The Nehor has left the building...

[_sock puppet]

See here, the current list of your 28 registrants.

The count was 39 on 9/12/2011 from this cached page.

So, why would one listing of registered users on 9/12/2011 give a count of 39 registered users, but now only 28 if you haven't had a defection? It sounds like a lot of folks--17 by my count, considering the 6 new additions since 9/12/2011--only wanted to participate in your secret combination so long as it could remain secret.

Sock...by all means...if it comforts you to think that there was a mass "defection" from my site, then God bless.

Frankly, with the way you are obsessing at this point, it just sounds like you're pissed that you didn't get an invitation.

Ironically, my not inviting you initially was actually an oversight, simply because you hadn't been active on the board. But considering how much of an asshole you've been to me tonight, I'm sure as hell glad that invitation wasn't extended.

No, liz. You would not have. The day I happened to return to MDB was the day that thecafeteria was exposed here. You gave invitations that day, and there were five new registrants that day and the next. That was six days ago. No invitation to me on that day or the next day when obviously several were issued and I was posting. Are you that honesty-challenged that here tonight you have to fabricate this I-would-have-invited-you and "your jealous, Sock" ruse but for my calling you on the carpet today? Check your timeline, Liz.

We both know I've rubbed you wrong from the get go. Remember how you hunted me down to censor--wrongly--my posts in Telestial in June--those censored Telestial posts that got restored by Shades when I complained? You must yet have enough Mormonism in you that you just knee-jerk white-wash the past when convenient. And we both know that I would not have accepted any such invitation--I do my posting out in the open, where anyone can see them. Skulking in back channels is not how I operate.

And of course, at your elevated-discourse, private board, you allow no personal attacks, right? So why don't you tell us why you did not delete DCP's posts on July 22, 2011 in thecafeteria thread entitled Doctor Scratch and Anonymity. So generous of spirit, so civil. He knows just how to treat what his professed beliefs consider other children of god:

Whatever you do, though, please don't invite Joey, Joseph, Scratch, DrCamNC4Me (or whatever his name is), or any other of their wearisome nonsubstantive ilk.

Oh, and then he chimed in his agreement that Screech not be invited either. As the erudite Ph.D. put it,

I agree.

No screech.

Ugh.

I wonder, liz, what would Jesus do? Maybe he'd wipe that feces off your nose, for beginners.

[_beastie]

Those from Darth J down were not on the list when I previously viewed it on 9/12/2011. They've all been additions since it was exposed in this thread that such board existed. So my assertion needs to be viewed in light of the information on which it was based. While I see a few apostates above Darth J's name, the closest to a critic might be Blixa, The Dude and Ray Agostini--who certainly do not bear anywhere near the critic ardor that Daniel Peterson, the nehor, and ttribe do defender ardor. Firebrands of TBM, but none of critics? Very moderate (not).

What does it take to be considered a "firebrand" of a critic?

[_jon]

What does it take to be considered a "firebrand" of a critic?

1. Point out factual errors and inconsistencies within Mormonism it's history and doctrine.
2. Point out factual errors and inconsistencies within apologetic works.
3. Point out the scholarly sloppiness of apologists.
4. Point out when apologists (and wanna be's) duck, dive, fudge, divert and generally avoid talking about/answering questions about, 1, 2 and 3.

Any one will do, but all four and you're definitely going to hell.

If you wish to avoid these four horsemen of the apologetic apocalypse then it sounds like Liz's board is a safe haven...

[_Yoda]

No, liz. You would not have. The day I happened to return to MDB was the day that thecafeteria was exposed here. You gave invitations that day, and there were five new registrants that day and the next. That was six days ago. No invitation to me on that day or the next day when obviously several were issued and I was posting. Are you that honesty-challenged that here tonight you have to fabricate this I-would-have-invited-you and "your jealous, Sock" ruse but for my calling you on the carpet today? Check your timeline, Liz.

I created my board on July 1st. That is when I sent out my bulk of invitations. What I was referring to is that if you had been active on MDB at that time, you would have likely received one.

Would I have invited you in the last few days? Hardly. All you have done since you have been back is verbally abuse me. I don't appreciate it here, so I'm sure as hell not going to deal with it on my site.

I don't really think we have much more to say to each other. Just leave me, and my site alone. If you have a problem with my moderation, take it up with Shades. All of those decisions are made through him.

[_Chap]

.... All you have done since you have been back is verbally abuse me. ...

That seems to me to be untrue, unless for Liz vigorous criticism and counterargument is to be counted as 'verbal abuse'. There are a few frankly rude phrases in what sock puppet has posted in this thread, but the great majority has been purely argumentative, though forcefully articulated. Of course for some people any clear expression of criticism or disagreement is 'abuse'. There is no accounting for tastes, is there?

Verbal abuse, on the other hand, (or so it seems to me) is when you respond to a post by saying things like 'You're a dumbass'. That is what the shy and intellectual young man whose departure from this board was lamented in Liz's OP used to do quite a lot, as I recall. Other people may of course find that kind of thing is a sign of wit and perspective, and who am I to say that they are wrong?

[_Yoda]

Do we know whether or not Liz told or requested all of the invitees to keep the board a secret? I.e., did she request that they refrain from making any mention of it on MDB? Or did she say that she didn't want certain posters here to know about the existence of her board?

I explained to my invitees that my board was invitation-only. Since I did not want to hurt anyone's feelings, I preferred that they not mention it openly on MDB, and I was not planning on making any type of public announcement regarding my board for the same reason.

[Guest]

Those from Darth J down were not on the list when I previously viewed it on 9/12/2011. They've all been additions since it was exposed in this thread that such board existed. So my assertion needs to be viewed in light of the information on which it was based. While I see a few apostates above Darth J's name, the closest to a critic might be Blixa, The Dude and Ray Agostini--who certainly do not bear anywhere near the critic ardor that Daniel Peterson, the nehor, and ttribe do defender ardor. Firebrands of TBM, but none of critics? Very moderate (not).

What does it take to be considered a "firebrand" of a critic?

Is your criticism as unhinged from facts and reality as Daniel Peterson and The Nehor are in their defense of Mormonism? No, I see you, beastie, as well grounded in factual evidence.

Do you incessantly whine that you're not being treated fairly by those on the other side of the great divide (for you, by the defenders), as ttribe does about his interactions with critics? No, beastie, not that I've seen in your postings.

Sorry, a firebrand critic you are not.

ETC Grammar.

[_sock puppet]

Just leave me, and my site alone.

What's in public view is fair game; I'm not a hacker.

[_sock puppet]

Do we know whether or not Liz told or requested all of the invitees to keep the board a secret? I.e., did she request that they refrain from making any mention of it on MDB? Or did she say that she didn't want certain posters here to know about the existence of her board?

I explained to my invitees that my board was invitation-only. Since I did not want to hurt anyone's feelings, I preferred that they not mention it openly on MDB, and I was not planning on making any type of public announcement regarding my board for the same reason.

No, it's certainly more polite just to foster a private environment for DCP and his 'wearisome nonsubstantive ilk' to be able to backstab those who come here in open view. How thoughtful of you, liz.

[_sock puppet]

.... All you have done since you have been back is verbally abuse me. ...

That seems to me to be untrue, unless for Liz vigorous criticism and counterargument is to be counted as 'verbal abuse'. There are a few frankly rude phrases in what sock puppet has posted in this thread, but the great majority has been purely argumentative, though forcefully articulated. Of course for some people any clear expression of criticism or disagreement is 'abuse'. There is no accounting for tastes, is there?

Verbal abuse, on the other hand, (or so it seems to me) is when you respond to a post by saying things like 'You're a d***a**'. That is what the shy and intellectual young man whose departure from this board was lamented in Liz's OP used to do quite a lot, as I recall. Other people may of course find that kind of thing is a sign of wit and perspective, and who am I to say that they are wrong?

It's okay, Chap. liz is in progress of migrating back from NOM to TBM. It's part of the Mormon persecution complex that she'll put back on. She's just getting in practice for all the whining, self-claimed victimization, etc. that goes with that territory. It seems ttribe and DCP are mentoring her well in this regard.