DCP Takes Aim at Everybody Wang Chung

[Philo Sofee]

You can’t doxx Dan when his identity is already known (by his choice). I think doxxing in general is a form of bullying and I definitely do not support it at all. So, I would complain about someone being doxxed as well, wouldn’t you?

You would? After I documented Peterson's plagiarism, he heard from a very unreliable source (smoky, a neo-nazi supporter who trolled here), who Smoky thought I was. He immediately posted her name, the university at which she taught, and her department. He was wrong, and eventually retracted his accusation, but when he thought it was correct, he was happy to doxx me.

And why? Because, as he stated, documenting his plagiarism was an "attack" on him. His clear implication was that people should attack me.

So, what do you think about Peterson's attempt to doxx me?

Heinous, immature and stupid. The man has no class in him. And 9/10ths of his scholarship is questionable. But then, how could it not be? It's mere apologetic for a dishonest corporation masquerading as a Jesus Church.

[Flemming]

Heinous, immature and stupid. The man has no class in him. And 9/10ths of his scholarship is questionable. But then, how could it not be? It's mere apologetic for a dishonest corporation masquerading as a Jesus Church.

I can tell you have big feelings. I suggest not dwelling so much on someone you dislike so much.

[Flemming]

I would like to see him stop being a hypocrite by calling anonymous critics cowards while protecting the identity of anonymous mopologists.

Marcus provided an example. Dan supports people like Robert Boylan, Stephen Smoot, and Mike Parker who all have a history of doxxing and harassment.

Why don’t you take it up with the people whom you claim are actually doing “A,” and not the person who is tangentially related to the “A” actors?

If you rob my bodega, I have a problem with you, not with some other person who supports the robbing of my bodega but has never actually done it.

[Kishkumen]

I can tell you have big feelings. I suggest not dwelling so much on someone you dislike so much.

What’s that? I can’t hear you when you have your face jammed between DCP’s cheeks!

Hellloooooo!!!!

[Kishkumen]

Why don’t you take it up with the people whom you claim are actually doing “A,” and not the person who is tangentially related to the “A” actors?

If you rob my bodega, I have a problem with you, not with some other person who supports the robbing of my bodega but has never actually done it.

That’s the lovely thing about Mopologetics. No one is responsible. No one is paid to do it. And yet the Mopes are well taken care of.

What are you getting for all of this? I mean money-wise.

Or are you just auditioning for a new role?

[Flemming]

That’s the lovely thing about Mopologetics. No one is responsible. No one is paid to do it. And yet the Mopes are well taken care of.

What are you getting for all of this? I mean money-wise.

Or are you just auditioning for a new role?

For what? My six posts on an obscure message board? Nothing. I don’t know Dan, or any of the people you’ve mentioned. I just thought it the height of stupidity to say that the most transparent (identity-wise) apologist is a hypocrite for calling out pseudonymous character attackers.

I promise that’s all.

[Marcus]

That’s the lovely thing about Mopologetics. No one is responsible. No one is paid to do it. And yet the Mopes are well taken care of.

What are you getting for all of this? I mean money-wise.

Or are you just auditioning for a new role?

For what? My six posts on an obscure message board? Nothing. I don’t know Dan, or any of the people you’ve mentioned. I just thought it the height of stupidity to say that the most transparent (identity-wise) apologist is a hypocrite for calling out pseudonymous character attackers.

I promise that’s all.

You promise? You don't know Peterson? And just six posts?

Daniel Peterson posts under his own name and has for his whole online career.

That's the end of your credibility.

[Flemming]

That's the end of your credibility.

Yeah there’s absolutely no way to research the past on the internet.

[drumdude]

Heinous, immature and stupid. The man has no class in him. And 9/10ths of his scholarship is questionable. But then, how could it not be? It's mere apologetic for a dishonest corporation masquerading as a Jesus Church.

I can tell you have big feelings. I suggest not dwelling so much on someone you dislike so much.

I’d recommend staying away from obscure message boards and posting in a futile attempt to defend some vaguely famous former BYU professor that you supposedly only just now became aware of.

[Kishkumen]

For what? My six posts on an obscure message board? Nothing. I don’t know Dan, or any of the people you’ve mentioned. I just thought it the height of stupidity to say that the most transparent (identity-wise) apologist is a hypocrite for calling out pseudonymous character attackers.

I promise that’s all.

LOL!!! Yeah, you are definitely and transparently a Mopologetic troll. Thanks for dropping by to repeat the bog standard tropes of your gang.