PFAL: An Unorthodox Translation

[Raf]

Now where have I heard that before? :)

[Tom Strange]

Why are you so afraid to deal with those questions? You absolutely MUST deal with them if you want any more from me on the subject. Those questions were designed to lead us into deeper discussion what you have been demanding of me, not to dodge it as you may suppose.

You want me to answer you, but then you object to the way I start out answering, and you thereby interrupt the answering process.

Think about the questions I posed you, and then say something about them that reflects an intelligent processing of them. Play along with me by considering them. Then I can respond more to you.

Mike, I'm not 'afraid' to deal with your questions. I simply have no reason to respond to them. I am not here taking a test. If I made statements of fact that you found to be contrary to and beyond what anyone else has ever thought of a subject, I'd expect you to question me on them. Further, if I was interested in you really understanding what I had to say I'd answer you. Your unwillingness to answer says (to me) that you're just not really interested in our understanding your statements.

Your statements are pretty radical. It should come as no surprise that you are questioned on them by me and others.

Consider this: If you answered the questions instead of attacking whomever asks, you might have a few more converts on your side working with you to get the message out. How can you bring 'us' to the point of believing if you keep attacking us as we seek to understand the message?

If your purpose here is not to convince me (us), then what is it? If you want me (us) to blindly devote ourselves to your ideas/theories, you've got to give us some reason to do so. So far the only 'concrete' thing I've seen from your side is that once a person masters PFAL they become combative and surly.

Just like you have demanded I consider your questions, WHICH I DID IN DESIGNING MY QUESTIONS, I demand you consider my questions.

Mike, I didn't make any statements of truth/fact that would engender questions. You did.

I gave you the beginnings of the answers (in question format) and you rejected them. If you want me to resume answering you then you MUST deal with my pedagogical style.

Mike, they're simple questions. If the answer is that you mis-spoke when you said them, then that's the answer. Maybe you just got caught up in the heat of the moment. I don't know. You can take them back instead of trying to avoid the issue.

Now, here is a new teaching/question I have for you: What is it about Jesus Christ’s DNA and fingerprints that forces you to clam up and change the subject? Why is that such a taboo subject?

Here's my answer: I don't know... why don't you enlighten me (us)?

[WordWolf]

[WordWolf's commentary in boldface, but you all knew that by now.]

templelady,

Please calm down.

[This is Mike in "nice" mode. Mike occasionally switches BACK from

"nasty" mode-as you've seen in the last few pages or so- into a "nice" mode-

which then becomes his excuse for saying he's been nice to people

(after having riled them with insults and jabs), then having them respond

in a less-than-nice mode. It's still the same Mike posting, but this post

is in "nice" mode. It's NOT "ghost-written" or anything like that.]

I didn’t attack your character. I said I suspected (and for good reasons) that the primary mode of operation you were in (maximum social interactions and minimum study) was not efficient for your learning the text. There’s no question that you missed much and demonstrated it richly in public here.

[Mind you, this was in RESPONSE...to her response to his claim previously...

when she said

"Being called a 'social butterfly' and implying that I only go/went to church-

LDS or TWI or other- only for social concerns, not spiritual concerns-

isn't attacking my Character? What else would you call it, pray tell?

And then, to add icing to the cake, you attack my character again my implying

I wasn't primarily in a learning mode when I took PFAL 14+ years ago.

How in the bloody blue blazes would you KNOW??? You weren't there.

You have no idea how many hours I spent studying and reading the collaterals."

(BTW,

looks like Mike was reading the mind and entire life-story of one of the posters

again. This seems to be a sort-of side-profession by now.

Some people read tea leaves and give a life-story,

Mike reads a post and gives a life-story.)

So, WAS Mike's original comment an attack on her character?

Well, here's the comment...

From 5/3/06, 11pm Eastern...

"You seem to focus well on the soap opera here, and I suspect that when you were in the ministry it was

social situations you only focused on, and the class material was a mere background for you. The same is

probably happening in your Mormon church, because I know how serious my Mormon friends and

customers are about doctrine and they'd NEVER waste as much time on a non-Mormon discussion board

as you do.

In other words, YOU'RE BUSTED! You are a social butterfly! YOu use the Mormon church as a social setting

for to flit about, just like you use GSC, and just like you used TWI and the PFAL class as a place to play

social games, only playing along with doctrinal matters. I see right through you..."

Not only does this look like an insult, you may notice that he went from a SUSPICION

to an announcement of fact. I also find it interesting that the fact that tl is having

this discussion with him becomes a reason to insult her.

"I know you're not serious about God because you're in here posting with me

on this messageboard." Ooo, good one! If people don't respond to Mike,

they're apathetic to God-now, if they DO, they are ALSO....

BTW, if you scroll up to his more recent defense of his original claim,

he said "I said I suspected..." and never mentions that the next paragraph

went from the suspicion to an outright claim that his suspicion

(which, I suppose, will supposedly be "spiritual")

became the statement of fact-becoming genuine.

(One might, therefore, consider labelling it 'genuine spiritual suspicion'

that this was her thinking and life-story.

Interesting if one DOES...)

Speaking of "busted"...

this same post ends with Mike saying

"my offer to get you the books stands."

Mind you, tl has been rather specific. She's not only claimed that

she would read the books, but that she could fill in the supposed

relevant quotes FROM the books that Mike supposedly wants us

to see, but seems unwilling or unable to bother posting,

when he gives a page# and then changes the subject.

Seems like this would be a positive thing from his perspective-

direct quotes HE said were relevant, from pfal.]

I think the mode you are in right now is also not efficient for learning.

I’m sorry, I missed the words you just highlighted in red. I apologize for my haste in reading. Please give me more reasons to read your posts more carefully by calming down and focusing on the more important matters at hand... like THE WORD, for instance. If I wrongly characterized you, then I’ll be happy to see you prove me wrong by your actions in re-reading and re-learning the wonderful contents of PFAL.

God says, I think in Proverbs, that a wise person loves reproof. God says in one of Peter’s epistles that if we are reproved wrongly it’s no big deal, AND it gives us an opportunity to relate to Jesus as to how he took savagely unjust criticism, bodily. Defending our ego is a small matter. I take in and blow off MUCH more baloney than I shove back. It’s a good skill to learn.

***

I didn’t see your e-mail address, and I still don’t. It’s not on my screen to the right as you described.

I read your post too hastily, and you did likewise. That’s why I ask you to calmly switch subjects away from you and me and onto more important matters.

I had asked you to PM your e-mail address to me BECAUSE posting your e-mail address in public is not a good thing to do unless you are prepared for it being found by anyone, including spambots.

But now, since you brought up your distaste to PM with me, might I AGAIN remind you that it’s better, if you have a beef with someone, to deal with it privately?

You once blew it in wrongly reproving me in public when it could have been done much more efficiently in private. I went to you by PM to show you were wrong FOR YOUR SAKE, and I urged you to remember Jesus’ advice to treat such matters privately FIRST if possible. This was an instance of where you seemed unaware of even KJV text in addition to many PFAL text items. Your learning in the past has been inefficient. I want to help you learn the Word better.

Calm down, and we will discuss in PMs which books and when I will provide you.

I absolutely INSIST on this being done privately or not at all.

This is the LAST I will discuss it with you in public, understand?

If you can’t trust me in PM, I can’t entrust to you the books.

That’s final.

[This is known as "moving the goalposts."

See, Mike already placed an offer on the table for himself to send tl

the books.

"My offer to get you the books stands."

When she ACCEPTED-saying her mailing address was posted and he can

see it on EVERY POST of hers,

Mike then CHANGED his word to

"If you can't trust me in PM, I can't entrust to you the books."

Seems tl is well-aware of the long history of posters communicating

with Mike by pm, or phonecall AT HIS INSISTENCE,

then ALL OF THEM changing to refuse to accept any private communication

with him of any kind. Perhaps she remembers one woman- was it

CW? Ex-C? - who said he was taking private confidences she had shared

with him and using them to try to change the subject in threads in the

"About the Way" forum, incidentally using them to lead to a false

conclusion. Perhaps he's familiar with others who said that he did that

sort of thing in the Doctrinal forum, on THESE threads.

Either way, people in general refuse to communicate privately with

Mike. They also refuse to walk thru dark alleys at night in bad

neighborhoods. Seems there's a consensus that these are not

good ideas.

Now Mike has invoked an excuse-that she's not willing to accede to

what is generally considered to be an "unreasonable request"-

so that he would fulfill his own word-

his UNQUALIFIED OFFER to send her the books.

Go back to 5/3/06, 11pm Eastern.

Is there a qualification to his offer? There is not.

That is why tl very naturally said

"ok-here's my mailing address. I'll wait by my mailbox."

(I'm using a figure of speech, an idiom.)

THEN Mike saw she was serious, and began adding

conditions to change her response.

(First, you shall bring me a shrubbery.

Then, you shall bring me another shrubbery.

Then, you shall chop down the mightiest tree in the forest.

With a herring.

Finally, she walks off, saying it can't be done.

This technique is famous among fans of "Holy Grail". ]

[WordWolf]

What part of "What could you possibly need to say to me that can't be posted here on the boards for everyone to see. I'm not having (back door) conversations with you that you can twist into something else down the road. What you need to say post here". Was unclear???

Me I'm perfectly calm.

I gave you the opportunity, (after much prompting by the Holy Spirit BTW) straight forward and above board, send me the books (as you have offered more than once ) and I will reread them.

But deep in my heart of hearts, I knew, because God gave me Word of Knowledge, that this was just a ploy on your part, (since you figured no one would take you up on the offer, least of all me).

NO longer can you claim to all and sundry, as you have so many times before, that none of us are willing to come back to PFAL; because when faced with a poster, myself, who agrees to do just that, you immediately set up a new series of conditions so that you don't have to provide the books. Conditions you already knew were not acceptable.

I must confess that I am disappointed that you are behaving exactly as I was told by Heavenly Father you would behave once I agreed to reread the books. I still held to the hope that you would actually supply the books so that a meaningful dialog could take place on this thread, with both of us having access to the same material.

There is only one reason for setting up this new scenario, knowing full well I will not agree to your new conditions: and that is that you DO NOT want a meaningful discussion about PFAL, and I doubt you ever have.

VPW used others work and claimed it was his own to gain acceptance. You on the other hand, use your work and claim it is VPWs in order to gain acceptance.

This is not a dialog about PFAL

this is a dialog about the "Doctrine and Dogma of Mike", always has been -

I will continue to post to this thread on occasion, but never again, will I be lured into the trap of thinking that this thread in any way is part and parcel of the PFAL I remember and learned from, this is your catechises pure and simple

I felt this was worth repeating, without any additions, subtractions or commentary

on my part.

Edited May 5, 2006 by WordWolf

[T-Bone]

This is all my own theory and may be totally off the wall. I get the impression from Mike that he thinks we're like Pilate looking at Jesus [the Way, the Truth and the Life] and asking "What is truth?" So, I'm wondering – as much as Mike gets offended when we question him about what his message is – maybe we've got it wrong. At first I thought his message was something like "Come back to PFAL" or "PFAL is God-breathed" or "PFAL interprets the Bible" - - it's hard to pin down since he doesn't respond to direct questions concerning his message. But after reviewing this thread and the first PFAL thread and some of his posts on other threads – I've narrowed it down to what - in my opinion – is his message. Mike is the message. I underlined that sentence because I thought it was an important opinion of mine – I don't want anyone to get confused thinking I'm saying Mike is The Message [a paraphrase of the Bible by Eugene Peterson].

Or to put it another way, Mike interprets PFAL which interprets the Bible. I underlined that sentence because I thought it was an important opinion of mine – I don't want anyone to get confused thinking I'm referring to Mike's commentary of the same name. Perhaps that accounts for his occasional references to hanging out with scientists and PFAL editors. This would certainly lend credence to his intelligence and authority and will be found at the beginning of the commentary listing his credentials. Since Mike himself is the message – that would account for contradictions or even the fact that you can't pin him down on what he believes – it depends on how he feels that day.

Edited May 5, 2006 by T-Bone

[Tom Strange]

T-Bone: is that like "the bird is the word"...?

[T-Bone]

It's more like - "his words are for the birds."

[Mike]

T-Bone,

There are many things hidden in PFAL that only serious students can see. Casual students drawing from 20 year old memories have no idea what I'm talking about. I try daily to bring these things out into the open and known, but people want to keep their eyes closed to PFAL and to my expositions of it. BTW, I too was shown these things; I'm just the messenger. You all would be very blessed to hear my teacher.

I'm still itching to get on with much more of my answer to your post to me that led to the critical Greek text questions. Whenever you want to deal with them we can proceed with more of my answer.

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

Tom, the same goes for you. I'd LOVE to get into Jesus Christ, PFAL, and his return. My chosen introduction to your badgering questions on these related topics is to pose you the questions I did. They await your serious consideration so that we can proceed.

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

**********************************************************************

templelady,

Sure you were calm.

You were so calm you were mixing up left and right!

My offer still stands. You need to understand that you are not in charge here. I am the one with the information and I call the shots. I will discuss it with you in PMs or not at all.

Edited May 5, 2006 by Mike

[T-Bone]

Well okay - Mike, I'm glad you're going to get back to my question - I'll just bring 'er forward here - hope GSC don't mind me taking up that much more space on their server.

Mike, I am very disappointed in both your condescending/insulting words to me and in dodging my simple question. I will not stoop to such a childish form of debate. You said you would address my request for your basic tenets of beliefs at a later time – WHY didn't you respond like that to my other question [on providing evidential support for your claim on the inaccessibility of ancient scriptures & etc.]?

Perhaps the disparity of your responses eludes you – so I'll explain. I asked for a brief, concise, specific statement of your basic beliefs – 2 or 3 sentences. I would assume you already know what they are and could have easily posted them – but you gave me a rain-check on that. My other question which asked you to document the reasons for your bold assertion [for which I thought you would have given me a rain-check on] you jump right on and instead of providing any specific evidence – you ASK ME to look for it myself! Is that how research papers are submitted nowadays? A person posits a theory and conclusion – but the middle of the research paper is an empty page with the heading at the top "This page intentionally left blank – fill it in yourself after you find evidence to back up my claim." I have taken the time to break down your statement [listed below in bold red] followed by my question below it to give you some direction:

The ancient scriptures

Define both terms and specify time-frame. Provide specific names of texts/references.

are not accessible,

Define term and qualify.

and the modern man-made reconstructions of them

Define terms; specify time-frame and all reconstructions you researched.

are FAR from definitive,

Quantify terms and qualify standard of reference.

shifting about constantly

Define terms and quantify duration, occurrence, frequency.

by the latest

Specify time-frame

theological fads

Specify and qualify terms, provide standard of reference, list theological pedigree of each citation noting point of deviation from said reference.

in translation and manuscript rating.

Provide list of all translations and manuscript rating systems you researched.

[edited for the intellectually challenged]

[Tom Strange]

Tom, the same goes for you. I'd LOVE to get into Jesus Christ, PFAL, and his return. My chosen introduction to your badgering questions on these related topics is to pose you the questions I did. They await your serious consideration so that we can proceed.

But that wasn't your 'chosen introduction'... your 'chosen introduction' was the statements you made that you're being asked to clarify.

Fine Mike, don't answer those questions. What about this one?

Now, here is a new teaching/question I have for you: What is it about Jesus Christ’s DNA and fingerprints that forces you to clam up and change the subject? Why is that such a taboo subject?

Here's my answer: I don't know... why don't you enlighten me (us)?

And I'd also add that I didn't "clam up" as you claimed... why you even said that I have no idea since I don't ever recall you bringing this up before (at least since I've been here)... so go ahead and answer this one. Or do you have an answer?

Edited May 5, 2006 by Tom Strange

[Mike]

Tom,

Surely you can ponder that question and come up with more than what you have so far. And the same goes for the large set of questions in Post #6. You’re not cooperating. You remind me of an insolent teenager trying to get away with as much as possible with a substitute teacher.

T-Bone,

That’s a good start for a review, but you forgot my set of questions. I eagerly await your dealing with them too.

And cyber space rent gets cheaper every year. It’s pictures and audio and video that hog up a lot of hard drive real estate, not text. Blocks of text being posted and re-posted is like spitting in the ocean now. Otherwise someone would have come down on WordWolf long ago for his repetitions of text blocks.

Want me to re-post the question set to complete the review or do you want the honor?

[Tom Strange]

Tom,

Surely you can ponder that question and come up with more than what you have so far. And the same goes for the large set of questions in Post #6. You’re not cooperating. You remind me of an insolent teenager trying to get away with as much as possible with a substitute teacher.

Mike, there's no need to be nasty. I answered your questions as much as I'm going to back in those other posts listed. I didn't raise the initial issues... you did. Therefore, in 'normal' conversation, it falls on you to explain. Since you don't want to do that folks will continue to not take your message seriously and it's nobody's fault but your own. God won't be very happy with you... he might switch messengers...

What is it about Jesus' fingerprints and DNA that causes YOU to clam up and change the subject? Why is that such a taboo subject for you? I'm just guessing it does and is since you're the one who introduced it that way...

[Mike]

Tom,

I am trying to get you (and readers) to think through the details of our Hope. There was once a thread on this and people enthusiastically participated. I saved a copy and may post parts.

How will, or how CAN we know it's really him when he appears? Will he look like his Renaissance portraits, and if so WHICH ONES? Will he look like his movie depictions, and again, which ones?

How will we know he’s not the anti-Christ, the counterfeit Christ?

Will it be the way he glows in the dark? Satan can do that, come as an angel of light.

Will it be the altitude at which we meet? Satan can do that too; he did it with Jesus.

Think it through a little. How will we know it’s REALLY him?

[T-Bone]

T-Bone,

That's a good start for a review, but you forgot my set of questions. I eagerly await your dealing with them too.

And cyber space rent gets cheaper every year. It's pictures and audio and video that hog up a lot of hard drive real estate, not text. Blocks of text being posted and re-posted is like spitting in the ocean now. Otherwise someone would have come down on WordWolf long ago for his repetitions of text blocks.

Want me to re-post the question set to complete the review or do you want the honor?

That won't be necessary, Mike - since your questions were a tactic to dodge mine.

[Mike]

No, T-Bone. Not true. I want to discuss my questions to you and further items they lead to even if you cut and run. Anyone here can participate and I invite them to.

************************************************************

************************************************************

************************************************************

************************************************************

Folks, you'll have to excuse me for a while. I have work to do and a grad friend is arriving at the airport in a few hours. He's one of the noble Berean grads who listens intently to my message and searches the scriptures (and PFAL books) daily whether those things are so. He never posts here.

I'll look forward to seeing you ALL you folks doing some discussion while I'm gone on the critical Greek texts, as well as some detailed thinking through of our Hope.

Edited May 5, 2006 by Mike

[templelady]

I'd LOVE to get into Jesus Christ, PFAL, and his return

When Jesus Christ returns the time for teaching will be past. Christ won't be returning with scripture in his hand of any sort, he'll be returning to gather the saints. Once we stand before GOD and Jesus Christ, all things will become clear "now we see through a glass darkly...."

This reality has nothing to do with what church you belong too, it is what it is.

By my callculations the books , If they are coming at all should arrive here, in about a week, given Mothers Day is coming up I'll adjust for mail volume and say I expect them by the 15th. I of course will be happy to help defray expenses--I can pay through Paypal (with a valid e-mail) or send a cashiers check. As with all posters , it is possible to contact me through e-mail by use of the settings available when clicking on my name. Mike has not yet made use of this opportunity.

[T-Bone]

No, T-Bone. Not true. I want to discuss my questions to you and further items they lead to even if you cut and run. Anyone here can participate and I invite them to.

Folks, you'll have to excuse me for a while. I have work to do and a grad friend is arriving at the airport in a few hours. He's one of the noble Berean grads who listens intently to my message and searches the scriptures (and PFAL books) daily whether those things are so. He never posts here.

I'll look forward to seeing you ALL you folks doing some discussion while I'm gone on the critical Greek texts, as well as some detailed thinking through of our Hope.

Just curious - is the person a grad of YOUR class [as opposed to TWI's class]? And if they listen intently to your message - what do they think about it? Has the grad ever seen Grease Spot - especially the threads that showcase your message where your message is hidden?....Oh - and if they are a grad of YOUR class - perhaps they could tell me what your message is.

Edited May 5, 2006 by T-Bone

[templelady]

How will, or how CAN we know it's really him when he appears? Will he look like his Renaissance portraits, and if so WHICH ONES? Will he look like his movie depictions, and again, which ones?

When of two things will happen when he returns, either I'll find myself rapidly accelerating toward Him from the earth--In which case I'll know it's Him, OR everybody around me will instantly disappear, In which case I'll know He's been and gone. Either way, And I Sincerely pray it is the former, I'll know it's Him.

[Mike]

templelady,

Well I though I’d stop in on my way to the airport and see what's happening.

I’ll look much closer at your notes on the Return later, when I have more time.

You wrote: “As with all posters , it is possible to contact me through e-mail by use of the settings available when clicking on my name. Mike has not yet made use of this opportunity.”

I tried twice today to send you a PM.

This is the message the system returned to me:

This member has chosen not to be contactable by the board Messenger

This personal message has not been sent

Did you forget that you blocked me or are you deliberately lying about this situation?

You CAN forget about the books and all cooperation from me.

I will absolutely NOT send them as long as your respect for me and my message and my attempts to help you are in the gutter.

No books; that deal is off.

Quoting a famous General: “I am in control... here.”

It is YOU who are trying to “change the goalposts” so I refuse to play. You can explain yourself in a PM to me and I will give you the chance to earn back some respect. Right now your account is pretty drained.

Edited May 5, 2006 by Mike

[Tom Strange]

ummm... Mike... before you go any further off of the deep end...

I don't believe she ever agreed to PM... she has always said "EMAIL"...

[templelady]

Mike,

You can rant , rave, fume, blather, dither, and foam at the mouth' til the cows come home. I said it once, I repeated it as a quote, and WW re posted it "I AM NOT HAVING ANY BACKDOOR CONVERSTATIONS WITH YOU"

That's three times NO PMs has been repeated

Why? because there is absolutely no need too.

• You package up the books
  
• you put my name on said package
  
• you take said package to the post office and mail it
  

I have offered to help defray expenses.

On the same page that says send a PM it says send an e-mail. YOU HAVE NOT DONE SO.

When you get right down to it, an email is no different than a PM, except, I have control over the contents of any emails I might receive as opposed to having to respect "confidentiality" with a PM.

So again the question becomes what is it you want to say to me that can't bear the scrutiny of everyone else on these boards or even more to the point ; what do you have to say to me that you are afraid of anyone else finding out you said? You have had no problem up to this point in saying whatever you darn well pleased to every body, why get shy now??

In short, Send the books as you promised, or don't send the books and again display your true character..

I weary of this dialog, and suspect that the problem is far greater that your unwillingness to send the books; I begin to suspect that your actions on this matter as well as your actions on this thread are because YOU YOURSELF DO NOT HAVE COPIES OF ALL THE BOOKS, much less extra copies to send to me

Edited May 5, 2006 by templelady

[WordWolf]

And cyber space rent gets cheaper every year. It’s pictures and audio and video that hog up a lot of hard drive real estate, not text. Blocks of text being posted and re-posted is like spitting in the ocean now. Otherwise someone would have come down on WordWolf long ago for his repetitions of text blocks.

How about that.

If I refer to Mike without a quote, Mike yells I'm afraid of people seeing his words.

If I refer to Mike with short quotes, Mike yells I'm not providing content.

If I refer to Mike with complete quotes, now I'm wrong for repeating text blocks.

I guess, according to Mike, I'm only right if I stop posting entirely.

Looks like Mike isn't going to think I'm right anytime soon.

[WordWolf]

[WordWolf's commentary again in boldface.]

templelady,

Well I though I’d stop in on my way to the airport and see what's happening.

I’ll look much closer at your notes on the Return later, when I have more time.

You wrote: “As with all posters , it is possible to contact me through e-mail by use of the settings available when clicking on my name. Mike has not yet made use of this opportunity.”

I tried twice today to send you a PM.

[For those of you playing along at home...

tl said she can be "contacted through e-mail"

and Mike read that, even QUOTED it,

and then-TWICE- tried to send "a PM".

This is the same Mike who accuses the rest of us

of poor reading, sloppiness, etc.

This is the message the system returned to me:

This member has chosen not to be contactable by the board Messenger

This personal message has not been sent

Did you forget that you blocked me or are you deliberately lying about this situation?

[Most people would have caught the mistake-if not sooner-

when they saw their OWN message where the two things are

different.

Not Mike.

Couldn't POSSIBLY be HIS FAULT.

Must be someone else's fault. In this case, tl's the only other suspect,

so it MUST be tl's fault.

Must have blocked him and FORGOTTEN...

...or deliberately LIED to Mike.]

You CAN forget about the books and all cooperation from me.

I will absolutely NOT send them as long as your respect for me and my message and my attempts to help you are in the gutter.

No books; that deal is off.

Quoting a famous General: “I am in control... here.”

It is YOU who are trying to “change the goalposts” so I refuse to play. You can explain yourself in a PM to me and I will give you the chance to earn back some respect. Right now your account is pretty drained.

[Hm.

Mike is no longer in "polite" mode. We are back to rude Mike,

the more default setting.

Mike fails to read correctly, and fails to communicate correctly

as a result, and this means that

"all her respect for him AND his message are in the gutter."

Wow.

All that from one blocked message,

which wasn't even her fault.

And, of course, now he's claiming a pretext to rescind his offer.

His word of honour, apparently, has a revolving door.

And, apparently, he read my reference to how he's

"moving the goalposts", because he's referring to them.

And taking it out on tl.

Apparently, she needs to earn the respect she lost when Mike

was unable to comprehend what he read when reading and

QUOTING her message, which was entirely his fault to begin with.

He's been draining her account.

He must have forged her name and written checks off her account.

Is anyone besides Mike buying Mike's version of events?]

[socks]

This may seem like a cheap shot as I'm not interested in posting on this thread, but I read the last few pages and had to comment -

Mike's been shot cold on this before, templelady and WW. And Mike's stated purpose for being on GS always come through - to find some interested people, proselytes.

He's pimping on GS, to put it in rude terms. GS is where the ex-Way "action" is and so he cruises the streets here where there's a reasonable amount of response, versus some of the other boards, where posts from the board creators have sat unspoken to for months at various times.

It's the way it is, GS is a focal point for whatever reasons bring people here and Mike's is to preach and find people who will move off board with him. But even though Mike says there are so-called "lurkers" who supposedly visit Mike in this vanity-press publishing house here who really support what he's doing, none of them post here (or if they do they hardly count as a large percentage) and offer additional insight, support or information. Why, if they did, they could start their own threads and populate them. AND none of them seem to be enough in number or interest to divert Mike's energies away from this board which again - seems to have no validated supporters of what Mike preacheth.

So where they are, we don't know. What they do we don't know, but they don't do it here. And for sure, there's plenty of precious time to post here. For only one reason - to get these invisible lurking people to PM Mike and get into some heavy off-board breathing over PFAL.

I know it's just me, but it seems oddly perverse.

But MIke, you know I love you. I do, and so I check in from time to time to see if anything's changed here and lo, even these many years now, no.

Edited May 6, 2006 by socks

[Tom Strange]

My brother from the sock drawer... yeah... we know... it's a study in abnormal psychology isn't it?