"That's just not true. You attack him every time you call his mental health status into question."

Have a great weekend.

That's not a criticism. I simply challenged the claim that you cannot attack Scratch because he's anonymous. It's obvious that you can and do attack Scratch as I demonstrated.

Daniel Peterson


Are you saying that I've ignored his actions over the the past half decade?

My occasionally expressing the (sincere) opinion that he's nuts can scarcely be compared with his relentless five-year campaign against me.

And I don't think that an anonymous poster can really be attacked in the same sense that a named one can. To say that Scratch is crazy does precisely nothing to him in real life. Scratch is merely a pseudonym on a message board. He has, as such, no "reputation" beyond it that can be harmed or enhanced.


No. But I think it's fair to say that, on the whole, the board has watched with equanimity and even amusement as he has engaged in his crusade against me for the past five years.

I've found that surprising and very disappointing.

I sincerely think that, if I saw a Latter-day Saint doing the same thing to a critic, I would have objected loudly long ago.

This is what you actually stated.

Daniel Peterson


You weren't referring to "the board", you were referring directly to me.

And I was referring, very specifically, to right now.

Look, if you want to feel offended, that's your prerogative, I suppose. I was not saying that you have failed to criticize him in the past. If I wasn't clear enough for you a few minutes ago, what I'm saying now should be entirely plain.

There is plenty to attack peterso on, but a commission for a family portrait???

What in the world is wrong with that?

Are you worried about the cost? Should he have gone to JC Pennys portrait studio and then had it digitlzed to look like a painting? Is there a cost limit to the job you believe he has to adhere to?

What if he went to some fine pt/pd photographers or some who specialize in hand poured carbon prints and paid $1000 or more for a truly excellent portrait shot with a 20x24 camera?

Mormon art isn't that hot but why run the guy down for wanting a very good family portrait?

Especially since it's not true.


Yeah!

Especially since -- I think I may have mentioned this already -- it's not true.

Dan, come on. This is just stupid. Look: do you want to start from scratch, or what?

I'd rather just stop.

I have zero interest in you, and zero interest in conversing with you.

Then why have you been throwing up post after post after post? I reminded you relatively early on in that other thread that LoaP, the narrator, etc. have told you to just "stop," and yet here you are, picking at your scabs, crying about this "5 year crusade" (and I see that you've now convinced yourself that I type up a negative post about you every single day). Lol. Really? *Every* day? Even those days when I don't post at all?

You know, if my criticism of you really burns you up so bad, then why not accept the various offers I've made re: reconciliation? Here I offer again, and look at what you do: "I have zero interest in you, and zero interest in conversing with you."

Or maybe by "stop" you mean putting an end to the nastier varieties of your apologetics? Well, if that's the case then you have my full support. If the extent of what you're doing is MST and the "Mormon Times" articles, then you wouldn't really be giving me much to work with. (Admittedly, I might still make fun of MST here and there---please at least grant me that much.)

But you've put as least as much effort into our little relationship as I have, ol buddy.

Having some idea what Mormons dish out, and your passivity in not confronting those who do, I really don't have much compassion for your situation. I would not be surprised if you have a network of devoted followers who do your dirty work. Guilt by silence, at the very least.

I have no idea why Scratchie is so focused on your imperfections, but if you were just to back out of the hostility, perhaps he might also moderate.

Personally, I find your subtle sarcasm quite irritating. Maybe you ought to tone it down.

He has his own reasons for maintaining internet anonymity. I have no idea what they are. Maybe Scratchie would like to ease my curiousity on that subject by PM. Mediation sometimes works.

Are you implying that someone else is "creeping people out" other than you?

oh oh oh! I know! I know! Well I know of one!

The Book of Mormon.

This is the key point. That someone could easily find it is true. Sometimes we have a false idea of privacy. I don't see a lack of privacy as being the core issue here--Malaise is correct that it is easy to find. The issue is that Scratch is so obsessed with Daniel Peterson that he would even look through a relatively harmless Amazon wishlist to see if he could use it to criticize Daniel Peterson. That's either desperate, pathetic, an obsession, or most likely all of that.

Which, of course, explains his obsession with maintaining his own anonymity while eagerly ferreting around for IRL information about his targets. It is so that he can continue to attack real people with impunity, knowing that they cannot effectively respond.

So while he's obviously unhinged to some extent, he's not completely crazy. The only thing about his character that is complete is his moral cowardice.


You wouldn't need to. If a Latter-day Saint were doing that to a critic, one of the hypocrites in residence here would have carefully gathered an exhaustive catalogue of everything that Latter-day Saint had said, or was alleged to have said, about that critic and used it as ammunition to publicly humiliate them.

While professing to be so veddy veddy sad that it was necessary.

Regards,
Pahoran

I believe that Dan has done exactly that. He has defended himself quite well, in my opinion.

If you are referring to the incident with Schryver, save your breath. You will get no support from me on that one.

I do, however, think that the attacks on Daniel are overdone, and have stated so very plainly, much to Scratch's chagrin.

It has not, however, stopped Scratch from continuing.

Don't worry Liz. I wouldn't expect that for a second.

Just like I don't expect to see a long, sumptuously detailed catalogue of (for example) Darrick Evenson's unequivocal and undoubted misogyny to be unveiled on this forum any time soon. And for the same reasons, too.


"Overdone?" That's the extent of your stinging criticism and rigorous condemnation?

Not that there's anything wrong per se with what Scratch is doing, it's just that it's "overdone."

All I can say to that is, "Oh."

And of course such a lukewarm slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket isn't going to do anything. Nobody really wants to stop Scratch from continuing; personal vendettas against LDS defenders are what this forum is for.

Regards,
Pahoran

Everyone knows he's a misogynist, and he's called out for it every time he posts something in that vein. He's also clearly mentally ill. Not sure what point it is you're attempting to score, but you shot wide.

You can climb down off that cross any time now, Pahoran.

For reasons that I will not go into, I wish to retract the above post. All I will say is that I have since found out certain facts that demonstrate that what I posted was wrong.

Liz, I apologise.

Regards,
Pahoran