The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dr. Moore:

I hope you've noticed that Dr. Peterson has been going ballistic over your criticism, repeating again and again his new passive-aggressive mantra:
DCP wrote:I'm trying to think of any ways in which the influx of posters (and of up- and down-voters) from your most excellent message board (to criticize which would instantly reveal me as a person of low character) has improved the conversation here.
DCP wrote:I probably won't respond. Not in real time, anyway. I'm less interested in a never-ending back-and-forth with the charming residents of your marvelous board (which it would be a horrific act of bad character on my part ever to fault) than I can possibly express. That way lies nothing but exasperation and possible madness.
Etc., etc. Getting called out as a liar really seems to have set him off.

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

Well, “marvelous” is an adjective oft used in reference to the founding of Mormonism, the work and wonder of the restoration, is it not? Even cloaked in sarcasm, I choose to hear a hint of acknowledgment of truth sneaking out there. It IS a marvelous thing, to create and manage a place where adults can sort through a broad range of ideas related to Mormonism. And Mormonism is super interesting, as are it’s leaders and ardent scholarly defenders.

I want to posit that the vitality of MormonDiscussions.com has absolutely nothing to do with Dr. P per se. He simply draws a majority of the fire, BY CHOICE, because:

(a) he used to post regularly here, for years, therefore has contentious history with many of you, but more importantly
(b) he out-writes blog/board posts by a factor of 100 to 1,000 times more than any other Mopologist or church leader. He is in a league of one, when it comes to volume. Think about that — even if we were to carefully track and control for equal time relative to online content posted, Dan Peterson would still find his name on a majority of current, topical conversations. His combative, tireless approach to blogs and boards only cements that reality.

Imagine if Dallin Oaks began blogging and boarding 6 hours every day, or if young Smoot were to raise his game to a Mopologist-leading 7 blog posts per day and 30-50 board comments per day, well I am confident they both would quickly overtake Dr. P in raw mentions and “attacks” — if attack is defined as critical content analysis.

By the way, I wonder if anyone would dare try to challenge Dr. P’s literal running of the table? If someone in the Mopolgetics community tried, would it piss him off to lose the spotlight? He sure seems committed to receiving as much attention (to be sure, he all but invites negative attention, the way he writes to provoke critics into a fight) ... But, AT WHAT COST??

Anyway, this isn’t a sewer, a sty, a stalker board or anything of the sort. Dr. Dan showing up in so many threads is simple math, law of large numbers, a function of his own carpet bombing the Internet with a simply mind boggling amount of controversial Mormonism-linked commentary.

Thanks, Dr Shades, and other helpers, such as Dean Robbers, for keeping the site going and for playing the long game by encouraging diversity of views and personalities here.

And I do hope Dr. P will choose to address people as people, and leave out all of the negative reference to MormonDiscussions.com. As he promised.

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

On further reflection, I have to wonder what BYU administrators might do when presented with evidence that a tenured professor had entered into a very public, very specific, fund raising agreement — a contract — to benefit the Interpreter, a non-scholarly side hobby, no less, in demonstrably bad faith. What do you all think?

The evidence is all out in the open: the context, the deal, the agreements by both parties. I can easily provide direct evidence of the donated funds. And moreover, because all of the clarifying email correspondence was conducted ON BYU EMAIL, an investigation would turn up ample evidence of the existence of the contract, of my part being gratefully acknowledged by Dr. Peterson, and of my numerous subsequent warnings that he had acted and continued to act in bad faith afterward. And to top it all off, of course, there is the almost 7 months of direct evidence of his near-daily wanton violations, indulgence really, in the one specific thing he contracted not to do: making public negative references to MormonDiscussions.com.

I have to say, while I prefer to err on the side of generosity with people, Dan’s behavior has me thinking that words are cheap, and that turning him in to administrators and honor code office might be in the best interest of all BYU stakeholders. It might end up being the best thing for Dr. P as well, a sort of intervention on professional accountability.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6342
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Philo Sofee »

What a fantastic enterprise this entire thing has been, and the wonderful way you have professionally and ethically handled yourself Dr. Moore. To me it demonstrates that to defend Mormonism even if one has to become immoral, childish, and unethical, it is the noble thing to do. That is how Peterson and Midget and Kiwi57 come across to all others except themselves. In their eyes they will be invited onto Jesus' lap and given a pat on the head for sharing the Savior's "love" with all his other children. They are morally superior by being immorally unethical. It boggles the mind.

User avatar
Dr. Shades
Founder & Visionary
Posts: 14130
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr. Shades »

Dr Moore wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 9:54 am
On further reflection, I have to wonder what BYU administrators might do when presented with evidence that a tenured professor had entered into a very public, very specific, fund raising agreement — a contract — to benefit the Interpreter, a non-scholarly side hobby, no less, in demonstrably bad faith. What do you all think? . . . turning him in to administrators and honor code office might be in the best interest of all BYU stakeholders. It might end up being the best thing for Dr. P as well, a sort of intervention on professional accountability.
NO. NO. A THOUSAND TIMES, NO.

My goal for MormonDiscussions.com is that the discussions that take place here NOT EVER bleed over into anyone's real life. I want nobody's marriage, relationships, employment, or ecclesiastical standing to be jeopardized IN ANY WAY by the things that are discussed here, NO MATTER HOW TENUOUS THE CONNECTION. Why? Because if everyone concludes that the things they say here can be used by an intellectual opponent to cause actual, lasting damage in the real world, then everyone will immediately clam up and free discussion will come to a screeching halt.

By contrast, if everyone knows that there will be no real-world consequences to the things they say, then they will speak freely and reveal their true opinions. . . and thus allow free speech, and this website, to continue to thrive.

Besides, snitching to people's tenure committees (as Tvednes did to Murphy's), snitching to people's department heads (as Midgley did to Kishkumen's), and calling a guy's sister to demand dirt on him (as Midgley did to Murphy's) in order to end their careers is a filthy trick that the Mopologists employ, not us disbelievers.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22018
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by moksha »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 5:33 pm
NO. NO. A THOUSAND TIMES, NO.
Bravo to Dr. Shades. Let's not have discussions here become part of "the evil that men do".

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dr Moore wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 9:54 am
On further reflection, I have to wonder what BYU administrators might do when presented with evidence that a tenured professor had entered into a very public, very specific, fund raising agreement — a contract — to benefit the Interpreter, a non-scholarly side hobby, no less, in demonstrably bad faith. What do you all think?

The evidence is all out in the open: the context, the deal, the agreements by both parties. I can easily provide direct evidence of the donated funds. And moreover, because all of the clarifying email correspondence was conducted ON BYU EMAIL, an investigation would turn up ample evidence of the existence of the contract, of my part being gratefully acknowledged by Dr. Peterson, and of my numerous subsequent warnings that he had acted and continued to act in bad faith afterward. And to top it all off, of course, there is the almost 7 months of direct evidence of his near-daily wanton violations, indulgence really, in the one specific thing he contracted not to do: making public negative references to MormonDiscussions.com.

I have to say, while I prefer to err on the side of generosity with people, Dan’s behavior has me thinking that words are cheap, and that turning him in to administrators and honor code office might be in the best interest of all BYU stakeholders. It might end up being the best thing for Dr. P as well, a sort of intervention on professional accountability.
Dr. Moore:

Have you seen what the Mopologists are saying about this? Check it out:
DCP wrote:Kiwi57: "You mean - the one that you'd have to be horribly cruel and mean-spirited to criticise in any way?"

Yes. That one. (My character is under serious attack at the moment because I've maligned that lovely place here and allowed others, notably including you and Professor Midgley, to refer to it disrespectfully. One person has proposed to take the issue to the BYU administration, in hopes of seeing me disciplined.)
Kiwi57 wrote:
One person has proposed to take the issue to the BYU administration, in hopes of seeing me disciplined.
That sounds like something a certain poster I know might think of as a way to make himself look important and "connected."
DCP wrote:It's someone in whom I'm very disappointed.
Gee whiz, Dr. Moore--didn't you donate, like, $1,000 to Interpreter? And this is the thanks--and disrespect--that you get in return?

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6342
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Philo Sofee »

And thus we see that the Mormons will do whatever it takes in order to come out looking good and moral and upright.....in their own eyes to each other. It is why I happily quit, and have gained in happiness ever since. I have far better relationships and friendships now than I ever did as a Mormon, seriously. And I am sure I know the reason why. Their morality is of a different order and is the utmost heinous.

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

Some people refuse to allow themselves to be held accountable for their actions. Some people prefer to blame shift until the earth is scorched.

Dr. P is free to be "very disappointed" in me, but I ask you all, disappointed at what, exactly? The contract he made was real. The money was real. And his bad faith was also real. He is the chronic alcoholic who blames everyone else for his alcoholism, but will never stay in rehab.

Grow up, Dr. Peterson.

I wonder if Midgley and McGregor would be "very disappointed" if they saw what sorts of things Dr. Peterson says about them, and their message board behaviors, behind their backs?

Just wondering...

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

Kiwi57 offers a free lesson in double standards with this one:
"That sounds like something a certain poster I know might think of as a way to make himself look important and "connected."
Pretty funny, from the troll who relishes shutting people down with demands for sources when he dislikes statements of fact or first-hand insight.
Kiwi57: I don't like what you're saying, sources or shut up!
Kiwi57: I don't like your sources, stop showing off!
LOL!!

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

moksha wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 12:19 am
Dr. Shades wrote:
Sun Apr 26, 2020 5:33 pm
NO. NO. A THOUSAND TIMES, NO.
Bravo to Dr. Shades. Let's not have discussions here become part of "the evil that men do".
Keeping the moral high ground is a worthy aim. Thanks for your wise feedback, Dr. Shades and Moksha.

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:18 pm
Gee whiz, Dr. Moore--didn't you donate, like, $1,000 to Interpreter? And this is the thanks--and disrespect--that you get in return?
Doctor, personal respect and thanks were was never a term of the contract between Dr. P and myself.

It was a far simpler transaction:
* I donated money to the Interpreter (over and above the $1,000 "thank you" prize, by the way, as it was the second of two offers)
* He agreed to a long-term model of not trash talking MormonDiscussions.com and its people.

That was it, no other specific constraints. Therefore, I cannot suggest any breach of covenant when Dr. P chooses to express contempt for me personally.

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21158
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Dr. Moore,

I'm in Dr. Shades' camp on this one. I don't think conversations, as agitating as they might be, ought to filter back into one's real life. One of the great things about the Internet and anonymity (or even using one's IRL name) is the unfiltered nature of it all. In vino veritas holds true if you look at the Internet as one's truth serum. More honesty and more dialogue has occurred because of the Internet than has probably ever happened in the history of Man. The fact that we can get so angry with one another and there's standoff is an incredibly valuable tool in the process of revealing the nature and facts of a topic.

This goes away when conversation is used as an agitprop to destroy one's life. Why? Because the conversations held over the Internet aren't the sum total of the person or persons engaged in them. To use just one facet of a man's words against him to levy retribution is, imho, immoral.

- Doc

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21158
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Kiwi57 said, “The obsession of the scumbags at Scumbag Central with finding "plagiarism" in your blogging looks pathetic and desperate.”

So. Just to be clear. Is Dr. Moore’s agreement with Mr. Peterson now null and void? Sicetenoneneers are free to violate the terms of the deal now?

- Doc

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

No, Doc, it's not null and void. It is being neglected, in bad faith, by Dr. Peterson.
Every time he makes or allows comments derogatory to MormonDiscussions.com, he is dishonestly acting in bad faith to our contract.

I would love to see how Kiwi57 wiggles Dr. Peterson out of the case of plagiarism that I found this morning. Once he gets past his sanctimonious indignation, I'm sure he'll find a way.

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21158
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Dr Moore said, "I would love to see how Kiwi57 wiggles Dr. Peterson out of the case of plagiarism that I found this morning. Once he gets past his sanctimonious indignation, I'm sure he'll find a way."

You'll be waiting for all time and eternity, my friend. Just like we're waiting on all those 'manuscripts' Mr. Peterson is, for sure, going to turn into a book one day.

- Doc

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10189
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Lemmie »

Dr Moore wrote:
Wed Apr 29, 2020 3:59 pm
No, Doc, it's not null and void. It is being neglected, in bad faith, by Dr. Peterson.
Every time he makes or allows comments derogatory to MormonDiscussions.com, he is dishonestly acting in bad faith to our contract.

I would love to see how Kiwi57 wiggles Dr. Peterson out of the case of plagiarism that I found this morning. Once he gets past his sanctimonious indignation, I'm sure he'll find a way.
Well, one time he did it by equating my outing of Peterson’s plagiarism with MsJack’s outing of schryver’s misogyny. Why he considered that a positive is beyond me. Here are some relevant posts (note, kiwi thought I was Nyal):
Kiwi wrote:Incidentally, Nyal, just so you know: accusations are not proof. For instance, just because a vindictive arch-feminist cherry-picked and cropped a few quotes as part of an obsessive campaign to make someone look like a "bubbling cauldron of deception and misogyny," that doesn't mean that he is one. It just means that one toxic man-hater decided to accuse him, and a bunch of mindless Mormon-haters all cheered and clapped on cue.
MsJack wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 pm
Lemmie wrote:Also, according to kiwi, if you notice plagiarism you are an arch-feminist?!!! Is this like Midgley's comment that homosexuality renders one unable to do history?
Xenophon wrote:I may be way off here but I read that initially as a reference to Ms Jack's expose on Schryver. Kiwi probably thinks lumping the two incidents together puts a stain on yours but personally I'd consider you in good company there.
Res Ipsa wrote:I was wondering why Kiwi was harshing on Lemmie. Ms. Jack would make more sense as his target...
I can provide a bit more context on this.

About a year after l'affaire du Schryver, there was a thread at MADB wherein Pahoran and William kept calling me things like "man-hater" and "feminazi," you know, the kind of things MRA'ers say of women they don't like. I am, of course, rather conservative as feminists go, so the fact that even my pro-life evangelical feminism is enough to elicit such epithets and slurs from them says a lot about their attitude towards women.

Later, on Liz's private forum, Pahoran decided that repeatedly calling me a "man-hater" was a brilliant strategy. I asked him for examples of my loathsome man-hating and the only thing he could pony up was that most of my high-profile conflicts with LDS apologists have been with men (him, Schryver, Dan Peterson, etc.). Because apparently there are binders full of female LDS apologists out there whom I am giving a free pass to on account of their gender, and I've never been critical of Valerie Hudson or Juliann Reynolds or anything like that. (Ironically, I believe this went down on a thread where I had been ever-so-mildly critical of Cassandra Hedelius.)

I can't provide links or exact quotes since I left Liz's forum, but this is all to say, Pahoran (aka kiwi57) calling women who are critical of LDS apologists "man-haters" and "feminazis" and "arch-feminists" is just par for the course with him. And pretty much a badge of honor for us.

http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic. ... 9#p1172049

[bolding added]

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Dr Moore »

Yeah, I guess he could try and flip it all the way around like that. I might then be tempted to respond by sending dear Kiwi57 a few samples of how his beloved hero condemns his online temperament behind his back when it bolsters his personal cause.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6342
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Philo Sofee »

The really dumb thing about Scryver's misogyny is that FARMS itself told him to get the hell out of there and NEVER come back, he was completely and totally excommunicated from FARMS academics DUE TO HIS MISOGYNY. And they are STILL defending Scryvner?! Perhaps they ought to go ask why FARMS kicked his ass between his shoulders and told him adios loser....... MsJack did one of the most solid and intense thorough investigative analysis of Scryvner's misogny in the entire world. ALL the evidence is there. But of course, evidence does not count when it is against Mopologists, but name calling is sure in order.

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 7801
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Wed Apr 29, 2020 6:29 pm
The really dumb thing about Scryver's misogyny is that FARMS itself told him to get the hell out of there and NEVER come back, he was completely and totally excommunicated from FARMS academics DUE TO HIS MISOGYNY. And they are STILL defending Scryvner?! Perhaps they ought to go ask why FARMS kicked his ass between his shoulders and told him adios loser.......
I'm not sure that this is altogether true, Philo. My understanding of the events is that there were a few folks at FARMS--notably Brian Hauglid--who stepped up and called out Schryver for his behavior, but that there were still some people--DCP and Paul Hoskisson, perhaps--who were sticking up for Schryver, but the Powers That Be ultimately sided with Hauglid.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6342
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: The Mopologists Fantasize About "A Totally Different Morality"

Post by Philo Sofee »

I was simply taking what I remembered form Scryver's own admission. Thank you for the heads up D. Scratch. That's fantastically interesting that Hauglid caught the ridiculousness of Scryver and Peterson never did and went with Scryver' heinous and debilitating immoral misogyny. That alone is all the commentary one needs on Peterson for reliability about much of anything.

Post Reply