Tagline/Signature Line Classics

[_Pokatator]

I just read Dr. Shades most recent post and noticed a new tagline, a great quote by Runtu. I like it, but it made me realize that I liked his last one, and several others before that. Also there have been some other really great ones from other posters.

I now find myself wishing I had collected and saved many of those taglines. So I am starting a thread to see if anyone would like to post their favorite tagline of theirs or someone elses.

I am sorry that I have never ever used a tagline, so I can't contribute but I can enjoy all of yours all over again. (I guess that shows a side of my selfish nature.)

Thanx in advance.

[_Polygamy Porter]

Help me out here...

About 2+ years ago DCP made some remark about FARMS "research" not so much being rejected by the outside but more just ignored... something along that line... Then some smart cat used that in his sig over on ZLMB and oh my, Danny came unglued! Then demanded he stop using the quote on his sig...

So, someone with an account to dig in the litter box on yonder Fboards, please for the love of Hinck and his 12 wannabes search it out and report back!

Shades, why do you suppose Danny has not posted over here yet... he lurks RfM like a wine-o at a liquor store and has even posted under many aliases..

I mean, besides my crap smelling breath, Shady Acres is a nice place to talk and sling mug.

[_Mister Scratch]

Shades, why do you suppose Danny has not posted over here yet... he lurks RfM like a wine-o at a liquor store and has even posted under many aliases..

I mean, besides my crap smelling breath, Shady Acres is a nice place to talk and sling mug.

Professor Peterson has said, in effect, that he is afraid of the critics here, notably Rollo and Vegas. And for what it's worth, I am almost positive that he lurks. What it all comes down to is the fact that he receives special protection on the ironically named FAIRboard, and he is reluctant to step out from behind his mod-shield.

[_Runtu]

Shades, why do you suppose Danny has not posted over here yet... he lurks RfM like a wine-o at a liquor store and has even posted under many aliases..

I mean, besides my crap smelling breath, Shady Acres is a nice place to talk and sling mug.

Professor Peterson has said, in effect, that he is afraid of the critics here, notably Rollo and Vegas. And for what it's worth, I am almost positive that he lurks. What it all comes down to is the fact that he receives special protection on the ironically named FAIRboard, and he is reluctant to step out from behind his mod-shield.

Rollo has certainly made him look foolish several times. What was the excuse they gave for banning Rollo?

And thanks for the compliment. I didn't even notice the tag line.

[_Mercury]

Shades, why do you suppose Danny has not posted over here yet... he lurks RfM like a wine-o at a liquor store and has even posted under many aliases..

I mean, besides my crap smelling breath, Shady Acres is a nice place to talk and sling mug.

Professor Peterson has said, in effect, that he is afraid of the critics here, notably Rollo and Vegas. And for what it's worth, I am almost positive that he lurks. What it all comes down to is the fact that he receives special protection on the ironically named FAIRboard, and he is reluctant to step out from behind his mod-shield.

Such power I wield!

Who else should I shoo away with my "indefensible" arguments?

[_rcrocket]

Professor Peterson has said, in effect, that he is afraid of the critics here, notably Rollo and Vegas. And for what it's worth, I am almost positive that he lurks. What it all comes down to is the fact that he receives special protection on the ironically named FAIRboard, and he is reluctant to step out from behind his mod-shield.

Such power I wield!

Who else should I shoo away with my "indefensible" arguments?

Yes. I am pretty sure he is quite fearful of Mister Scratch and Vegas Refuse. You might even start him weeping if you'd just get some substance, and if Vegas didn't write like he was a homeless bum.

P

[_Runtu]

Professor Peterson has said, in effect, that he is afraid of the critics here, notably Rollo and Vegas. And for what it's worth, I am almost positive that he lurks. What it all comes down to is the fact that he receives special protection on the ironically named FAIRboard, and he is reluctant to step out from behind his mod-shield.

Such power I wield!

Who else should I shoo away with my "indefensible" arguments?

Yes. I am pretty sure he is quite fearful of Mister Scratch and Vegas Refuse. You might even start him weeping if you'd just get some substance, and if Vegas didn't write like he was a homeless bum.

P

Actually, it wasn't Scratch; it was Rollo. Or are you one of those people who thinks they're the same person? Hint: they're not.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

What was the excuse they gave for banning Rollo?

The Mods said it was because I had disparaged Blake Ostler as a "philosopher wannabe" (his day job is lawyering). This occurred within a thread on FAIR this past April about the Wall Street Journal article covering Quinn's being blackballed in the field of Mormon studies. At the time, DCP and I were debating why BYU had threatened to pull its sponsorship of the Yale conference on Mormonism if Quinn were allowed to present his scheduled paper (BYU only backed off when Quinn was yanked as a presenter and, instead, simply introduced another speaker). One reason postulated by DCP for excluding Quinn from the conference was, according to DCP, that Quinn was not qualified to speak on LDS theology (implying that the conference was limited solely to LDS theology; I pointed out that the official title for the conference included "history" along with "theology"). I countered that both he (a BYU prof on Islamic studies, not LDS theology) and Blake Ostler (a lawyer) had been allowed to present at the conference, and neither was a professional LDS theologian (the criterion DCP was using to exclude Quinn, a preeminent LDS historian). DCP took umbrage at my perceived insult of Ostler (Ostler has written a couple of books on LDS theology, but professionally he is only a lawyer); the Mods quickly swooped in and placed me on the queue (and closed the thread, only to reopen it briefly to allow DCP to get in the final word; after his final post, the thread was immediately closed again). Although the Mods claimed the reason for my queuing was my statements about Ostler, I'm quite certain it was more about the bigger issue in that thread: my exposing DCP's and his "circle's" rumor-mongering about Quinn's sexual orientation (including to Quinn's SP). DCP flipped out about this, and even after I was queued he sent me personal emails claiming I had slandered him and casting (in full GA-wannabe voice) cosmic curses and judgments my way. Very surreal.

I was officially banned by FAIR over this past summer. I refused to post anything at FAIR after being placed on the queue in April, but I became active on this bb (or its predecessor), including stating my opinions of the absurd moderating at FAIR, etc. As you know, the FAIR Mods are always lurking here; they saw my comments, and banned me over at FAIR (I cannot even view the bb anymore). The same happened to others around here during that same period. The FAIR folks are mighty sensitive, indeed.

[_Runtu]

What was the excuse they gave for banning Rollo?

The Mods said it was because I had disparaged Blake Ostler as a "philosopher wannabe" (his day job is lawyering). This occurred within a thread on FAIR this past April about the Wall Street Journal article covering Quinn's being blackballed in the field of Mormon studies. At the time, DCP and I were debating why BYU had threatened to pull its sponsorship of the Yale conference on Mormonism if Quinn were allowed to present his scheduled paper (BYU only backed off when Quinn was yanked as a presenter and, instead, simply introduced another speaker). One reason postulated by DCP for excluding Quinn from the conference was, according to DCP, that Quinn was not qualified to speak on LDS theology (implying that the conference was limited solely to LDS theology; I pointed out that the official title for the conference included "history" along with "theology"). I countered that both he (a BYU prof on Islamic studies, not LDS theology) and Blake Ostler (a lawyer) had been allowed to present at the conference, and neither was a professional LDS theologian (the criterion DCP was using to exclude Quinn, a preeminent LDS historian). DCP took umbrage at my perceived insult of Ostler (Ostler has written a couple of books on LDS theology, but professionally he is only a lawyer); the Mods quickly swooped in and placed me on the queue (and closed the thread, only to reopen it briefly to allow DCP to get in the final word; after his final post, the thread was immediately closed again). Although the Mods claimed the reason for my queuing was my statements about Ostler, I'm quite certain it was more about the bigger issue in that thread: my exposing DCP's and his "circle's" rumor-mongering about Quinn's sexual orientation (including to Quinn's SP). DCP flipped out about this, and even after I was queued he sent me personal emails claiming I had slandered him and casting (in full GA-wannabe voice) cosmic curses and judgments my way. Very surreal.

I was officially banned by FAIR over this past summer. I refused to post anything at FAIR after being placed on the queue in April, but I became active on this bb (or its predecessor), including stating my opinions of the absurd moderating at FAIR, etc. As you know, the FAIR Mods are always lurking here; they saw my comments, and banned me over at FAIR (I cannot even view the bb anymore). The same happened to others around here during that same period. The FAIR folks are mighty sensitive, indeed.

I remember the part about Daniel's unconscionable gossiping about Quinn. He should be ashamed of himself for conducting himself in such a way, but I missed the part about the conference snub and the perceived insult towards Ostler.

Surreal, indeed.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I remember the part about Daniel's unconscionable gossiping about Quinn. He should be ashamed of himself for conducting himself in such a way ....

I think he was, which explains why he "protesteth too much" on the matter. His own words painted him in a corner, and he knew it -- he had unwittingly revealed to the world his personal involvement in the rumor mill about Quinn's sexuality, and post after post he only dug his hole deeper. It was fascinating to watch.