Battle of the Patriarchs
It has been brought to my attention that one patriarch has decided to hit another patriarch when down. This last week, David Bayly expressed worry about Vision Forums’ marketing strategy. You can see his post here. Given the Bayly’s embrace of the same misogynist views, and given that the Bayly’s public front is far more vicious and barbarous than any public front we have seen from Vision Forum, this is certainly a fine time for such a cheap shot. Vision Forum at least attempts to make their misogynist patriarchy look a bit lovely and culturally promising. You might recall that we closed our case on the Baylys here. You can view the topic “Tim Bayly” to the right or above if you want more about that short lived, yet wild ride with Tim and David Bayly. If you have checked out David Bayly’s new post here, you will see that it only took an interesting treasure hunt and a single marketing picture to both arouse David Bayly suspicions as well as his determination to publicly insinuate that Vision Forum is a greedy and corrupt organization.
Also note that David Bayly removed a comment from John Thompson but kept his name and email address available. He also made public comment to the comment he censured from the public:
This comment has been removed because of negative statements made about a third party in the absence of a genuine name or email address.
If you are the author of this comment and wish to provide your real email address and name we will consider reinserting the content of your comment. Sniping anonymously from the shadows is behaviour unbecoming Christians and will not be permitted on this blog.
Notice how Bayly claims that the comment was removed simply for having made a “negative statement” about a third party while not disclosing his real name in the thread (in a thread to a post that Bayly made a negative comment himself about a third party!); but Bayly goes on an implies that John Thompson had just made a post that was also “sniping…from the shadows” in a way “unbecoming” Christians. This is remarkable, but fully consistent with what we have learned about the tactics of the Bayly Brothers. It is a very dark world in Bayly Blogdom; you risk getting libeled by even showing up there. Hopefully, John Thompson never connects his real name to this alias now that David Bayly has made public accusations about material he has banned from the internet. Bayly’s criterion against anonymity here is also fully disingenuous since we have well documented the fact that the Baylys censure people from their blog all the time without any equitable standard at all. Even I was banned from their blog after I did not fully submit to Tim Bayly’s demand that I fully accept his treatment of Corrie. Further, Christian bloggers that the Bayly’s would not disapprove of at all do allow anonymous comments all the time, and without referring to them as “unbecoming” “sniping.”
No comments yet.