Response to Dan Peterson

Post by **_gtaggart** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:18 pm

Hmmm. You might want to take a look at the "Question For The Moderators" thread on MAD.

Post by **_The Dude** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:48 pm

I posted this on that thread before I saw this part of the discussion on MD.

The Dude wrote:Maklelan did start a thread titled "Another Lawsuit is Threatened" but I don't believe there was ever a first one. Right after Gee's test appeared there was a lot of sqwaking on this board (from the defenders) about libel and slander from CaliforniaKid. On Mormondiscussions some of us joked that CaliforniaKid might get a process server on his doorstep if he gave out his address, but nobody said Gee had threatened to sue. I haven't found any quotes from Gee's test that preserved this threat -- maybe those were edited too. And perhaps the least valuable piece of evidence against this is my memory; I don't remember seeing that threat in Gee's silly test. I don't think it happened.

also

The Dude wrote:Kevin just isn't remembering correctly. I do remember talking about the possibility, and seeing people talk about the possibility. It would be easy to make the mistake unless you went back and looked at how the possibility first came up indiscussion.

That's what I think. Am I wrong, Kevin?

_marg · Post by **_marg** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:20 pm

This is what I see as the main important issue brought forward by Kevin. I see Ritner as an agrieved party and all the rest of the discussion by mainly Mormons as attempts to shift focus onto Kevin by personal attacks, finding fault with anything at all he might have said. If Kevin made a mistake by thinking Gee threatened critics with a lawsuit, that's not a big deal, that's not defaming Gee's professional reputation. One can appreciate how such an error can easily happen. But it is a big deal to defame R. Ritner's professional reputation repeatedly over an extended period of time, by innuendo and false accusations. That's unethical and malicious. And one can understand the motivation to do that. It is a common tactic, particularly by religious apologists, when one doesn't have good evidence and reasoning to make personal attacks on the opposition. So the important issue, the one which really matters in my opinion are the malicious attempts by DCP and Gee to discredit Ritner's professional reputation.

Post by **_The Dude** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:32 pm

I stand corrected by Whoever. William Schryver said something about a lawsuit before Gee ever posted his dumb test. He said this directly to CK. Still thinking Kevin is mistaken for saying Gee said it in his pinned thread. Not malicious, just mistaken.

Post by **_dartagnan** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:34 pm

No what I am referring to is the Gee email that was posted by the mods. In it Gee made a remark to the effect that if he thought it was worth it he'd consider filing a libel suit. It was short and subtle, but it was there.

Suddenly, after Peterson decided to get all indignant with the Ritner case, it isn't there anymore.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:38 pm

dartagnan wrote:No what I am referring to is the Gee email that was posted by the mods. In it Gee made a remark to the effect that if he thought it was worth it he'd consider filing a libel suit. It was short and subtle, but it was there.

Suddenly, after Peterson decided to get all indignant with the Ritner case, it isn't there anymore.

He'd consider filing a libel suit based on what and for what reasons? What's the motive?

Post by **_The Dude** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:42 pm

dartagnan wrote:No what I am referring to is the Gee email that was posted by the mods. In it Gee made a remark to the effect that if he thought it was worth it he'd consider filing a libel suit. It was short and subtle, but it was there.

Suddenly, after Peterson decided to get all indignant with the Ritner case, it isn't there anymore.

But you didn't copy it? I can't find anybody quoting that part, or making a direct reference to Gee actually saying that. We joked about it, yes. Can you find anything printed to back up your memory? All I find is Will Schryver telling CaliforniaKid to look out for legal action.

Post by **_dartagnan** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:42 pm

Who knows seems to have noted the legal threat in the email

wtf is this? if you can't 'pass' his test, you can't comment on the Book of Abraham?

what a douchebag.

wait, can I be threatened with a lawsuit for saying that? – June 6

And I made reference to it on the 7th of June here: http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... c&start=20

And Gee is an absolute fool who is going to be held accountable whether he likes it or not. That lame legal threat was the last straw for me. I am thinking of dedicating an entire website to the incompetence of BYU scholars. Sue me if you dare!

But now there is no sign of any of it.

How convenient.

Post by **_Yong Xi** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:43 pm

dartagnan wrote:No what I am referring to is the Gee email that was posted by the mods. In it Gee made a remark to the effect that if he thought it was worth it he'd consider filing a libel suit. It was short and subtle, but it was there.

Suddenly, after Peterson decided to get all indignant with the Ritner case, it isn't there anymore.

I am quite certain this is correct.

Post by **_Jersey Girl** » Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:54 pm

Spit it out, Kevin.

You say

But now there is no sign of any of it.

How convenient.

1. What is the actual claim?
2. What is the motive for said claim?
3. Why didn't you yourself copy it?

Jersey Girl