In this thread you mentioned that you had heard of the SCA before at Rennaissance festivals, but had never dressed in costume. You said that while on a hike with Mrs. Phlosphr, someone from the SCA near where you have recently moved in Arizona had taken an interest in your skill with the crossbow and had invited you to join. You asked for input about the SCA and how much time Dopers spend with their groups and whether or not costumes have to be tailored or if they can be bought. You asked what questions would be good to ask at a meeting.
I am a very absent-minded person myself. But I would think that at least one of you would remember that you and Mrs. Phlosphr belonged to the SCA “for years” when you lived in Phoenix before. Two years ago you posted this with the details, saying that you ordered your costumes from Randall. You said that the taste of mead was worth the membership.
I’ve had some of that bathtub mead myself and very much enjoyed my experiences with the SCA. I was of the Clan McBrayer whose battlecry was “Huh?”
I used “lapses” (the plural) in the title of this thread for good reason. You have heard only one of them.
Why waste our time and yours with a false persona? (Or maybe someone else logged in under your name, right?)
Kaitlyn created a specific issue by not merely presenting a facade, but by drawing very particular attention to that facade and making it the focal point of a large number of posts.
I suspect that in this basically anonymous medium, we could find a number of people who have established facades who have not, in the course of multiple years, successfully maintained them with total rigor.
Unless we find that a poster is persistently using that facade to play on the emotions of the Teeming Millions or to spread falsehoods that could injure another person, I really would prefer that we not begin going on explorations to discover who has made some random claim that does not have total factual accuracy to support it. It is not going to do the SDMB any good at all if we use the unfortunate episode of Kaitlyn and his or her banning as the prompt for us to re-enact The Monsters are Due on Maple Street from The Twilight Zone.
Zoe, if you (or anyone else) has good reason to believe that posters have lied about themselves in ways that might harm other posters, I suggest you present your doubts and your evidence to the staff for resolution. Otherwise I fear that the next madness on the SDMB will be to have hordes of nitpickers looking to tear down other posters for the sheer joy of wreaking havoc or causing trouble for their “enemies.”
These are simply my personal beliefs on this topic. I am not speaking for the staff. (Of course, if “outing” people becomes the next fad on the SDMB, these are the views I will bring to any staff discussion.)
No, she’s taking queues from another messageboard in which they are seeking to “out” other members of the SDMB. It is their new goal in life, wearing K6’s demise as their badge of honor. These losers have nothing else better to do with their lives but scour the archives of the SDMB for ammo against certain posters they have monstrous hardons for.
Yes, this is the new fad. No, this will not end well.
I confess. I think I may have once posted a comment to the effect that I preferred smooth peanut butter over crunchy, but have since changed my mind and recently posted that I prefer crunchy. It isn’t my fault - I come from a broken home.
“You have heard only one of them.” This leaves a rotten stench behind it. If you have a complaint, say it. Say all of it. Present the evidence you have. All of it. This “each night as the clock strikes four, new revelations shall appear carved into a pumpkin on your porches” melodrama is nonsense. It makes you appear as if you’re trying to make Phlosphr dance to your call, or, less plausibly, are pretending to threaten him. The fact that this complaint, regardless of its validity, refers so far to posts that are, as far as I can see, completely harmless, and that you are not even claiming to have been hurt by them, doesn’t make me any more sympathetic. The fact that you asked Phlosphr directly about the contradiction that you think you spotted last night and couldn’t even wait until morning for an answer before starting this leads me to doubt the purity of this particular search for truth. Say your piece, then let him answer if and as he will.
As for the tidbit you provide in the OP, I don’t care nearly as much whether Phlosphr explains this as poor memory, wanting in a thread wherein he is soliciting suggestions to appear less knowledgable than he is, or any other way, or at all, as I care about the sudden zeal to mine posters’ histories for that valuable commodity, dirt. The unintended consequences of such are rarely benign.
No, I have not participated in another message board in approximately a month – not even to read.
I recall pitting only one person in the two years that I have posted here and that was George Bush. If there was anyone else, then I have forgotten, but I think those who know me can attest to the fact that I don’t quickly speak ill of others or participate in pile-ons.
My suggestion to Phlosphr was not that he go away or do anything anatomically impossible. I asked that he post here as himself.
Tomndebb, thanks for your response.
Maybe next time my timing will be a little bit better.
It’s okay, Mangetout. We can start our own message board after we’re banned. After seeing this thread I started doing vanity searches and found the tangled web of lies I’ve been constructing over the years.
Actually, it should be quite funny if someone looks up my first few posts on the board (is there any easy way to do that?), as I was certainly much closer to the fundamentalist extreme of the Christian spectrum when I arrived here than I am today.
Quite likely, we could find a number of people without any established facades who have not, in the course of multiple years, successfully maintained their realities with total rigor.
I too have a confession to make. In an MPSIMS thread long ago, I claimed to be 5’11" tall. This was in fact a sad distortion of the facts, since I am only really 5’10 3/4". I am thoroughly ashamed of the heartless deception I have practised upon you all for so long, and if you no longer wish to to speak with such a mendacious wretch, I fully understand. I shall be slumped sadly over in the corner with only the rats for company: perhaps with time I can win the acceptance, nay, even the companionship, of one of their number. Truly, I deserve no more.
Maybe I’m not as suspicious as you are, but to me “involved for several years” doesn’t necessarily equate to “belonging to the SCA ‘for years’”; nor does “having garb” necessarily mean that Philosphr has full costumes. And telling someone that a renfair is worth attending if only for the mead is certainly NOT the same as saying “the taste of mead was worth the membership.”
This looks an awful lot like a fucking witch hunt.
I once claimed to be divorced for longer than I actually was.
On more than one occasion I claimed to have a girlfriend when indeed I was talking about former GF’s. I did this for the shelfish reason to make my post more superfluous.
Somebody puh-lease ban me as I am not worthy of this board. :rolleyes:
