But you said:



So "I have" means "I have the ability to get" now?

Well, get mine, and PM me to tell me what city I am in now. Go on: I don't mind.

When did they make you admin? That should be the only way you could know anybody's IP address on a phpBB type system unless you are actually working for the FBI or Dreamhost hosting company. You better re-read up your CCNA, CCNP or CCIE notes. I also think you owe everyone an apology for implying that you can at any moment find out who anyone is and use this information for your benefit.

Maybe Belmont is about to prove he can find IP addresses by finding mine, and telling me via PM what city I am in now?

Why?



I am the IT director for my particular department. I never stated otherwise.



Are you being dishonest when you claim that you've published "75 peer reviewed articles?"



"David Taylor" and all of the "general authorities" who posted on that thread were most likely all sock puppets of you, and Darth J.



I am exactly as hell-bent on exacting revenge on critics as you are on exacting revenge on apologists. [deleted] has nothing to do with it. I simply work there, and I do not represent it.



My location listing said "A better place than you," not "New England."



It is not totally unverifiable, but you'd have to be pretty tech savvy to get any IRL information about me.



Again, why is the truth of who I am so significant to you?



The articles do not exist, Scratch. I don't mind you having a little faux academic persona, but when you accuse others of lying you have to abide by higher standards.



I could send you a picture of any Tom, Dick or Harry and you'd post it on your blog? Who would look the fool then?



Perhaps I am unaware of which quote you were referring to.

It takes a lot of work, and the legality is questionable. I won't do it.

What an unexpected reply.

May I recall that Belmont told us some time ago that he had all our IP addresses?

Then that morphed into a claim that he could get them if he wanted to.

Now he says, in response to my challenge to find just one IP "I could if I wanted to, but I won't".

I call BS on the whole business. This man is a mere blowhard.

You aren't thinking outside the box, Chap. I'm talking about social engineering here.

This is meaningless babble.

I come here because I believe in the faith and want to learn of new attacks or challenges so's I can be better educated on them when people ask me about them.

You come here, a non-believer, posting about a religion in which you no longer believe, because why, exactly? For a community of fellowshippers who triumph the benefits of fornication and masturbation, as well as outright atheisim? Who talk about sex with their wives in public? Who enjoy a little porn; maybe not a little, but a lot? Who don't see how porn treats women? Who appear to have serious issues with women -- to the point of sociopathy? Who use vulgarities as a means of deriding the faithful?

I see you are no admirer of the Gamiliel solution.

You seem to see life in an us-vs.-them sort of way. You come here to arm yourself against challenges and attacks, seeing nothing of value in the people you deride as degenerate sex/porn/masturbation addicts.

I don't see life or the people here in those terms. Although some people may "triumph" the positions you say they do (I haven't seen too much of that, honestly), one does not have to agree with everything other people say to enjoy talking with them and making friends of them. My coworker, who is an elder's quorum president, has quite a vulgar sense of humor and foul mouth, for example. I like him, though, and I have had meaningful conversations with him. By your logic, he and I disagree on religion and on how one ought to speak and behave in public, so I should shun him.

Sorry, but I like a lot of the people here, even you, usually. If that makes me disgraceful and pathetic, I can live with that.

As far as your Elders Quorum president is concerned, by your description he is no Christian and a hypocrite to what he pretends to be on Sunday. But then, I peel off a few hell and damns here and there so I'm one too; the Church is for hypocrites

But that brings me back to my question. Why the hell are you here and why do you spend so much time here? For what purpose? To what end?

I should go back to church.



It's funny that no one ever asked me that question when I was a believer and posting on these boards. But apparently, when you stop believing, you should leave boards where you find the discussion interesting and where you have friends.

I enjoy discussing Mormonism. Do you have a problem with that?

Because truth is important to me, Simon.



No. Hence why I offered to link provided that you offered up an abstract.



Which says nothing about your erratic behavior.



In what sense do you think I'm exacting "revenge" on apologists? What is it you suppose they ever did to me?



For a time, it said "New England." Around this same time you invited Paul O. to come and do A/C work in "CT."



So: we've gone from "it's impossible" to find out to "It is not totally unverifiable." You were wrong, Simon. It's good of you to admit your mistake.



Who ever said it was "significant"?



I'm happy to post a link to a peer reviewed article. Just as soon as you put up your abstract(s).



I don't know, Simon. If you're peddling false information, I hardly see how I could be to blame for that. Plus, the leaders of the Church have told us to be honest in our dealings with our fellow men.



Perhaps. But I doubt it. Here it is again, just in case:



Did you say or write these words, Bro. Belmont? Y/N?

Liar.

Oh, kind of like Joseph Smith indicating that there is a king's name in Facsimile No. 3? You're no better than Joseph Smith. You're a liar just like him. You said you had our IP addresses. But you're really just a liar playing a false prophet's game.

You're caught with you pants down, yet again, Simon. I'm afraid that the apostates are simply wearing you down. Not even The Nehor can save you now. You're getting tired, boy. You're slipping.

Soon, Dr. Scratch will tire of you and pounce you like a cat on a rat.

Get him, Scratch! It's time to reel in your catch.

Paul O

How can you be so crude?

Firstly, it was not a lie, it was a kind of a parable. When Belmont said "I have your IP address, along with everyone else's here" only a simple-minded fundamentalist would have taken that literally. What he really meant was <fill in some general uplift here>.

Secondly, who doesn't tell lies from time to time. Catholics do too, you know. And atheists are the worst of all. If you aren't perfect, you have no right to criticize Belmont for one little mistake.

Thirdly, he was not speaking as Belmont, but as an LDS chatbot programmed to fight evil critics of the CoJCoLDS.

Fourthly, it is not doctrine that Belmont has all our IP addresses, so stop your irrelevant quote mining.

Fifthly, what today's Belmont says ("I could get your IP addresses but I won't") supersedes any thing yesterday's Belmont said ("I have all your IP addresses"). Precept on precept. line on line you know ...

Sixthly, as a number of FAIR articles have pointed out (do your homework!) in Reformed Egyptian "I have all your IP addresses" really meant "I do not have all your IP addresses".

I can see you left the Church because you never understood anything about it in the first place.


[Edited to add:
Seventhly: It wasn't a lie - it was social engineering. And that one was straight from the horse's mouth.]