Dear me, decisions, decisions. Is it worth the expenditure of my mental energy to compose a response to Phaedrus? After all, it does take up a significant percentage of the available supply, perhaps more of one than would be necessary to some of our more distinguished members.
I suppose I could point out that a turnabout of the situation would not result in LBMBer’s hounding of my every post. Rather, there would be a small smattering of wisecracks, with perhaps here and there a mild and respectfully worded post pointing out an inconsistency in someone’s argument.
More to the point might be to observe that I regard the Internet primarily as a divertissement, by which I mean that posters are not likely to find my contributions to be about things that are particularly important to me. I’d think that you might have noticed that about my posts here.
As to your assertion that
well, I’d have to point out that, in the words of some guy calling himself Phaedrus, that’s your subjective opinion. I’ve gotten many a chuckle out of some of the posts on this thread. I am also aware that most examples of humor involve the recognition of the ridiculous aspects of what we observe as we go through life. This tends to include a lot of observation of the ridiculous aspects of the things our fellow human beings do and say. Saving a detailed debate on the nature of humor for another thread, I will here merely suggest that everything that is funny is also mean, from someone’s point of view. That said, I do not assert that everything that is mean is necessarily funny.
Which aspects of a Jewish Message Board might you expect to see addressed with challenges in the way that the LBMB has been addressed by the infiltrators from this board? The things on LBMB that I have noticed being challenged include sanctimoniousness, a tendency to be exclusionary, shrillness, apparent demands that total strangers submit their innermost beliefs for inspection and judgment by the Grand Inquisitors (does the phrase “kicking back with a tub of popcorn and a bottle of root beer” ring any bells?), willful ignorance, and an insistence on a unanimity of opinion that brings to mind thoughts of totalitarianism. To be sure, some or all of the same traits can be found in posts appearing on the SDMB. The difference is this: on the SDMB, when such traits appear, there is a good chance that someone will feel free to point them out. I think even you would agree that this freedom is an important quality of the Board. My visits to the LBMB have not yielded much evidence that such a perception of freedom is present there. And should we be directed to a Jewish Message Board where such traits were rampant, with the LBMB’s same apparent level of tolerance for dissenting thought, I wouldn’t call someone an anti-Semite for strolling in and providing the service of reality-checking that we tend to take for granted here. Not that I expect such an occurrence to arise.
I, too, believe that persons of faith have a right to peaceful co-existence with their fellow human beings. But I don’t think of the LBMB as a place where persons of faith come to co-exist peacefully with their fellow human beings. As far as I have been able to see, it looks like a haven from the rest of humanity. IMO, such a haven is not a healthy environment for either the intellect or for faith. I’m not claiming that the infiltration from this board can be justified as being something “good for them,” but I flatly deny that it amounts to any attempt to abrogate the right of people of faith to “peacefully co-exist” with their fellow human beings (unless, of course, you want to contend that the term “human being” applies only to fundamentalist Christians, a contention that would not be without precedent in this weary world of ours; but I really don’t think you want to contend that).
You may be prepared to argue that these people of faith have a right to peacefully co-exist with their fellow human beings solely within their Message Board, possibly implying that their fellow human beings should stay out and leave them to themselves. Should that actually be your argument, I have no words to defend the infiltrators. But I do declare that the argument itself is worthy of debate.
“Perhaps other actions can be taken to stop [me?]” First, allow me to point out the irony of directing the statement at me, personally, as I am, after all, an EXTREMELY minor player in the saga of the past several weeks. It’s very ironic. Second, allow me to suggest such an action: Post a link to this thread in the LBMB. I confess that I’ve toyed with the notion of doing so myself. However, were you to do it, there would be yet another irony to enjoy; to wit, the fact that in an earlier post to this thread I gave YOU credit for being a good enough sport to restrain yourself from outing us to the LBMB. But as SoulFrost said, and I implied (a bit more obliquely), this infiltration does seem to have pretty much run its course. The notion of ending the charade with a bang instead of a whimper carries a certain appeal. I wouldn’t cry if the outing were carried out today, but I won’t presume to make that decision for the posters who have distinguished themselves on that site far beyond what I have contributed. If you should choose to do so, of course, knock yourself out. But be aware that I will be dropping by to observe the reactions. And I might think some of the fallout is funny. On your own head be it. 
Of course truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.
Mark Twain