Mormon's Great and Spacious Building - The Hinckley Center

[_guy sajer]

I was there to view the adoring fans in action on Friday in the varsity theatre. I spoke to Guy about it briefly over the phone after class let out at 5:30 . . . I did promise the good Dr. Sajer a write-up of what I learned in your class, DCP, and I always make do on my promises.

Good grief.

An immediate telephone report followed by a written summary?

I'm hoping this is a joke.

Otherwise, I'm afraid I may now be dealing with Scratch Three. (Have I somehow stumbled into the internal message board of a psychiatric ward?)

It may be time to change my telephone number, buy a shredder, get a Doberman Pinscher, sign up for security service, and hire bodyguards.

Yes, and initial reports is that a couple of females in the audience were THIS close to whipping off their bras and throwing them at the good Dr.'s feet and screaming, "I'll be your polygamous ho Dr. Peterson."

That and the good Dr. made lots of snide references to anti-Mormons and ex-Mos, much to the amusement of the crowd. (The idea that some can laugh at others for refusing to believe an angel with a flamming sword commanded Joseph Smith to copulate with other women is sadly ironic and wildly funny in itself. One can, as a comparison, imagine the attendees at Alien Abduction rallies laughing at those who refuse to believe little green men are going around in spaceships thrusting metal probes up persons' anuses.)

[_beastie]

by the way, I had a brilliant idea for their next project. They ought to build the BIGGEST Mall in america and name it:

THE JOSEPH SMITH MALL

[_guy sajer]

If Scratch will permit, I would like to respond briefly to the brilliant and accomplished Guy Sajer.

One day maybe they'll even get around to tearing down the old decrepid Knight Magnum Hall, where, I believe but am not sure, our good friend Dr. P has his offices. That one is long overdue also,

I do not have my office there, and never have.

But, you'll be happy to know, the Knight Mangum Building -- note the spelling -- is in fact slated to come down.

Which is why I said I'm not sure; an acknowledgment before the fact that I might be wrong.

It's about time it's coming down; it's long overdue.

I don't give a diddly how to spell it.

Memo to Dan, nobody but you is impressed when you correct others' spelling (as likely to be typos than actual spelling errors) and grammar. While you pat yourself on the back in smug, self-congratulary affectations, everyone else just thinks you're being a prick.

Dr. P needs a nicer office where he can pass the day away posting on internet discussion boards, writing Mormon fluff pieces, constructing arguments of how polyandry is actually wonderful and Joseph Smith was a true prophet for restoring it, preparing his "rock star" speeches to adoring fans in the Varsity Theatre, and generally not doing productive academic work.

Although I'm not by any stretch a mental health professional, I understand that you suffer from a compulsion to comment on my academic career every week or so even though you don't actually know enough to judge it. Still, you ought, perhaps, to avoid making public pronouncements based upon your hallucinations: Although I'm sure you think you've read it, and may even imagine that you're holding it in your hands at this very moment (while you're issuing orders to the cavalry at Waterloo, perhaps), I have never written anything even remotely connected to the subject of polyandry. Your other pronouncements on me are typically just as loosely tied to the world of empirical reality, but they're not usually this obviously bogus.

Incidentally, your reference to my allegedly "adoring fans in the Varsity Theatre" -- you could have made your point more forcefully if you had known that I gave four lectures last week to much larger audiences (1500-1600) in the Wilkinson Center ballroom -- suggests that you may have been something of a flop as a lecturer. Would jealousy perhaps account, at least in part, for your animus? If so, take comfort: Immanuel Kant was apparently fairly dull, too, and he was very nearly as brilliant as you are.

Dan, I've seen your CV (or a good chunk of it), and I'm fully capable and competent to judge. It, quite frankly, sucks. Why don't you post your CV here and let other people judge for themselves if I'm right or wrong?

Every week or so? Now that's a pretty gross exaggeration. In the time I've been posting here, it's come up maybe around 10 times, give or take. In most cases it was contextually appropriate (this case was an exception; your academic posturing and pomposity make you such an juicy and easy target, it's hard to resist). I only bring this up because, I believe, that you portray yourself as something you're not, and you do it so often, that there should be someone somewhere pointing out the difference between the perception of your academic brillance and the reality of it (or lack of it).

Uh, Dan, the reference to polyandry wasn't meant to be taking literally. Geez, lighten up would ya?

I see substantial evidence in your hundreds if not thousands of posts over time that, if fact, you suffer a significant disconnect from empirical reality. I stand squarely by this assessment. This is true as well for other apologists who seem to have a very, very difficult time understanding that rank and file members see the world very differently than they do and that there's a broad range of experience out there, even within the cloistered world of Mormonism.

So, let me see, that fact that I did not mention that you gave a lecture to thousands of adoring fans in the Wilkinson Center, and was apparently unaware of it, implies I was something of a flop as a lecturer? Uh, Dan, can you say "non-sequitur?"

I don't follow your activities; I don't really give a rat's ass what you do. I only knew about the Varsity because in a casual conversation with someone else, she told me she went and gave me a brief synopsis. She offered this information to me without me asking.
Dan, if I stood up there and constructed ridiculous but pompous academic arguments revealing how the Mormon Church is so obviously true and its critics so obviously wrong, then I'd probably find a mass audience among the faithful hungry for any tidbit of "evidence" that their beloved, insignificant quasi-cult is God's one and only true quasi-cult. But then, I like to think that I have more integrity than to prostitute myself by making obviously unfactual claims so as to bask in the ego-stroking glory of the adulation of the Mormon masses.