
* Letters Eleven through Twenty
* Letters Twenty-one through Thirty
* Letters Thirty-one through Forty
* Letters Forty-one through Forty-nine
* Letters Fifty through Sixty
* Letters Sixty-one through Seventy-five (Note: This file contains correspondence which James White refuses to place on his web site. James claims he wants to record to speak for itself, yet he has censored the record on his web site saying that this part of correspondence is "irrelevant." Apparently he believes that his readers are incapable of deciding for themselves.)

[_cksalmon]

It's easily found:

http://www.shields-research.org/Critics/A-O_Min.htm

"Letters to a Mormon Elder, the Uncensored Version":

* Correspondence with James White
and Dr. William Hamblin (BYU):

* Letters One through Ten
* Letters Eleven through Twenty
* Letters Twenty-one through Thirty
* Letters Thirty-one through Forty
* Letters Forty-one through Forty-nine
* Letters Fifty through Sixty
* Letters Sixty-one through Seventy-five (Note: This file contains correspondence which James White refuses to place on his web site. James claims he wants to record to speak for itself, yet he has censored the record on his web site saying that this part of correspondence is "irrelevant." Apparently he believes that his readers are incapable of deciding for themselves.)

No, it wasn't at all "easily found," which is why I asked you for a direct link (note that your provided SHIELDS commentary mentions nothing about Psalm 82).

But, some posts later, here it is. Thank You.