Ray A wrote:Why did Scratch put the names up in the first place?
Honestly, Ray, I did not think there would be any harm in posting the names. I figured that the names were well-known, and that juliann, Pahoran and Co. would have no problem with it. It turns out that they were very, very angry about it, for reasons which remain unclear to me. Pahoran appeared on this board to rail against me for quite some time, only to react rather awkwardly to my very simply pointing out of the fact that his name had been removed a long time ago...
Because a person's name is accessible on the Internet does not mean they would approve of someone else posting their names, especially someone hostile to them!
If this is the "Golden Rule" for you, then you are going to have to chastise DCP, Bill Hamblin, David Bokovoy, Pahoran, juliann, and any number of MAD participants who routinely "name names" of people they are hostile towards.
Also, it needs to be pointed out that at certain times in the past, juliann, Pahoran, smac97 and others have sharply denounced and criticized others who wanted to remain anonymous. These MAD posters all boasted about their "bravery" at giving up their in real life names. But where has that bravery gone now?
Why does Scratch always have to be called on to post in good taste? Remember, he was putting these names up, and we still don't know HIS name. Now, I wonder how Scratch would feel if someone found out HIS real name and posted it? You see, this is the real problem with Scratch, as I have been saying, he wants and expects anonymity, yet he also wants the freedom to post full names and then attack those people.
That's not true. I am happy to just attack arguments. It just so happens that many of these folks post their in real life names as a kind of "badge of honor," DCP in particular. It is transparently obvious that he uses his real name because he knows it will earn him the adulation of TBMs.
Juliann does not use her full name when posting on boards, everyone knows that, and the fact that her full name is accessible on the FAIR website means nothing!
I disagree. If she genuinely wanted anonymity, she would have chosen a pseudonym. Instead, she wants to climb up the totem pole of apologetics, hence her use of her in real life real name. I would be willing to bet that she has long hoped that high-ranking apologists would see her posts on FAIR/MAD and say, "Wow! Who is this Wonder Woman!" She obviously views the FAIR/MAD board as a kind of stage, otherwise why would she flip out so much at being embarrassed by Beastie and Dartagnan? Why the need for the "hidden" Pundits Forum?
This is her preference, not to use her full name on forums. Ditto for Pahoran. It is this violation of personal preference that is at issue. Not whether names are accessible on some corner of the Internet. Many know Dr. Shades' real name, and I have respected his wish not to use his real name on the forums, and have never even used his first name. In fact anyone who doesn't know Shades' real name must be a newcomer to boards, since it's easily accessible on Z. Does that mean I can start a blog and reveal his real name, and do so in good conscience?
Let me remind you again, Ray: no unwanted in real life names appear on my blog. As soon as I was alerted to the fact that Pahoran and juliann took offense to the names being there, I took them down. While we are on this topic: are you aware of the fact that juliann personally approved of the Mr. Itchy blog? (Which, unlike my blog, allowed the in real life information to stand for weeks.)
You are defending Scratch for taking down the names. I am asking why they were put there in the first place?
Why were the Mr. Itchy names "put there in the first place"? Why was CKSalmon "outed" by Bill Hamblin "in the first place"? Why was DCP gossipmongering about Mike Quinn "in the first place"?
Some of you here don't seem to understand why there's a backlash against you. You are like a dog who attacks someone, and when he gets clobbered back wonders what he did wrong. If you launch missiles into another territory, expect some missiles to return.
Last time I checked, Mormonism is older than all of us. And in any case, your "You guys started it!" argument is awfully lame.
It's the same with RFM. In the name of "recovery" this site lambasts and constantly attacks Mormons, and when they are called on they say, "oh, we are hurting and need to express ourselves". "We are 'only' venting." "It's all because we need this therapy." Well, don't whine when you get a taste of your own medicine from Mormons, and don't expect them to forever remain silent. Enough is enough. People can only take so much.
I can take as good as I give, Ray.
Here's another question for you: How is RfM somehow "picking on Mormonism"? For the most part, those folks stay on their own little corner of cyberspace, "in the name of recovery." It is not as if they are sending missionaries out, door-to-door, in order to change the world as we know it....