View Single Post
  #114  
Old 12-01-2013, 11:11 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 12,093
Default

Re (from opalescent): Why respond to Dirtclustit ... because I ... felt like it ... because I was "Fascinated, Captain" by the unexpected. Yes it's true. I had no idea he was gonna say I never did missionary work in Detroit. That one just came out of thin air. I was too darned "Fascinated, Captain" by that unprecedented change of affairs as I understood them.

I guess I gave him a C for Creativity, and am hoping he'll go into more detail about what he thinks my motivations for lying about my mission would have been. Was curious to find out how I'd respond to this kind of unprecedented challenge.

Sorry about the four-post monster.

Re:
Quote:
"Just because dirt lost his shit -- again! -- and weirdly accused you of not being a 'real' Mormon because he inexplicably doubts you went on mission does not mean you should feed the crazy."
[bowing head in contrite humility] ... I know, I know; I fed the crazy. Sorry about that. I didn't want to ... but then suddenly it was too tempting. Hey, sometimes the Twilight Zone can be a fun place to visit ...

And yes, I did see the sign going in: "Please don't feed the trolls and the crazies around here." And I wanted to save my peanuts for the more worthy exhibits, but then that little devil on my left shoulder whispered in my ear and against all the counsel of the little angel on my right shoulder, I tossed some peanuts into Dirtclustit's disheveled pen. I'm embarrassed. I'm not worthy. I suck. Please have mercy on my own not-so-sane-as-it-seems soul.

Re:
Quote:
"Even if you are not 'real,' you owe nothing to anyone here."
I agree. I only did it for fun ... honest injun ...

Re:
Quote:
"In fact, you have every right to ignore my butting in here to offer a suggestion."
No your suggestion is wise and reasonable. I promise I'll try to do better in the future.

Re (from Post #92):
Quote:
"Dirtclustit, this is by far the longest post you'll ever get from me. From now on, I'm going to distance myself from you, and you're welcome to brag that's it's because you supposedly proved me wrong. Eventually I'll probably stop repying to anything you say altogether -- a threat which would scare ColorsWolf but I know it doesn't scare you so score yourself a point."
Given the fact that I posted the above statement publicly, I apologize to Dirtclustit, to the remaining members of Polyamory.com, and yea, even to myself. I presumed to predict the future and then became the proof that my prediction was wrong. I didn't *say* it was a promise (actually I said it was a threat which was too harsh a word; "prospect" would have been a better word), but you could certainly rightfully begrudge the fact that I didn't keep my word.

The above quote should have read: "Dirtclustit, this is *probably* by far the longest post you'll ever get from me. From now on, I'll *probably* distance myself from you ..." Then at least I wouldn't have ended up breaking my own word.

Please forgive/pardon me for doing that, taking into account how shocked I was that Dirtclustit (said he) didn't believe my "mission story," as well as the fact that his post (the one I so long-windedly indulged), while still being rather aggressive, was at least reasonable enough to make more plain what it is that I've been doing that's (supposedly) been bugging him. Finally, some material I could really work with; not just vague, insulting riddles.

If I was never very active at all in the church, and invested little or no study in the LDS scriptures (the King James version of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Articles of Faith), and if as part and parcel to all that, I neither served a mission nor thus spent time amongst black people in Detroit, then you could claim that I was unqualified to claim any knowledge about any black people, and that I was unqualified to claim any significant knowledge about the Mormon church, and thus was totally out of line in saying anything that would make the Mormon church look bad. So if Dirtclustit truthfully disbelieves my church-and-mission story, then he has legit reason to protest much of what I've posted in this thread.

But I admit, I'm starting to have suspicious thoughts of my own, and there's new reason for me to play it safer in the future. It all seems so surreal, and I've started to wonder, who's playing who? Bleah, that game's losing its novelty. For example, I'm now wondering how many accounts the user of the Dirtclustit account has.

---

ColorsWolf, your last post was excellent, and made sense. I agree with you that "too much sanity" (e.g. too tight of a hinge) is arguably as bad for a guy or gal as is "too much insanity." So I'll pardon your "unhingedness" if you'll pardon my (on-and-off) "hingedness."

Kevin

---

@ london ... I'm sad to say that Dirtclustit's probably "less hinged" than ColorsWolf, though I admit that's my personal opinon (and grant me that it doesn't count as an insult because I know that I, for one, don't choose to have the mental and emotional disorders that I have).

This ain't the first time Dirtclustit has accused someone of having multiple accounts (e.g. sock puppet accounts) on this forum. I think he believes that a whole lot of people (even Franklin Veaux! You figure that one out) are posting on this forum from many different accounts: usually for the purpose of tricking other Polyamory.com members into thinking that more people subscribe to this or that opinion or position than the true number of people who subscribe to it. It sounds crazy to me, but I admit it's technically possible.

Anyway london, I really really appreciate (and need) your morale support for me, on this forum and especially on this thread. Hope I'll never do anything to give you cause to regret that support.

And you're right, my indulgence of Dirtclustit's weird accusations is questionable, both in terms of whether it's a good way for anyone to spend any of their time, but also in terms of whether it's doing Polyamory.com any favors (which makes it a moral/ethical consideration).

I don't know whether my four-post post was such a great idea. From the moment I posted it, I've changed my mind a dozen times at least about whether I should have posted it. In the end, I guess I'm just not sure.

By the way, there's a chance Dirtclustit isn't nuts, but rather, a reeeally clever troll. Or both ... "crazy like a fox" as they say.

---

LovingRadiance, loved the post where you gave us more info about the Community of Christ (a.k.a. the RLDS church). Most of it was stuff I didn't previously know and I found it, well ... "Fascinating Captain." I knew about the contraversy over giving the Priesthood to the women of the church, and I knew why it originally broke away from the LDS church, but the rest of your post was new info for me. So thank you for sharing it.

But quick handy bullet list:
  • LDS [adjective] = of or belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the "original" Mormons who are now based out of those huge buildings in Salt Lake City).
  • RLDS [adjective] = of of belonging to the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, now known as the "Community of Christ." Probably the first break-off from the LDS church (or the first that got very far).
Anyway: you're right, culture really isn't the same thing as race. I'll go even further out on a limb and say that handicaps of any kind differ in type, nature, and inherent issues than both race and culture. I feel qualified to say that because I am handicapped (i.e., my brain is broken).

Heck you can hate other people for all kinds of dumb reasons. You can hate someone because of the shoes they wear, because they say "what what" too often, because they're a fan of some team you're rooting against, because they vote Republican, because they hate driving a stick shift, or whatever.

Even religion is distinguished from race, culture, and handicaps. These are all different excuses people can use to hate and/or discriminate against each other, and all come with their own sets of traits and issues. Having said that, there is overlap between various things. So when I say, "Polyamory and Racial Minorities" in my thread title, I do arguably make room for tangents into the cultural, religious, and handicap areas. The thread mostly has to do with the question, "How can we get more poly people from differing races to join hands?" But that question invites further discussion about a range of trials and experiences that outcasts of all kinds may experience. As long as we don't get *too* caught up in those tangents, then I'll personally consider us to still be reasonably near or within the fuzzy bounds of the official topic.

---

And by the way LR: good stuff from that book you've been reading.
__________________
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote