What is the Mopologetic "skinny-l" Listserve?

[_harmony]

"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

75??? 75 letters? I don't think I've ever written 75 letters to one person who wasn't a son on a mission. I can't imagine that kind of correspondence.

I don't see the fascination with the skinny list either. Is there something inherently evil about a bunch of friends who don't live close to each other corresponding via email, even if the correspondence is hate-filled diatribes and self-congratulatory nonsense? Or is it just that it's a closed list and not open to the public?

[_Tarski]

You know, Dan, I understand my morbid fascination with the goings on here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park. I more or less grew up on the wrong side of the tracks and so I have a soft spot in my heart for snotty-nosed, shabby bastard children like Mr. Scratch and his cohorts here in the Circle Jerk Suite.

For all you priesthood leaders and other promoters of that which is praiseworthy and good report, for all you who wish to keep clean and wholesome thoughts and language, I must point out that brother William Schryver is graphically refering to a situation where a group of people get in a circle and having pulled out penises proceed to masturbate and make a mess.
Nice wholesome image Will.

[_antishock8]

You know, Dan, I understand my morbid fascination with the goings on here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park. I more or less grew up on the wrong side of the tracks and so I have a soft spot in my heart for snotty-nosed, shabby bastard children like Mr. Scratch and his cohorts here in the Circle Jerk Suite.

What's your excuse?

;-)

Wow. Is this the fruit of the Gospel? Is this the Spirit of Christ? Wow... At least we now have definitive examples that Mormonism doesn't effect a change in a person. This guy, The Nehor advocating electroshock therapy, and Mr. Peterson's endless penchant for passive-aggressivism don't bode well for Mormonism's claims of being a catalyst to a better way of life.

[_Mister Scratch]

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.

Oh! Well then, please feel free to correct me.

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.

This is laughably ironic, of course. The SHIELDS "Critics Corner" pre-dates my "dossiers" by nearly a decade. Furthermore, I haven't posted anyone's private email correspondence on my blog. Haven't you ever heard that old saying, about glass houses and such?

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

We do?

Yes. In fact, I recently read a couple of comments from Midgley and Novak in which they were criticizing Dr. Shades for using a pseudonym. Now, though, when asked about who is on the "Skinny List," anonymity suddenly becomes attractive to you all. Imagine that!

... 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.

[/quote]

Come now, Prof. P. Clark Kent is originally from either Kansas or Iowa, Mr. Wayne is from New York. Now, if you don't mind: the names of the Skinny List members, if you please?

[_cksalmon]

You know, Dan, I understand my morbid fascination with the goings on here in The Great and Spacious Trailer Park. I more or less grew up on the wrong side of the tracks and so I have a soft spot in my heart for snotty-nosed, shabby bastard children like Mr. Scratch and his cohorts here in the Circle Jerk Suite.

What's your excuse?

;-)

Yes, Dan, unfortunately, this really is indicative of the quality of the company your apologetic worldview inspires. Weep for it, I beg you, in the name of decency.

Nice, huh?

This is akin to the forced laughter of scientologists on talk show programs: "HA-HA-HA!!! Critics are poor and live in trailer parks! HA-HA-HA!!! Critics masturbate together and spill their semen on each other! HA-HA-HA!!! Critics are homosexuals! HA-HA-HA!!! Critics are really nasty homosexual people. HA-HA-HA!!! They do nasty stuff! HA-HA-HA!!!They like to get together and masturbate! HA-HA-HA!!!"

Yes, this is right up there with SHIELDS in terms of scholarly interchange.

Can we get Schryver's homosexual masturbatory fantasies involving trailer-park dwelling critics archived on SHIELDS? Surely his contributions to LDS apologia merit archiving, right?

I mean, Schryver is the best shield that Hauglid can manufacture.

And, really, isn't it about time that we start officially equating LDS critics, a la Schryver, with those nasty "faggots?"

I mean, that was his point, right? "Faggots" are nasty. Critics are nasty. Critics are "Faggots."

(I mean utterly no offense to any or all of my homosexual readers, here. I think Will's comments are extremely demeaning to both LDS critics and male homosexual persons.)

[_Daniel Peterson]

Oh! Well then, please feel free to correct me.

I just did.

Furthermore, I haven't posted anyone's private email correspondence on my blog.

Nor have I.

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

We do?

Yes. In fact, I recently read a couple of comments from Midgley and Novak in which they were criticizing Dr. Shades for using a pseudonym.

Maybe you did. Maybe you didn't. Clearly, though, "Midgley and Novak" doesn't equal "You, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak & et al." I couldn't care less about Shades using a pseudonym. For that matter, in fact, I know his real name, and he's been in my home a couple of times.

Now, though, when asked about who is on the "Skinny List," anonymity suddenly becomes attractive to you all. Imagine that!

To us all? Funny, but neither Midgley nor Hamblin nor Novak nor et. al appears to be posting here, and I plainly don't care about anonymity. (Daniel Peterson is my real name.)

I simply choose to let you do your own malignant data-gathering.

[_Daniel Peterson]

[
Yes, Dan, unfortunately, this really is indicative of the quality of the company your apologetic worldview inspires. Weep for it, I beg you, in the name of decency. . . .

Yes, this is right up there with SHIELDS in terms of scholarly interchange.

Can we get Schryver's homosexual masturbatory fantasies involving trailer-park dwelling critics archived on SHIELDS? Surely his contributions to LDS apologia merit archiving, right?

I mean, Schryver is the best shield that Hauglid can manufacture.

And, really, isn't it about time that we start officially equating LDS critics, a la Schryver, with those nasty "faggots?"

I mean, that was his point, right? "Faggots" are nasty. Critics are nasty. Critics are "Faggots."

Having a bad day, cks? You seem unusually antagonistic today.

[_Mister Scratch]

Furthermore, I haven't posted anyone's private email correspondence on my blog.

Nor have I.

Ha ha ha. Real funny. You and your Skinny List friends have private email correspondence splashed all over the pages of SHIELDS. Can you really say that you feel good about doing something such as that?

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

We do?

Yes. In fact, I recently read a couple of comments from Midgley and Novak in which they were criticizing Dr. Shades for using a pseudonym.

Maybe you did. Maybe you didn't. Clearly, though, "Midgley and Novak" doesn't equal "You, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak & et al." I couldn't care less about Shades using a pseudonym. For that matter, in fact, I know his real name, and he's been in my home a couple of times.

Keep dodging. Meanwhile: Are Stan Barker and Chuck Peterson on the list? Y/N?

Now, though, when asked about who is on the "Skinny List," anonymity suddenly becomes attractive to you all. Imagine that!

To us all? Funny, but neither Midgley nor Hamblin nor Novak nor et. al appears to be posting here, and I plainly don't care about anonymity. (Daniel Peterson is my real name.)

I simply choose to let you do your own malignant data-gathering.

You are trying to keep a secret.

[_beastie]

I think it's unethical to engage in an email correspondence with someone with the intent to distribute the exchanges to another group without informing the person of your intent beforehand.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Ha ha ha. Real funny. You and your Skinny List friends have private email correspondence splashed all over the pages of SHIELDS. Can you really say that you feel good about doing something such as that?

I have never posted a private exchange, and would not do so.

I had my exchange with SuzyQ posted only after she had grossly mischaracterized our interaction for roughly a year in a public place where I could not respond. Now the truth is out there and people can make up their own minds.

And yes, I feel entirely good about that.

Keep dodging.

I'm not dodging. I'm simply not inclined to be your gopher, and disinclined to feed your weird obsessions.

Meanwhile: Are Stan Barker and Chuck Peterson on the list? Y/N?

I've never even heard of a "Chuck Peterson."

You are trying to keep a secret.

Not at all. I'd happily give every name I know on the list to anybody who isn't one of your cronies or research assistants and/or doesn't participate on this list. Gather your own data.