Some thoughts...

[_Lemmie]

Who says stuff like that? Who mocks people's work like that? How can he possibly call someone a loser, mock their academic work by attempting to use 'interesting' as a slur, and then start his own thread about how he is a victim of bad behavior at this board? That is monumentally rude and sick.

MentalG keeps complaining how there used to be good discussions here--not only is he apparently missing the good discussions currently happening, but he seems determined to trash every discussion he enters.

The worst part is, in his initial comment he was one step away from actually encouraging discussion. If he had just phrased his comment as an actual question instead of the passive aggressive nit-pick that went with, something might have actually been discussed. I even found myself wanting to agree with idea (that perhaps we shouldn't hold positive testimony against Joseph Smith) but couldn't because of how it was presented.

Given how many, many times mentalgymnast has pulled exactly these same shenanigans, I'm afraid I am a little more cynical. He always positions himself one step away from an actual question, apparently so that if his passive aggressiveness is noted he can try for plausible deniability.

I still can't get past his ugly comment to grindael, his use of the term loser, and his mocking of research because it's "just interesting."
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=44421&start=84&p=1017729&view=show#p1017729
No one with a sincere interest in conversation does that.

ETA: and now in his latest post, he's saying Chap is "covering" for grindael?!!! Covering for what?!!! How ridiculous. He chased grindael over 8 threads, posting the exact same crap, every time promising to stop trolling. It's true, a cornered rat bites.

[_mentalgymnast]

...Chap is "covering" for grindael?!!! Covering for what?!!!

grindaels deletion of his own posts. Apparently before he went to Shades to complain. I'm wondering if you actually read everything that I say. His deletions changed the tenor of the thread. It was, or at least appeared, as if I was talking to a non-entity and/or non-participant at that point.

An innocent non-entity...from your POV.

I thought I'd made that clear?

by the way, what do you think about the substance of my questions/comments in my posts to Shades on this thread...now that you've kind of gone off on a tangent of speculation as is par for the course. Derailer/provocateur extraordinaire. Are you able to stick to the subject/topic of a thread without stalking with the intent of coming in and throwing grenades? This is exactly what I'm talking about in my ON TOPIC comments in this thread. You have a way of moving things helter skelter. That is at least part of the reason that Ceeboo notices a lack of true conversation on this board.

Well done.

Wishful thinking that you'll stay on topic rather than simply going to attack mode. I've said this before, but I'll say it again. You are a total waste of time and bandwidth, in my opinion. Barking up trees to chase down ghosts of your making. I have NEVER actually had a substantitive conversation with you...but I've wasted mega amounts of time responding to your derails and flak throwing behaviors.

But...that may be your intent? To steer things away from where a conversation/discussion COULD go? And to twist and shout and use ellipses and cut and pastes to make folks say/intend something that was not actually being said/intended?

Stalker. You're actually kinda creepy, Lemmie. It's as if you live for this stuff.

Weird stuff.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

mentalgymnast, you make some good points that deserve to be addressed, but I'm afraid I don't have time right now (my wife has taken to forcing me to be in bed by 1:00 a.m.) and will do my best to get back to you tomorrow.

tl;dr: I'm not ignoring you.

*bump

[_Lemmie]

I'm wondering if you actually read everything that I say.

I read-and noted- this:

MG says this about grindael's research, which, by the way, has been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, coming out spring 2017:

by the way, loser, we are already well aware that you don't believe in the Divine calling of Joseph Smith...so what's your point in preaching to the choir? You already know you're gonna just get high fives. So what's your point? Much ado about nothing, isn't it?

Not that the history isn't interesting in some respects.

That's it? It's just interesting? That's what drives you?

MG
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=44421&start=84&p=1017729&view=show#p1017729

Who says stuff like that? Who mocks people's work like that? How can he possibly call someone a loser, mock their academic work by attempting to use 'interesting' as a slur, and then start his own thread about how he is a victim of bad behavior at this board? That is monumentally rude and sick.

MentalG keeps complaining how there used to be good discussions here--not only is he apparently missing the good discussions currently happening, but he seems determined to trash every discussion he enters.

Are you able to stick to the subject/topic of a thread without stalking with the intent of coming in and throwing grenades?

says the person who stalked grindael for 8 threads, posting the exact same troll comments, every single time. Leave him alone, you creep.

[_mentalgymnast]

[blah, blah, blah]

What did any of that have to do with the post I made that had your question at the top"

Chap is "covering" for grindael?!!! Covering for what?!!!

You didn't even answer that. Just a bunch of other mush. That's why I wonder whether there is a comprehension/perception problem on your end.

Try again. What do you think Chap might be covering for. grindael has not shown up to defend himself as to why he deleted his own posts on his own thread and THEN went and whined to Shades.

Do the italics and the underlining help?

Regards,
MG

[_spotlight]

Do the italics and the underlining help?

It's a form of emphasis not unlike bolding or the use of capitalization or colors and hence draws the attention in an unbalanced manner away from the rest of the text.

[_Lemmie]

Do the italics and the underlining help?

It's a form of emphasis not unlike bolding or the use of capitalization or colors and hence draws the attention in an unbalanced manner away from the rest of the text.

[_Lemmie]

Lemmie wrote:
[blah, blah, blah]
Do the italics and the underlining help?

Regards,
MG

Go ahead, attack me, mental. You know perfectly well grindael said he wouldn't post on a thread you started so you're taking this opportunity to try to impugn him with your passive-aggressive remarks about having Shades 'return and report.'

I can quote him though, and he was very specific:

I'm done with you Mental. You can take this to the bank. I won't ever post on another thread you start. But if you start with me on MY threads, the gloves are off. You can rant and rave and play all the passive aggressive games and copy other people's work all you like. If you want to start a thread about me or my posts, go right ahead. Have at it. I just have to wipe this damned crap off my shoe. It stinks to high heaven. viewtopic.php?p=1017782#p1017782

And you still haven't explained why you posted this singular bit of assholery:

by the way, loser, we are already well aware that you don't believe in the Divine calling of Joseph Smith...so what's your point in preaching to the choir? You already know you're gonna just get high fives. So what's your point? Much ado about nothing, isn't it?

Not that the history isn't interesting in some respects.

That's it? It's just interesting? That's what drives you?

MG
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=44421&start=84&p=1017729&view=show#p1017729

Who says stuff like that? Who mocks people's work like that? How can he [mentalgymnast] possibly call someone a loser, mock their academic work by attempting to use 'interesting' as a slur, and then start his own thread about how he is a victim of bad behavior at this board? That is monumentally rude and sick.

[_fetchface]

Hey guys, this is interesting and all, but I'd like to wait and see what Shades has to say in response to my questions/comments. He said he'd return and report. At this point I don't have much interest in the chatter surrounding the situation. Chap, I know you're trying to cover for grindael but I'm much more interested in what he has to say and how it may relate to Shades' actions.

Regards,
MG

Frankly, who the hell cares what you'd like to do?!?!? We'll discuss whatever the hell we want to in your thread, like you do in all of the others.

Either:

1. You have a truly astounding lack of self-awareness. You think you have the right, as the thread-starter, to place rules on the discussion and exert control over the thread. Yet you repeatedly disregard the wishes for the direction of discussion of another thread starter. I find your recent behavior to be fairly disgusting. It is the type of behavior I see in small children, where one is angry and trying to get away from the other and the other is following the first around and won't leave them alone. Guess which one I reprimand?

- or -

2. You *are* a disingenuous troll.

Which is it?

[_mentalgymnast]

And you still haven't explained why you posted this...:

by the way, loser, we are already well aware that you don't believe in the Divine calling of Joseph Smith...so what's your point in preaching to the choir? You already know you're gonna just get high fives. So what's your point? Much ado about nothing, isn't it?

Not that the history isn't interesting in some respects.

That's it? It's just interesting? That's what drives you?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=44421&start=84&p=1017729&view=show#p1017729

I said what I meant and meant what I said. And I know what I meant.

Thanks Dr. Seuss

MG