Once again I've missed the fun...

[_Blixa]

I confess that I'm curious about why you don't think SGW's story was well-written (I've only read snippets from mock-quotes). I honestly don't know what makes good or bad writing style.

Its mostly a matter of piling on adjective upon adjective in the misguided belief this makes things clearer and "more descriptive." The result, though, are long, meandering sentences where subject/verb coherence falls apart and the adjectival referents become impossible to trace.

A dead give away of an unsophisticated writer is that they can never have their characters "say" anything. All dialog is "murmured", "interjected," "uttered," "verbalized," or god forbid, "ejaculated."

Another problem is the use of more complicated words when simpler ones will do. The piece reads like a thesaurus was open the whole time, because complicated or technical terms are not used naturally but forced into places where they are not needed (by the way, this is a huge problem with Droopy's prose).

I've read a lot of bad fiction. Two of my degrees are from schools with prestigious creative writing programs, and while I never did a creative writing degree myself, I was subjected to a lot of work of unsophisticated aspiring writers in various committees I served on. I know a lot of well regarded novelists and poets and I have a lot of connections to publishing (I've read slush piles as favors for editor friends). And finally, I do writing besides scholarly work; I have written for mass market publications in the U.S., England, Finland and Hong Kong.

[_The Nehor]

Do it. Let the reader see how far you have to reach to tear it down.

I've been doing freelance editing for the last decade. He won't have to reach far.

[_Runtu]

One of my favorite books opens with this sentence:

"The liquid note of the thrush entered the house through the flowering privet, through the clumps of rhododendron, from where he whistled in the bed of pachysandra, but the Grandmother, eavesdropping on the stairs, wished he would shut up."

I love it because it sounds like it is going to go on in a flowery, ornate style, and then the author tells you everything you need to know about the Grandmother and the tone of the book right at the end.

[_asbestosman]

Are you guilty because a MAD poster sent in real life information about me to other people and said I was a mentally ill sexual predator?

I wish you'd stop bringing that up.

asbestosman, read Blixa's posts for some examples of excellent writing, this one, for example.

I usually do read Blixa's posts. Not only does she know what they teach in school about writing, but she seems fairly skilled at internet culture in general.

And finally, I do writing besides scholarly work; I have written for mass market publications in the U.S., England, Finland and Hong Kong.

And COBOL if I remember correctly. COBOL? I'm so sorry you went through that.

[_Runtu]

I've been doing freelance editing for the last decade. He won't have to reach far.

I'm really not intending to be mean at all to SGW. I would hope he would give the unanimous opinion of three professional writers some credit.

[_Runtu]

I wish you'd stop bringing that up.

It seemed like an appropriate analogy. But you're right. That was a long time ago, too long for me to carry a grudge.

[_Pahoran]

Hi Pahoran,

It looks like you have quite a few details wrong (as usual). Allow me to set the record straight.

Based upon my experience with you, I'll be sure to double-check all your assertions. The fact that you assert that I've got something wrong means that it's probably right.

From what I've heard, some years ago, when he was still one of your lot,

Incorrect. SeattleGhostWriteredited by harmony. Do not use red per Rule #2. did not register an account with Mormon Discussions until Sunday, June 5, 2011, which was quite more recently than "some years ago."

Note that I've corrected your gratuitous expression of spite. For the balance of this thread, I invite you to try to restrain your vindictive instincts, pervasive and controlling though they are.

When I said he was one of "your lot" I meant ideologically, not in terms of his forum membership. He and I are both still members here, but I certainly don't count myself as one of "your lot."

SeattleGhostWriter wrote some "erotica" which was placed on an Internet site he didn't control.

So is he claiming someone else placed his erotica on the Web site and not him? That's news to me. How did they get it? Did they hack his computer or something?

No. He is claiming that he put it there, but when he later thought better of it, he wasn't able to remove it.

In any case, if he truly had no control over his short story's presence there, I'm not sure why he did not simply do what he did to MDB and use a DMCA threat to get the Web hosts to take the content offline. They were, after all, running his copyrighted image along with the erotica in question. If they did not have his permission to use his erotica, surely they lacked his permission to use his copyrighted image, no?

Evidently they had his permission. It's possible (I haven't looked into this) that a condition of posting material there is that the author relinquishes control in some degree.

Later on, he repented and returned to the Church,

So he claimed after the fact. Once upon a time, I would have taken it as a given that an LDS apologist would never do something like publish erotic stories next to his apologetics works.

And once upon a time I would have taken it as a given that a self-proclaimed "Christian" would never pursue spiteful little vendettas against an array of ideological targets.

But that was before I met you.

Then again, I never would have expected a Mormon apologist who had openly referred to the first female leader of Mormonism as a "champion bitch" to be invited to speak at a FAIR Conference. I guess I just don't know what the standards are for Mormon apologists anymore.

As I recall, that individual openly apologised for that, and has not since repeated the error. As a self-proclaimed "Christian," I might have expected that repentance might mean something to you.

In any case, the erotica was dated June 30, 2007. SeattleSmutWriter was still publishing Mormon apologetics pieces as recently as May 25, 2007 (here, for example). I guess it's possible that he apostatized and dived into pornographic writing in the short span of a month, but I'm not sure how he would expect curious outsiders to know all that.

Actually apostasy is usually a process, not an event. Perceptive Latter-day Saints are not suprised by a person's departure from the Church being preceded by departure from its standards; nor by the fact that such things might be deceitfully exploited by obsessive muck-rakers.

but was unable to get his material removed from that site.

And yet, when it came up for discussion here, it took him less than two weeks to figure out a way to remove it. I wonder why that is.

See above.

Then Polygamy Porter decided to follow the example of the muck-raking diva and go after SGW. In the process, he posted copyrighted photos of SGW and his family.

Would you please care to clarify which party you mean when you say "muck-raking diva"? I can't really comment on the accuracy of this statement until you identify your real target.

Here's a little hint: if I were to be as maliciously dishonest as that muck-raking diva, I could pretend that I'd forgotten who she was; but, as always, I'm better than that.

It's you, of course. The resident queen of muck-raking.

Am I on track so far?

Not really, but that's pretty typical when you're in "spin" mode.

You really ought not to project so eagerly.

You've also neglected to mention that what started it all was SeattleGhostWriter edited by harmony. Do not use red. soliciting donations for a non-existent Mormon studies journal which he apparently wished to develop---an odd move for someone who hasn't even been published in one of the existing Mormon studies journals to begin with.

I agree that that is odd, and probably not likely to succeed. I fail to see why that makes him fair game for the kind of spite attack for which this board in general -- and you in particular -- are so justly famous.

SGW then issued a take-down notice to the board, and the webhost, purely for the copyright images.

There was only one copyrighted image in question by this point. But since Spurven Ten Sing and TrashcanMan79's use of the image would have been covered by Fair Use law, SSW's DMCA was likely illegal.

This is amazing. A formal request to remove something is "illegal" simply because in your opinion the pirating of the image was all good?

The Webhost then took the board offline for a couple of days.

Yes. And to SeattleGhostWriter's edited by harmony. Do not use red. credit, this was pure irresponsibility on DreamHost's part and hardly his fault.

"Pure irresponsibility" how? Who was harmed? It seems to me that protecting themselves against the risk of legal action is the responsible thing to do.

I know that insincere expressions of regret are all the rage around here -- Ms Jack is almost as skilled at them as she is at dishing the dirt

CFR for where I have ever issued an "insincere expression of regret" and "dished dirt."

The latest (and AFAICT, the longest) Will Schryver bash-fest was your doing, and it consists of nothing but dishing the dirt. As for your insincere expressions of regret, how about this:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18091&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=1174

The note I received last week informing me that his work was being canceled came as something of a shock.

"Shock" is an unusual spelling for "triumph."

Or this:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18091&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=1119

An outcome where William is barred from publishing because he refuses to abandon his offending behavior is not what I would have wanted, but in 47+ pages of this issue being discussed, William showed not the slightest sign of changing his ways.

What I "did" to him? I didn't "do" anything to William Schryver. He did it to himself.

That's right; he did it to himself. He combed through hundreds of posts pulling out a handful of rude remarks, all to support the obvious lie that he was a "misogynist."

Or this:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/545 ... 1209015045

And no, I took no "glee" in exposing what he was doing. Ask my husband. The time I spent combing through William's posts and compiling all the things he said about women made me want to throw up. I frequently had to step away from my computer and regroup with him about how awful it all was.

And yet, still you found the strength to valiantly press on.

You must have been really motivated.

You also snarked:

Good luck with your hypocrisy hunt. You're going to need it.

Oh, I don't think so.

In any case, Pahoran, I hope this clears things up for you.

It would have, had I ever been in any doubt that you have absolutely no moral qualms about declaring open season on your ideological opponents; all of whom, just coincidentally, happen to be Mormon apologists of one sort or another.

But like I said: if, instead of pursuing malicious vendettas against people you hate, you were to discuss ideas and events, this sort of thing wouldn't happen. It happened because PP was following your example.

And again, I'm sure you must be very proud.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Guest]

Paharon you don't know dick about what popped up here.

Someone please tell SSW/Tim that his five inches of fame are up, err I mean five minutes of fame.


In other news, I have been working on a parody of "Splish SPLASH"....

[_moksha]

And COBOL if I remember correctly. COBOL?

If not COBOL, then perhaps it's heavenly programming language equivalent, COLOB. When they say it is written in the stars, they are reading the code.

Pahoran wrote: Note that I've corrected your gratuitous expression of spite.

They're giving it away free? I want a refund.

[_Kishkumen]

Do it. Let the reader see how far you have to reach to tear it down.

I've been doing freelance editing for the last decade. He won't have to reach far.

The Nehor is a pro. You have just been schooled by him.