Finally Clearing Up Old Issues - John Pelan's Lie
Haunted River
and a day, so in an attempt to clear up one particularly annoying
dispute, I make this post, in the hope that we can finally resolve the
issue and move onwards to other things.
On the 1st and the 8th February, John Pelan claimed stock ownership of
his then ISP CNW / ISOMEDIA.
Links proving this:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.books.ghost-fiction/msg/6d2258eb48f56c47
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.books.ghost-fiction/msg/f5e8645bad64a43a
Pelan made these claims to deter anyone from complaining to his ISP
about his abusive internet behaviour. However, I liased with ISOMEDIA
via their website (www.isomedia.com) and was put in contact with their
Legal Counsel, a Mr Barry Maulding. Not only did Mr Maulding confirm
that he had reprimanded John Pelan for abusive behaviour, but that
Pelan was most definitely not a stockholder, and that he had
specifically warned Pelan to stop making this false claim.
Indeed, Mr Maulding deemed it so serious a matter that he actually
telephoned Pelan at home.
A short while ago, Pelan's new acquaintance Kevin O'Brien, claimed in
alt.horror.cthulhu to have received emails from Barry Maulding
completely disputing my account of things, allegedly stating that Mr
Maulding had denied ever having been in contact with me. However,
O'Brien has a proven track record of lying about such matters, and
faking communications that never existed, as proved here:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.horror.cthulhu/msg/f8ad11eed04746e8
Both Pelan and O'Brien have been curiously unwilling to publish these
supposedly-received emails from Mr Maulding, no doubt fully aware that
ISOMEDIA would swiftly litigate against for forging non-existent
communications. In contrast, I have been given permission by Mr
Maulding to publish his email confirming that both Pelan and O'Brien
are lying.
This email is cited below, with full headers, in case anyone doubts its
authenticity. Furthermore, Mr Maulding is still in residence as Legal
Counsel at Isomedia, and anyone doubting my version of events can liase
with him themselves.
Received: from [207.115.64.110] (helo=tpa6.isomedia.com)
by smtp.web-mania.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)
id 1ClyVy-0004nR-00
for ch...@hauntedriver.co.uk; Tue, 04 Jan 2005 23:55:02 +0000
Received: from auctiondev (flare.isomedia.com [207.115.64.77])
by tpa6.isomedia.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EC5F71C821B
for <ch...@hauntedriver.co.uk>; Tue, 4 Jan 2005 15:25:15 -0800 (PST)
From: "Barry Maulding" <bar...@isomedia.com>
To: <ch...@hauntedriver.co.uk>
Subject: John Pelan
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 15:29:08 -0800
Message-ID: <AMEPLAECMHHHFDHFJ...@isomedia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Importance: Normal
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at isomedia.com
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 tagged_above=-999.0 required=999.0
tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Level:
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: LEVEL=
X-WM-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more
information
X-WM-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-UIDL: Yme"!oYX!!To$#!;TJ"!
X-NAS-Bayes: #0: 2.53168E-060; #1: 1
X-NAS-Classification: 0
X-NAS-MessageID: 1775
X-NAS-Validation: {77A9AD63-8FD8-4D3A-9047-52D783B327C0}
Mr. Barker,
Regarding your email of Dec. 29, you are authorized to publish
any emails I sent you and this email.
I do not deny and have not denied that I warned Mr. Pelan to
stop making false claims about being an owner of ISOMEDIA.
Barry Maulding
General Counsel
* * *
John Pelan has persistently tried to dodge this issue. He started off
denying that he had ever made any claims about ISP stock ownership
(until I posted links to his own posts proving that he had); then he
argued that I had not received any emails from Mr Maulding (until I
published one of those emails, proving that I had); now it would appear
that Pelan is questionning Mr Maulding's very existence, even though
that can be very easily corroborated.
Pelan's original lie is bad enough, but this sleazy, constant denial of
wrongdoing is causing significant ongoing problems in many newsgroups.
Other people are becoming victims. My belief is that until Pelan
finally apologises in public, admitting that he lied about this
specific issue, then many newsgroups jointly frequented by us both will
continue to be unpleasant and acrimonious. Furthermore, until he
accepts and acknowledges his guilt in this matter, he will be unable to
stop stalking and harrassing me in his very obvious attempt to clear
his own name by attacking mine. Again, I would argue that I am not the
only victim of this abuse: everyone who gets dragged into the matter
suffers to some degree or other.
I doubt very much that Pelan will have the humility or decency to own
up to his lie, far less apologise for it. I would therefore urge his
friends and acquaintances to urge him to either do so - which would
clearly be in the interests of several newsgroups - or else require him
to publish proof of his own repudiating my version of events.
PS. One final observation: perversely, it is very much in Pelan's
business interests to perpetuate rancour within usenet groups because
he owns Horrabin Hall. Thus not only has he caused the ongoing
conflict, but he actually benefits from everyone's misery.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> A short while ago, Pelan's new acquaintance Kevin O'Brien, claimed in
> alt.horror.cthulhu to have received emails from Barry Maulding
> completely disputing my account of things, allegedly stating that Mr
> Maulding had denied ever having been in contact with me. However,
> O'Brien has a proven track record of lying about such matters, and
> faking communications that never existed, as proved here:
>
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.horror.cthulhu/msg/f8ad11eed04746e8
>
LOL! Accusations made by other people who have lied about me to third
parties and who themselves forged email messages do not constitute
proof in any reality except Barkerville.
>
> Both Pelan and O'Brien have been curiously unwilling to publish these
> supposedly-received emails from Mr Maulding, no doubt fully aware
that
> ISOMEDIA would swiftly litigate against for forging non-existent
> communications. In contrast, I have been given permission by Mr
> Maulding to publish his email confirming that both Pelan and O'Brien
> are lying.
>
Yes, but you changed the content of the message he sent you before you
posted it. He knows this, since I sent him a copy of the post, but he
prefers to just let the matter drop and declined to take action. He
thought it would be best to just ignore you than give you any form of
credibility, even by suing you.
>
> I doubt very much that Pelan will have the humility or decency to own
> up to his lie, far less apologise for it. I would therefore urge his
> friends and acquaintances to urge him to either do so - which would
> clearly be in the interests of several newsgroups - or else require
him
> to publish proof of his own repudiating my version of events.
>
Since no one takes you seriously, no one needs proof from him to doubt
your version of events. All we need to know is that Barkerville is a
funny place.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
bed. It's none of your business and you've done your level best to stir
up trouble.
Let John Pelan publish the emails you claim to have received from
ISOMEDIA, or else admit that he lied. Then we can all move on, and
hopefully end this ongoing rancour.
jpe...@qwest.net
ill. Please seek help for your unhealthy obsessions. Your continual
stalking behavior and spamming of non-commercial newsgroups will land
you in a good deal of hot water. Imagine how empty your existence will
be when you can't post your rants on Usenet any longer.
Run along now, no one cares about your sick little fantasies.
Cheers,
John
Haunted River
to post evidence to support your claim that you did not lie?
It's just as I predicted - you are condemning abgf to perpetual
rancour. Partly because you are inherently dishonest, partly because
you wish to compel potential customers to subscribe to your moderated &
privately owned Yahoo newsgroup.
fundoc
"Haunted River" <haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113593531.9...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Huh.
jpe...@qwest.net
fill a book. Just go away, no one cares about your wild allegations.
J
Haunted River
this group, are you prepared to publicly acknowledge that you lied, or
will you be publishing evidence that you and O'Brien claim is in your
possession which proves your claim to be innocent of the allegation?
We need one or the other to resolve this issue. Come on, stop wasting
everybody's time.
Haunted River
claims to have received from Barry Maulding at ISOMEDIA, I will promise
to leave this group for good, forever.
John Pelan
<haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You promised to leave this newsgroup if you failed to prove that I was
"Deathdream". You failed to prove this, and in fact had it pointed
out to you that the computer used by "Deathdream" was in a different
part of the country, different path, different ISP, and in short could
not possibly have been me. Your latest accusation that I am "Eliza B."
is equally ridiculous, the young lady obviously knows British comedies
that I've never seen and her ISP is based in the UK. Just because you
are fond of playing dress-up and masquerading under a feminine alias
doesn't mean that everyone else shares your kinks.
Not only are you a stupid git, but we all know you to be a cheap
little liar without an iota of credibility, so why should either
O'Brien or anyone else kowtow to your outrageous demands?
Run along flycatcher, your trolling grows tiresome.
J
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> Please stop with the pissing-games. I'm trying to put this matter to
> bed. It's none of your business and you've done your level best to
stir
> up trouble.
>
LOL!
You made it my business when you started lying about me just because I
reported that Isomedia denied your lies about John.
>
> Let John Pelan publish the emails you claim to have received from
> ISOMEDIA, or else admit that he lied. Then we can all move on, and
> hopefully end this ongoing rancour.
>
LOL!
Really, Barker, you are hysterical. You were the one who started this
whole issue, by making a mountain out of a molehill. Your obsession
for revenge made you take an obvious hyperbole and turn it into a
bald-faced lie, and your refusal to back down, despite having made an
ass (I mean the animal, not the body part) of yourself, simply shows
how desperately moronic you are.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> I'll go further. If you will publish the emails that Kevin O'Brien
> claims to have received from Barry Maulding at ISOMEDIA, I will
promise
> to leave this group for good, forever.
>
LOL!
You've never kept that promise before, so why should anyone believe you
now?
Unlike you, I don't particularly care whether people believe your lies
about me or not, so I see no reason to post private email messages.
You and I both know you're lying; that is enough for me.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
I promise to send Todd £1,000 (one thousand pounds), for him to donate
to a charity of your choice, if you will publish the emails that you
and Kevin O'Brien claim to have received from ISOMEDIA. It's the only
way of clearing up this matter, resolving all the conflict, and handing
the newsgroup back to the general public. Alternatively, you could come
clean and admit in public that you lied about owning stock with your
ISP.
It's your choice. Out of respect for dozens of other people, you must
seize this chance to end the conflict. I have published a genuine email
with the full consent of Barry Maulding, Legal Counsel for Isomedia. If
you also claim to have emails from Mr Maulding, why won't you publish
them?
Chris Barker
http://hauntedriver.co.uk
John Pelan
<haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I thought that you had promised to leave Usenet if you couldn't prove
that I was "Deathdream"? You are simply a nasty little liar without an
iota of credibility. Now why don't you go back to your comedy forum?
From skimming the posts, it looks like you're getting a solid
ass-kicking there as well.
No one wants your rubbish Barker; not here, not elsewhere; you'd be
best off unplugging the computer or sticking your head in the oven,
whichever seems the most prudent course of action.
Good day,
John
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
You remind me of a poster on talk.origins that used to challenge
evolutionists to all sorts of bets, then claimed evolution was false
because no one took him up on any of them.
The only reason why there is "rancor" on this newsgroup is because you
attack people; if you stop the attacks, the rancor will end.
It's as simple as that.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
few weeks ago, strangely obsessed in protecting John Pelan. You have no
idea what you are talking about.
My offer stands. If you or Pelan publish those emails in this forum,
I'll leave for good and post Todd T a cheque for £1,000. Of course, if
you don't post them, you're open to the allegation of lying, and the
rancour will persist, because I for one will not tolerate your
collective presences in any forum. And nor will I leave or drop the
matter.
John Pelan
<haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Fuck off you stupid piece of rubbish. No one gives a damn about your
ravings, you sick little pervert. You have been revealed as a habitual
liar, thief, spammer; and likely a pervert. Go away.
J
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
> The reason why so many people ignore you. . . .
>
LOL!
Only in Barkerville does a statement about you being the cause of
rancor in this group become a complaint about people ignoring me!
Hysterical!
>
> My offer stands. If you or Pelan publish those emails in this forum,
> I'll leave for good and post Todd T a cheque for £1,000. Of course,
if
> you don't post them, you're open to the allegation of lying, and the
> rancour will persist, because I for one will not tolerate your
> collective presences in any forum. And nor will I leave or drop the
> matter.
>
Aye, aye, Cap'n Ahab, sir! May ye have the Devil's own luck in thy
obsessed quest fer revenge agin the Terribal White Whales! Arrgh!
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
$1,000 to a charity of your choice if you or O'Brien publish the emails
you claim to have received from the Legal Counsel at Isomedia which
allegedly clear you of the charge of lying.
I've published an email from the same organisation proving you lied.
Anyone can contact Isomedia to verify it's authenticity. I fail to
understand why you are unwilling to publish your emails.
PS. Your vile, baseless utterances only serve to emphasise your anger
at being exposed as a liar. It's a pity however that you persist in
subjecting a good many other people to this conflict when you could end
it all by either admitting you lied, or in publishing those emails you
claim to have received.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> My offer still stands and I will keep on referencing it. I will
donate
> $1,000 to a charity of your choice if you or O'Brien publish the
emails
> you claim to have received from the Legal Counsel at Isomedia which
> allegedly clear you of the charge of lying.
>
Still another example of Barker's expert imitation of a Netkook.
Netkooks love to make grandiose claims such as this, and then when
everyone ignores them knowing they could never make good on their
boasts they then declare victory.
>
> I've published an email from the same organisation proving you lied.
> Anyone can contact Isomedia to verify it's authenticity. I fail to
> understand why you are unwilling to publish your emails.
>
As I said; to the Netkook there can be only one reason why no one took
him up on his grandiose offer. Of course, to any reasonable person
there can be and generally are other legitimate reasons, the chief one
being that no one believes the Netkook can make good. But to the
Netkook silence is vindication of his claims, and so he declares
victory. As Barker does here.
>
> PS. Your vile, baseless utterances only serve to emphasise your anger
> at being exposed as a liar. It's a pity however that you persist in
> subjecting a good many other people to this conflict when you could
end
> it all by either admitting you lied, or in publishing those emails
you
> claim to have received.
>
And of course the quintissential characteristic of a Netkook: blaming
others for the rancor he himself causes.
Kevin L. O'Brien
The People's Poet
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.horror.cthulhu/msg/f8ad11eed04746e8
Kris Baker
"Wildwood" <wildw...@pipeline.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:ghk561hbi6mj1v5fq...@4ax.com...
> kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net you up next, work it out now.
>
>>
>>And of course the quintissential characteristic of a Netkook: blaming
>>others for the rancor he himself causes.
>>
>
> they respond to him anyway, polluting multiple groups instead of
> ignoring and silently laughing at him?
>
> Just killfile him (and any puppets) and killfile the pissing contest
> threads that he and Pelan have (or just killfile them both, but I
> usually read Pelan's posts when he isn't being led around by the hook
> in his mouth in those threads that boil down to 2 children shouting
> "IS SO!" and "IS NOT!").
>
> Bill
Brava!
I've found that killfiling any *subject* with a regular's name in
it, gets rid of 50% of the junk in a newsgroup....and lets you
safely read the non-pissing posts.
Abandoning the group isn't the answer; the answer is having
restraint, respect, and a good strong killfile.
Kris
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> So why is it that everyone knows he is both a 'kook and a troll, but
> they respond to him anyway, polluting multiple groups instead of
> ignoring and silently laughing at him?
>
Because Netkooks also appeal to the "silent majority" for support,
claiming that everyone who does not publicly oppose them in fact
supports them.
>
> Just killfile him (and any puppets) and killfile the pissing contest
> threads that he and Pelan have (or just killfile them both, but I
> usually read Pelan's posts when he isn't being led around by the hook
> in his mouth in those threads that boil down to 2 children shouting
> "IS SO!" and "IS NOT!").
>
In my case I read and respond to posts using Google Groups, so I can't
killfile anyone. Besides, my philosophy is even someone you absolutely
hate can sometimes say something worthwhile, so I wouldn't killfile
anyone anyways. Barker may be the exception that proves the rule, but
we won't know until he actually does say something, anything,
worthwhile.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
"The People's Poet" is a sockpuppet for Chris Barker! The email
address is the same.
This demonstrates two more characteristics of the Netkook. Netkooks do
not have any support on the Groups they frequent, so they create
sockpuppets to pretend that they have support from others. And
Netkooks are hypocrits, condemning others for faults they themselves
practise when it suits them.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
blaming
> >others for the rancor he himself causes.
> >
>
> they respond to him anyway, polluting multiple groups instead of
> ignoring and silently laughing at him?
>
For the very good reason that I am neither a kook nor a troll. That's
just a silly but obvious attempt to demonise me so in order to try and
dismiss what I say. It's textbook stuff.
Seriously, the rancour between Pelan and I could easily be resolved
should these things happen:
1) Pelan either owns up to having lied about stock ownership of
Isomedia or else publishes the emails which he says will clear his name
2) He stops stalking around after me in various Yahoo and Google
newsgroups, harrassing me with a succession of sock puppets
3) He desists from abusing me and in particular my family
4) He closes his abuse group "Bad Mr Toad" at Yahoo.
Until he does those things, I'm going to keep reminding folk that he is
an abusive bully who tells lies. Once he owns up to the lie and
apologises, I'll drop the matter.
Of course he won't admit having lied. He knows his professional
credibility would be horribly undermined should he admit that he had
lied and that his ISP had threatened to sue him for lying.
So the conflict goes on......but I would point out that it does so
because of Pelan's propensity to bully and lie, not because of my
dogged determination to stand up to him. As I said, I will happily lay
down arms once Pelan makes confession.
Haunted River
alt.horror.cthulhu.
It's been proven by someone who appears to be a respectable film-maker
(whom you've harrassed) that you lied brazenly about receiving letters
from professional organisations, in your bizarre quest to prove him a
net kook and troll etc etc. Even a published friend of yours privately
confided to me that you were mad, in the context of asking me to be
kind to you because of that illness. And I know that you lied about
receiving emails from John Pelan's ISP because their Legal Counsel
Barry Maulding told me so (in an email I published with his
permission).
It's pretty obvious that *you* are the sick internet deviant here,
O'Brien.
Bob
>I'm going to keep reminding folk that he is an abusive bully who tells
lies.
I'm beginning to believe you Barker!
>He knows his professional credibility would be horribly undermined
What professional credibility? His little vanity press scribblings?
He's already a laughing stock on rec.collecting.books and with every
post digs himself in deeper and deeper.
He a pitiable, cowardly, loud-mouthed endomorphic bullyboy who hides
behind the internet.
I gaurantee that he wouldn't dare open his mouth in person because he
knows he would get the living shit beat out of him.
Haunted River
for a long while. He's cowed many of his cronies and customers into
submission via his domineering personality and those of his peers who
should know better have too many shared business interests to risk
standing-up to him.
Pelan DID tell a lie about his ISP to try and stop people complaining
to the ISP about his abusive behaviour. He then tried to bully the ISP
because they freeely admitted to me that they had reprimanded him for
lying. He flew into a rage and threatened them with litigation. Oh, the
irony of it! Pelan lies about owning stock in their company, and then
*he* threatens to sue *them* after they find out about it. Worse, he
then employs a deranged lunatic called Kevin O'Brien to claim to have
received emails clearing Pelan from all charges....only, neither of
them can actually publish those emails because they don't actually
exist, and if they were stupid enough to fake some, Isomedia would
quickly sue them both.
As for 'professional credibility', I long ago rumbled the fact that
Pelan keeps on referring to himself as the 'critically-acclaimed'
author / editor etc etc of this or that book. But where is that
critical acclaim? In five odd years, I've never yet been able to locate
any. Does it exist, anywhere?
Mark Dillon
Kevin L. O'Brien wrote:
> Still another example of Barker's expert imitation of a Netkook.
> Netkooks love to make grandiose claims such as this, and then when
> everyone ignores them knowing they could never make good on their
> boasts they then declare victory.
>
> As I said; to the Netkook there can be only one reason why no one took
> him up on his grandiose offer. Of course, to any reasonable person
> there can be and generally are other legitimate reasons, the chief one
> being that no one believes the Netkook can make good. But to the
> Netkook silence is vindication of his claims, and so he declares
> victory. As Barker does here.
>
> And of course the quintissential characteristic of a Netkook: blaming
> others for the rancor he himself causes.
Netkook, narcissist... no matter which term we use to describe
Barker, we're dealing with someone so profoundly ill that he will
never understand the implications or extent of his illness.
He will never grow, never learn, never accept responsibility for
his own self-imposed frustration. And he will never stop blaming
the rest of us for his constant self-sabotage.
It seems to me, then, that our only solution is to killfile everything
he says. It's not as if we'd miss anything new: Barker repeats the
same dull fantasies every time; refute him this year, and he'll
be back next year with the same obsessive fabrications. And it's
not as if anyone would ever believe Barker's lies: he wipes out
his own credibility with masochistic finesse.
So why are we wasting time with him? We have so many things to
share, so many worthy topics to discuss, so many things to learn...
but every moment spent with Barker is a blot on the day.
Please: let's ignore him, once and for all.
Mark Dillon
Quebec, Canada
John Pelan
>Haunted River sez:
>>I'm going to keep reminding folk that he is an abusive bully who tells
>lies.
>
>I'm beginning to believe you Barker!
>
>>He knows his professional credibility would be horribly undermined
>
>What professional credibility? His little vanity press scribblings?
Fuck you, you worthless junkman, when I want any shot out of you I'll
suggest that you scrape your tongue. Make of the comments below to my
face and see what happens, tough guy.
>He's already a laughing stock on rec.collecting.books and with every
>post digs himself in deeper and deeper.
>He a pitiable, cowardly, loud-mouthed endomorphic bullyboy who hides
>behind the internet.
>I gaurantee that he wouldn't dare open his mouth in person because he
>knows he would get the living shit beat out of him
Delusional asshole. Get back to your dumpster-diving. Anytime you
think your hard enough, bring it the fuck on. You'll spend the rest of
your miserable life drinking out of a straw.
John
Christopher J. Henrich
<kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net> wrote:
> Wildwood wrote:
> >
> > So why is it that everyone knows he is both a 'kook and a troll, but
> > they respond to him anyway, polluting multiple groups instead of
> > ignoring and silently laughing at him?
> >
It's much more fun to /watch/ a pissing contest then it is to
participate. (Think of the headwind...)
>
> Because Netkooks also appeal to the "silent majority" for support,
> claiming that everyone who does not publicly oppose them in fact
> supports them.
>
This is true, but unimportant. I can claim to be the rightful King of
Beltravia, but so what?
I am a newcomer to this group, and not sure who "started it" between
Haunted River and John Pelan. Nor do I really care.
(And I think the people of Beltravia are with me on this issue.)
--
Chris Henrich
http://www.mathinteract.com
God is Real.
Jesus is Integer.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> You've been branded a mentally ill liar by the group
> alt.horror.cthulhu.
>
LOL! That's rich. Only in Barkerville does the opinion of one person
represent the unqualified opinion of an entire newsgroup!
>
> It's been proven by someone who appears to be a respectable
film-maker
> (whom you've harrassed) that you lied brazenly about receiving
letters
> from professional organisations, in your bizarre quest to prove him a
> net kook and troll etc etc.
>
LOL! Oh, this is priceless stuff! Only in Barkerville would the
unsubtantiated accusations of a man who lied about me to third parties
and forged email messages by considered proof.
>
> Even a published friend of yours privately
> confided to me that you were mad, in the context of asking me to be
> kind to you because of that illness.
>
LOL! This is the best yet! When my friend read this, he contacted me
and told me that this was most definately NOT what he told you. So
again you've lied about what people say to you.
By the way, still not insulted, but please feel free to try again.
>
> And I know that you lied about
> receiving emails from John Pelan's ISP because their Legal Counsel
> Barry Maulding told me so (in an email I published with his
> permission).
>
LOL! It just got better. Mr. Maulding informed me that you had
changed the contents of that email before you published it, and that he
had told you directly that he had not reprimanded John and that he
asked you to stop saying he had.
>
> It's pretty obvious that *you* are the sick internet deviant here,
> O'Brien.
>
Yes, well, Barkerville is indeed a very strange place.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
My interest in responding to Barker is not to "win", or to inform
people of the "truth" about Barker (though there may be newcomers who
might take him seriously, or wonder why I do not defend myself), or to
respond to his vile accusations (though again on Usenet failure to
respond is often seen as an admission of guilt). I respond for two
reasons:
Like John I am exercising my freedom of speech; you and others are then
free not to listen.
What I do is akin to the saying that all that evil needs to triumph is
for good men to do nothing.
By all means, please feel free to killfile Barker, me, Pelan, and this
thread. Were I in your place I would probably do the same (except for
the reason I stated earlier). Just keep in mind that had you been
subjected to Barker's vitriol you might feel differently.
So leave us to our own private antechamber of Hell forever at each
other's throats, but understand why we do it and pity us, not revile
us.
Kevin L. O'Brien
The People's Poet
exposed a liar. It is a public service.
You lied about Aaron Vanek and as such are a laughing stock in
alt.horror.cthulhu. Even the people who have worked with you quietly
admit that you are a serial liar. AV cut you into little pieces and
everyone agreed.
And you lied about receiving emails from Barry Maulding about John
Pelan. How do we know this? Firstly, because Mr Maulding says you are.
Secondly, he allowed me to publish an email proving that. And thirdly,
you have been curiously unwilling to publish those emails or even quote
from them. Now, anyone in your position would not hesitate to publish
extracts from these emails; certainly Isomedia would not object, not if
they were real emails. The fact that you don't is extremely suspicious.
Two lies, both proven beyond all reasonable doubt. There's nothing
'vile' about that, except for your part in creating the deception.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> It is not a "vile allegation" to point out that you have twice been
> exposed a liar. It is a public service.
>
LOL! Only in Barkerville would vile allegations be considered a
"public service".
>
> You lied about Aaron Vanek and as such are a laughing stock in
> alt.horror.cthulhu.
>
No, those are just the voices in your head.
>
> Even the people who have worked with you quietly
> admit that you are a serial liar.
>
No, those are just the voices in your head.
>
> AV cut you into little pieces and everyone agreed.
>
LOL! Aside from myself, only four people responded to Aaron's post,
two of whom are notorious themselves for being trolls and Netkooks. I
hardly think AHC's total membership consists of five people plus
myself. The "everyone" has to be those pesky voices again.
>
> And you lied about receiving emails from Barry Maulding about John
> Pelan. How do we know this?
>
LOL! Lo, the voices speak to you even now!
>
> Firstly, because Mr Maulding says you are.
>
And Mr. Maulding told me you are the one who has lied.
>
> Secondly, he allowed me to publish an email proving that.
>
And he told me you altered the contents of that email, so again you
have lied.
>
> And thirdly,
> you have been curiously unwilling to publish those emails or even
quote
> from them. Now, anyone in your position would not hesitate to publish
> extracts from these emails; certainly Isomedia would not object, not
if
> they were real emails. The fact that you don't is extremely
suspicious.
>
Only in Barkerville. The fact of the matter is, the emails Mr.
Maulding sent me were copies of the ones he sent to John Pelan. Since
they are third party emails and the property of Isomedia, Mr. Maulding
made it clear he was sending them to me as a courtesy and not for
public publication. He therefore asked me not to publish them or even
quote from them. He also told me that he sent copies of them to you,
so you know exactly what he said to John. Those emails clearly show
that John was not reprimanded and Mr. Maulding has confirmed this to
me, so your continual insistance that he was is itself a lie.
>
> Two lies, both proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
>
Only in Barkerville, which is a very strange place.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> Even the people who have worked with you quietly
> admit that you are a serial liar.
>
To those who might be interested, in light of this accusation I believe
it's time to reveal something about Barker's personality that I had
previously decided not to mention. Several of the authors I have
published who are members of AHC did contact Barker to defend me
against his vitriol. He in turn retaliated by flooding their inboxes
with so many vindictive messages that they had to add him to their Spam
blocker programs to filter him out. I had to do the same myself when I
first started publicly challenging him. Just goes to show you the
length this man will go to in pursuing his vendettas against anyone he
perceives to be an enemy. Hence ignoring him doesn't work; he just
keeps coming at you from any direction he can.
I also find it interesting that Barker, as part of his desperate
obsession, is now trying to sow dissention between me and my authors.
I'm beginning to believe that what John and others have said about him,
that his attacks are motivated by jealousy for people who have
succeeded where he has failed, may be right after all.
Humor is the best way to deal with him, that and mockery, because the
one thing the Devil cannot stand is to be laughed at.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
then there's no point responding to you.
You're a liar. I proved it. If you want to clear your name, publish
those emails.
PLONK
Haunted River
with one or two authors who were published by you.
CB
Pennyroyal
Kevin
Your'e being a bit disingenuous again. You *Chose* to be involved in
this fight. You werent *chosen* by CB as fresh blood. You leaped
into it feet first in the ghost story newsgroup and made an enemy of
CB so dont play the role of long suffering martyr. You muddied the
waters and then descended into a farrago of logic and evasions and
never followed up on anything you began. I was quite impressed by
what seemed at first to be a reasonable attempt to get to the bottom
of all that crap but you rapidly became as big a pain in the bum as CB
himself was so I lumped you in the same category as him, and, sadly,
John Pelan too. Interesting and informative occasionally, but
irritating when youre all stirred together in a big noisy stew of
invective, vitriol and silliness, like an over seasoned gumbo, or a
Lancashire hotpot gone horribly wrong.
I'm only replying because I'm at a bit of a loose end waiting for more
work to turn up, and looking for diversions. Usually its easy to
ignore the lot of you.
If I could make you all go stand in opposite corners of the room with
your noses to the wall then, well, I would, so there. And you can
jolly well stay there until those bottom lips return to normal and you
stop stamping those itty bitty feet. And theres another corner free
for anyone who wants to join Kevin, Christopher and Johnny!
BAH!
John Pelan
wrote:
Not that I'm particularly concerned about your opinion, but I would
like to see anyone else endure Barker's constant attacks without
striking back. Maybe you're more forgiving than I am; and if so, good
on you. I will attempt to ignore Barker, but if his croaking becomes
insufferable, I will defend myself. Trolls like Barker and Finnan are
a common enough nuisance on Usenet and the adage of "don't feed the
troll" seldom works. The certifiably insane like Barker will keep
screeching invective until they get a response. When such invective is
directed at you, it becomes impossible to ignore and has been proven,
it's impossible to conduct a discussion without Barker interjecting
his croaking.
Cheers,
John
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> You are lying - yet again. I've had perfectly affable correspondence
> with one or two authors who were published by you.
>
LOL!
Ah, yes. Everybody lies about Barker. Poor unfairly maligned Barker.
Boo hoo.
But you and I and my authors (at least those who contacted you) know
that you are the liar. That's all that needs to be said.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
LOL!
Translation: Everything you said was absolutely right, but of course I
could never admit to it, so I will just spew more vitriol and pretend
to ignore you, for a few minutes.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> Your'e being a bit disingenuous again. You *Chose* to be involved in
> this fight. You werent *chosen* by CB as fresh blood. You leaped
> into it feet first in the ghost story newsgroup and made an enemy of
> CB so dont play the role of long suffering martyr.
>
Not quite accurate. Barker made the same accusation, that I stalked
him here, but as I pointed out to him, my first posts to this group,
that were not cross-posted from AHC, had nothing to do with Barker. He
attacked me because he did not think I should post here, despite the
fact that his opinion of who belongs is meaningless. You are right in
one respect, however; I do choose to be involved whenever Barker makes
unprovoked attacks against people simply out of a spitefull obsession
with revenge. The plain and simply fact is, if he stopped these
unwarranted attacks, I and John would stop responding to them.
But being as he has declared that he will continue his attacks, I won't
hold my breath.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
"...like an over seasoned gumbo, or a Lancashire hotpot gone horribly
wrong."
I once made what should have been a superb game casserole. Only trouble
was, I misread the allowance for juniper berries, and exceeded the
suggested measurement by a factor of ten. Then I went to the pub and
cooked it for three hours too long. The result was....well, after ten
years, I still wake up screaming at the memory of the taste.
Haunted River
you flew to Pelan's defence, inventing fake emails to ingratiate
yourself with him. I wonder why? Well, one theory proposed by one of
your writing friends to me was that after having been so horribly
ridiculed in alt.horror.cthulhu for pathological lying, you were eager
to take out your frustrations on someone else. It's textbook stuff. A
cruel father beats his child, the child becomes a bully and then beats
his peers. The bullied peers then take it out on the cat etc etc.
The courageous thing to do would be to stop lying, acknowledge to both
yourself and others that you have done so, and then ndeal with your
frustrations in a proper manner, rather than take it out on someone
else. Then those friends of yours who quietly emailed me about your
mental problems wouldn't be forced to take their concerns undergound -
they could defend you publicly without fear of shame or ridicule. As
things stand now, they dare not support you because you have been
conclusively exposed as a serial liar. The only friend you've got is
John Pelan, but even a fool can see that he's wary about getting too
close to you, because he knows that you lied about those Isomedia
emails.
Try reading 'Lord Of The Flies' and '1984'. It might give your some
insight into the psychology of violence.
PS. All this "Know the Devil by his actions" stuff is making you look
even more of a nutcase than the lying. You're one step away from being
Carrie's mother.
Haunted River
me, they would quite possibly rupture a rib laughing.
Clearly you are unbelievably desperate to demonise me. You probably
think I'm a bigger threat to world peace than Osama Bin Laden. Gosh,
how you must fear me. And why? Because I stand up to your friends and
highlight some of their nepotistical, hypocritical and fraudulent
actions.?
Jeez, *that's* the biggest problem in your life? No wonder people say
that America is going to pot.
Haunted River
will become a worldwide laughing stock even before your career has
properly begun.
Bob
>Trolls like Barker and Finnan are a common enough nuisance on Usenet
and the adage of "don't feed the troll" seldom works
And, unfortunately, psychotic bully boys with anger management problems
and delusions of grandeur are also commonplace.
Haunted River
their malign purpose to do so.
If you are the victim - a preposterous claim as anyone who knows you
would be forced to concede - why have you been forcefully evicted from
two independently owned Yahoo newsgroups for stalking me in there to
post malicious abuse, hmm? If you are the victim, why do you have very
strong links to a malicious sock puppet which was set up (as you freely
admitted) for any of your friends to use to attack me? And why did you
make the password available for this sock puppet in your own Yahoo
abouse group below, owned and managed by you for no other purpose than
to harrass me?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bad_Mr_Toad/
No, clearly your new tactic of arguing that you are the victim is
patent bullshit. You are very clearly the aggressor. But why the new
strategy? Yes, of course, I've got it! You are desperate to evade the
Isomedia issue. You know you lied; you know that Kevin O'Brien has
since lied for you; and you know that Isomedia will haul your derriere
into court if you dare fake emails and publish them to support your
case. Oh, and you also know that these lies have been an extremley
major factor in abgf conflict, so any admission of guit would expose
you to the charge of having caused a large amount of trouble (just as
your bullying people whilst boasting about your HWA status caused a lot
of trouble for poor old HWA staff).
I'm an athiest, but if I were a Catholic, I truly believe that you
would burn in Hell for your crimes, the least of which is a monstrous
dictatorial arrogance.
CB
alamocitycomics
mistake, then how are we to believe your rant about John Pelan?
Haunted River
Haunted River
American blood money may have installed you as temporary head of state,
but the People's Popular Front Of Beltravia-Igloostan will bring about
a Glorious Revolution that shall sweep away your tinpot dictatorship in
a tidal wave of Liberty, Egality and Free School Milk! Soon you will be
filling up your rusty rent-a-vans with looted treasures from the Great
Palace and fleeing to sanctuary in nearby Yankestan and we the free
peoples of this forgotten backwater rich in oil shall rise up and smash
the palace windows (though not too badly because those of us who will
win the postal election may want to live there, purely for strategic
reasons you understand).
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
LOL! Translation: I am a liar and know very well that the emails
exist and that they show that John Pelan was not reprimanded, but I am
too cowardly to admit it publicly, so I will continue my demented
campaign of revenge against you for telling people the truth about me
and try to destroy you for it by any foul means I can. (signed) Chris
"Captain Ahab" Barker
Dear Captain: Do your worst and be damned! Kevin "The White Whale"
O'Brien
(And of course we all know who won the duel alluded to.)
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> You don't have any emails from Isomedia, do you?
>
LOL! Translation: Mr. Maulding sent me the same copies he sent you,
but I cannot admit it, so I will ask innane questions to hide from the
issue.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
Regarding your email of Dec. 29, you are authorized to publish
any emails I sent you and this email.
I do not deny and have not denied that I warned Mr. Pelan to
stop making false claims about being an owner of ISOMEDIA.
Barry Maulding
General Counsel"
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
that you have forged it.
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
do so.
2. The headers were not faked. They are real. You will have to detail
exactly how they have been faked if you want to dispute them.
3. How do you explain the fact that only last week, Pelan was trying to
suggest there was no such person as Barry Mauding? It is another
suggestive inconsistency in yours and Pelan's argument.
4. If Isomedia prohibit publication of their emails as you claim, then
why have you failed & Pelan failed to report me for having (as you
claim) published a fake email on the internet? It's very out of
character for you both to have not commented on this, and for neither
of you have to reported me for fraud. Isomedia would clearly be very
concerned at being falsly represented and they would almost certainly
complain to my ISP.
No, your lies are riddled with anomalies. Isomedia do indeed permit the
publication of emails on the internet. You are prevaricating like a
politician stripped of all dignity in your quest to dupe everyone.
CB
alamocitycomics
know me so I have nothing to gain or lose. Hopefully this Maulding dude
will respond to my question concerning the validity of Haunted
River/People's Poet's claim.
Afterwards, there really isn't anything to discuss. I'm impartial and
will post all headers and email once received....I should say "IF"
received.
One more thing...I vote that Pelan send CB a plane ticket to Seattle
and settle the score in person. Screw all this email/newsgroup shit.
Face off like men.
Haunted River
that I want to end this acrimony as soon as possible. After a brief
victory dance, I will drop the matter - provided that John Pelan and
Kevin O'Brien do the decent thing and apologise.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> 1. Prove it. Post your message. I've published evidence. . . .
>
Which you faked.
>
> 2. The headers were not faked. They are real. You will have to detail
> exactly how they have been faked if you want to dispute them.
>
Your reading comprehension is pretty bad. I never said the headers
were faked; Mr. Maulding confirmed to me that the headers were
accurate. What he said was that you changed his message in the body of
the email that went with the headers. That itself is very easy to do.
Once you copy and paste the email into a text editing program, you can
then change any part of it you want to. You did not change the headers
but you did change the message itself. That has been confirmed by Mr.
Maulding to me.
>
> 3. How do you explain the fact that only last week, Pelan was trying
to
> suggest there was no such person as Barry Mauding? It is another
> suggestive inconsistency in yours and Pelan's argument.
>
As I said before, I am not responsible for John's arguments, so I am
not afraid to contradict him.
>
> 4. If Isomedia prohibit publication of their emails as you claim,
then
> why have you failed & Pelan failed to report me for having (as you
> claim) published a fake email on the internet? It's very out of
> character for you both to have not commented on this, and for neither
> of you have to reported me for fraud. Isomedia would clearly be very
> concerned at being falsly represented and they would almost certainly
> complain to my ISP.
>
Your memory is also very selective. I have stated several times now
that I did report you to Isomedia and that I did send Mr. Maulding a
copy of your email; that's how I found out that you changed the message
he sent you. He told me, however, that he is sick and tired about
dealing with you and this issue, so he wasn't going to give you any
credibility, even by suing you.
>
> No, your lies are riddled with anomalies. Isomedia do indeed permit
the
> publication of emails on the internet. You are prevaricating like a
> politician stripped of all dignity in your quest to dupe everyone.
>
It is not my responsibility if the facts I have reported contradict
your Barkervillian delusional fantasies.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> I contacted Maulding and am waiting for a response. You people don't
> know me so I have nothing to gain or lose. Hopefully this Maulding
dude
> will respond to my question concerning the validity of Haunted
> River/People's Poet's claim.
>
> Afterwards, there really isn't anything to discuss. I'm impartial and
> will post all headers and email once received....I should say "IF"
> received.
>
I hope you get a response. However, Mr. Maulding told me that he
frankly was pretty sick of this whole issue and did not intend to reply
to further inquiries from ininvolved third parties. In any event, we
shall see.
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> I applaud your intervention. Thanks. I've stated on several occasions
> that I want to end this acrimony as soon as possible.
>
LOL! Then stop bringing it up all the time and we will stop discussing
it.
>
> After a brief
> victory dance, I will drop the matter - provided that John Pelan and
> Kevin O'Brien do the decent thing and apologise.
>
Ah, so, if you don't get your way you'll keep on creating more rancor?
Why does that not surprise me?
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
liars, O'Brien has just blundered into another quite stunning gaffe,
pre-empting said expose.
He said:
"I never said the headers were faked; Mr. Maulding confirmed to me that
the headers were accurate. What he said was that you changed his
message in the body of the email that went with the headers. That
itself is very easy to do. Once you copy and paste the email into a
text editing program, you can then change any part of it you want to.
You did not change the headers but you did change the message itself.
That has been confirmed by Mr. Maulding to me."
Well, aside from the fact that O'Brien never thought to mention this
new piece of information until now, he has once again shot himself in
the foot.
I never published the headers to the emails he references. Therefore,
it would be impossible for him to forward them on to any third party,
least of all Barry Maulding at Isomedia.
How many embarrassing gaffes does O'Brien need to commit before he
decides to leave newsnet gracefully?
I very clearly recall only quoting excerpts from Barry Maulding's
emails on newsnet, no headers. In response to this quotation of
comments, O'Brien claimed to have then liaised with Mr Maulding, and
obtained statements from him disputing my claims, and denying having
ever sent those earlier emails. O'Brien referred to these alleged email
exchanges with Barry M in at least two newsgroups as the archives will
prove.
In response to this, I emailed Barry M and asked him to comment on
O'Brien's highly dubious claim to have received an email response from
Isomedia. In response Barry M replied:
"Mr. Barker,
Barry Maulding
General Counsel"
Thus clearly refuting O'Brien's version of events, and denying that
O'Brien had even been in contact with him.
It was only at this point in time that I opted to post the last email
received from Isomedia - with full headers - in newsnet groups. Thus
O'Brien's new claim to have copied the headers from earlier messages is
completely unfounded.
****************************************************************
Of additional interest is the fact that Kevin O'Brien now also claims
that Barry Maulding long ago told him that Isomedia weren't bothered
about suing me for supposedly faking quotes by them on the internet. If
this is the case, if O'Brien knows full well that Isomedia have no
interest in pursuing people who willingly misquote them, then why he is
so unwiling to actually publish the emails he claims to have received
from Barry Maulding? If Isomedia aren't bothered about suing me for
inventing fake quotes, why on earth should O'Brien be worried about
publishing actual ones?
No, this is all very fishy indeed. The logic just doesn't stack up
properly.
*****************************************************************
It won't be long before Pelan and O'Brien's duplicitous behaviour is
confirmed by an independent party. I wonder how their friends will
react? I personally think it is a damning indictment of how supposedly
mature adults act when posting messages onto the internet, in that so
many people willfully encourage their lying and abusive practises.
However, I do hope that several group regulars - the independents
amongst us - finally have the decency to come forward and condemn Pelan
and O'Brien for having lied and for having contributed so significantly
to group acrimony. They should put aside their concersn about offending
a HWA official, and source any Midnight House books they might want
from a third party source, rather than keep quiet for such reasons.
Those that don't are cowards, and I personally think less of each of
you for implicitly condoning his actions.
Pelan owes an important apology to a great many people, not just me. If
he isn't urged to make one, no matter how damning or conclusive the
evidence against him, then the majority of you *are* craven sycophants,
and you have no right whatsoever to ever question my integrity.
CB
John Pelan
You have no integrity, no credibility and your six month crusade over
an out-of-context remark that any ISP "would be more interested in
selling me stock than listening to the complaints of an unemployed
nutter in the UK"; has grown tiresome. You operate dozens of
sock-puppets, spam newsgroups, steal intellectual property, and stalk
disinterested third parties until they send you concilitory e-mails in
the desperate hope that you'll leave them in peace. This, couple with
your racism and homophobia are really all that anyone needs to know
about you. You are a disgusting little man and that's all you'll ever
be.
It's quite obvious to all what you're up to here, and no one's buying
it. The recent poll conducted by one of your allies should serve to
show you exactly where you stand. No one believes your ravings and you
are nothing more than a tiresome nuisance. I'm no longer going to even
give you the dignity of slapping you down when you get uppity. You may
continue to rant and rave and soil this newsgroup, I won't bother
responding to you, Kevin seems quite capable of making a mockery of you
without any help from me. Imagine, contacting the authors in his
anthologies to whine that their publisher was mocking you on the
Internet... What a pathetic creature you are...
Good day.
John
essenti...@gmail.com
unfortunately cleared up nothing that remains in dispute.
--Mike
Haunted River
Haunted River
Haunted River
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> Although O'Brien and Pelan are about to be exposed independently as
> liars, O'Brien has just blundered into another quite stunning gaffe,
> pre-empting said expose.
>
> He said:
>
> "I never said the headers were faked; Mr. Maulding confirmed to me
that
> the headers were accurate. What he said was that you changed his
> message in the body of the email that went with the headers. That
> itself is very easy to do. Once you copy and paste the email into a
> text editing program, you can then change any part of it you want to.
> You did not change the headers but you did change the message itself.
> That has been confirmed by Mr. Maulding to me."
>
> Well, aside from the fact that O'Brien never thought to mention this
> new piece of information until now, he has once again shot himself in
> the foot.
>
ROTFLMAO!!! Barker, you sanctimonious twit, I told you SEVERAL TIMES
already!
>
> I never published the headers to the emails he references. Therefore,
> it would be impossible for him to forward them on to any third party,
> least of all Barry Maulding at Isomedia.
>
LOL! I never said that, you bare-faced liar. The only headers you
ever published were for the only email from Mr. Maulding you ever
published, the one you quote below. As I have stated over and over
again, it was that email, complete with headers, I sent to Mr.
Maulding, no others.
>
> How many embarrassing gaffes does O'Brien need to commit before he
> decides to leave newsnet gracefully?
>
LOL! I did not make this gaffe, you did.
>
> I very clearly recall only quoting excerpts from Barry Maulding's
> emails on newsnet, no headers. In response to this quotation of
> comments, O'Brien claimed to have then liaised with Mr Maulding, and
> obtained statements from him disputing my claims, and denying having
> ever sent those earlier emails. O'Brien referred to these alleged
email
> exchanges with Barry M in at least two newsgroups as the archives
will
> prove.
>
LOL! More bare-faced lies. I never said Mr Maulding denied sending
you emails; I stated he denied reprimanding John Pelan.
>
> In response to this, I emailed Barry M and asked him to comment on
> O'Brien's highly dubious claim to have received an email response
from
> Isomedia. In response Barry M replied:
>
> "Mr. Barker,
>
> Regarding your email of Dec. 29, you are authorized to publish any
> emails I sent you and this email.
>
> I do not deny and have not denied that I warned Mr. Pelan to stop
> making false claims about being an owner of ISOMEDIA.
>
> Barry Maulding
> General Counsel"
>
> Thus clearly refuting O'Brien's version of events, and denying that
> O'Brien had even been in contact with him.
>
LOL! No, this is the message Mr. Maulding said you forged.
>
> It was only at this point in time that I opted to post the last email
> received from Isomedia - with full headers - in newsnet groups. Thus
> O'Brien's new claim to have copied the headers from earlier messages
is
> completely unfounded.
>
LOL! I made no such claim on this newsgroup; it resides only in your
delusional mind.
>
> Of additional interest is the fact that Kevin O'Brien now also claims
> that Barry Maulding long ago told him that Isomedia weren't bothered
> about suing me for supposedly faking quotes by them on the internet.
>
LOL! Yet another bare-faced lie. I did not say Mr. Maulding told me
this "long ago"; I said he told me this after I sent him a copy of the
email you posted. That was back in January.
>
> If this is the case, if O'Brien knows full well that Isomedia have no
> interest in pursuing people who willingly misquote them, then why he
is
> so unwiling to actually publish the emails he claims to have received
> from Barry Maulding? If Isomedia aren't bothered about suing me for
> inventing fake quotes, why on earth should O'Brien be worried about
> publishing actual ones?
>
Because they expressly forbade me to publish them. Mr. Maulding
himself admitted that he had errored granting you permission to publish
his email, but he never expected you to alter his message. He said it
wasn't worth suing you over one incident. But if I were to publish the
several emails he sent me, that would be far more serious and they
would sue.
>
> No, this is all very fishy indeed. The logic just doesn't stack up
> properly.
>
Only in your delusional mind.
>
> It won't be long before Pelan and O'Brien's duplicitous behaviour is
> confirmed by an independent party. I wonder how their friends will
> react? I personally think it is a damning indictment of how
supposedly
> mature adults act when posting messages onto the internet, in that so
> many people willfully encourage their lying and abusive practises.
>
> However, I do hope that several group regulars - the independents
> amongst us - finally have the decency to come forward and condemn
Pelan
> and O'Brien for having lied and for having contributed so
significantly
> to group acrimony. They should put aside their concersn about
offending
> a HWA official, and source any Midnight House books they might want
> from a third party source, rather than keep quiet for such reasons.
> Those that don't are cowards, and I personally think less of each of
> you for implicitly condoning his actions.
>
> Pelan owes an important apology to a great many people, not just me.
If
> he isn't urged to make one, no matter how damning or conclusive the
> evidence against him, then the majority of you *are* craven
sycophants,
> and you have no right whatsoever to ever question my integrity.
>
LOL! And once again, in Barkerville roaring crowds cheer the mighty
Barker as he once again declares victory over His Hated Enemies!
Kevin L. O'Brien
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.books.ghost-fiction/msg/89b15169c8d4dbf6?hl=en
>
And nowhere in that post does he say I or John lied. As always, you
read into it what isn't there, just what your delusional mind fools you
into thinking what's there.
Kevin L. O'Brien
The People's Poet
No, this is demonstrably untrue. This is the chain of events as per
usenet archives:
1. I branded Pelan a liar by quoting selectively from two emails sent
to me by Barry Maulding.
2. You dismissed those emails as fakes and said that you had been in
contact with BM yourself. Furthermore, you said that BM had denied ever
have communicated with me.
3. I then emailed BM and asked him to comment on your claims. He denied
categorically ever having heard from you. He also gave me permission to
quote any of his emails.
4. I published this last email complete with headers. You responded
with generalized evasions and smokescreens, but you most certainly did
not say that you had then received later emails from BM, and you most
certainly did not say that BM had accused me of faking the text of his
email(s).
5. Several months later, when pushed to cough up new evidence
validating your preposterous claims, you suddenly inform us that BM had
apparently dismissed by earlier emails as doctored fakes. Apparently
you'd been sitting on this info all this time, but you decide to only
inform us when several other people had started to question both your
motive and your sanity.
6. You also decide to reveal that BM had said that Isomedia were
disinterested in pursuing anyone for allegedly faking their emails. Yet
this doesn't sit comfortably with your claim that they had required you
to not publish their emails to you. In fact, it's a whopping great
contradiction. You appear to be suggesting that they are happy for
people to go around misquoting them, but that they object to being
accurately quoted. Very odd. Very odd indeed.
But this is all redundant now. Kate aka Wagga Wagga has stated that
Isomedia confirmed to her that John Pelan did lie. Logically, if Pelan
lied, then everything you have said in his defence is a lie.
PS. All this rolling-about-laughing to yourself and the weird
references to me being the devil - seriously, you are a sick man,
O'Brien, and you need help. The only saving grace is that you don't
appear to have children. Speaking as a parent, I am deeply glad about
that.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> No, this is demonstrably untrue. This is the chain of events as per
> usenet archives:
>
> 1. I branded Pelan a liar by quoting selectively from two emails sent
> to me by Barry Maulding.
>
That's never been in dispute.
>
> 2. You dismissed those emails as fakes . . .
>
Liar; prove it.
>
> . . . and said that you had been in contact with BM yourself.
>
This is true, I did contact him.
>
> Furthermore, you said that BM had denied ever
> have communicated with me.
>
Liar; prove it.
>
> 3. I then emailed BM and asked him to comment on your claims. He
denied
> categorically ever having heard from you. He also gave me permission
to
> quote any of his emails.
>
Liar; you changed the message he actually sent you.
>
> 4. I published this last email complete with headers. You responded
> with generalized evasions and smokescreens, but you most certainly
did
> not say that you had then received later emails from BM, and you most
> certainly did not say that BM had accused me of faking the text of
his
> email(s).
>
I said nothing at the time because Mr. Maulding asked me to just drop
the issue. It has only been recently that I have said anything about
this and that is because of your continued attacks.
>
> 5. Several months later, when pushed to cough up new evidence
> validating your preposterous claims, you suddenly inform us that BM
had
> apparently dismissed [m]y earlier emails as doctored fakes.
>
Liar; prove it.
>
> Apparently
> you'd been sitting on this info all this time, but you decide to only
> inform us when several other people had started to question both your
> motive and your sanity.
>
Liar; you are the only one who has questioned either, no one else has.
And I revealed this information because you keep making unprovoked
attacks in your obsessed delusional quest for revenge.
>
> 6. You also decide to reveal that BM had said that Isomedia were
> disinterested in pursuing anyone for allegedly faking their emails.
>
Liar; I said they were not interested in pursuing YOU. Prove I said
otherwise.
>
> Yet
> this doesn't sit comfortably with your claim that they had required
you
> to not publish their emails to you.
>
Liar; they told me not to publish the emails they sent to John Pelan,
which they sent copies of, as I explained on numerous occasions; they
said nothing about not publishing the emails they sent to me. Prove I
said anything different. However, those emails simply said, here are
the emails we sent to John Pelan. That's it; no sense in publishing
them.
Besides, it's a completely different issue, Barker; you are arguing an
apples and organges fallacy.
>
> In fact, it's a whopping great contradiction.
>
Only in Barkerville, not in the real world.
>
> You appear to be suggesting that they are happy for
> people to go around misquoting them, but that they object to being
> accurately quoted. Very odd. Very odd indeed.
>
The way you describe it, yes, but you are deliberately describing a
distorted version to suit your own delusional puposes.
>
> But this is all redundant now. Kate aka Wagga Wagga has stated that
> Isomedia confirmed to her that John Pelan did lie.
>
Liar; she said no such thing. Prove it; quote where she said "Isomedia
confirmed to me that John Pelan lied."
>
> Logically, if Pelan
> lied, then everything you have said in his defence is a lie.
>
But since John did not lie, your syllogism is false.
>
> PS. All this rolling-about-laughing to yourself and the weird
> references to me being the devil - seriously, you are a sick man,
> O'Brien, and you need help. The only saving grace is that you don't
> appear to have children. Speaking as a parent, I am deeply glad about
> that.
>
LOL!
Kevin L. O'Brien
Haunted River
that sit with the fact that you were yourself outed independently as a
serial liar as per below?
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.horror.cthulhu/msg/f8ad11eed04746e8
I think it's pretty obvious that you are projecting guilt at your own
nefarious habits upon me.
Switch off your pc, go visit a doctor, try and make some real friends.
Everyone can see that you've prostituted your arse to John Pelan. I'm
amazed that you have no self-dignity.
kevi...@clare.ltd.new.net
>
> You've called me a liar eight times in your above post. But how does
> that sit with the fact that you were yourself outed independently as
a
> serial liar as per below?
>
Simple: accusations by a man who lied about me to third parties and
forged email messages does not constitute proof. But then his behavior
emulates your own, so it is no wonder you idolize his unsupportable
opinion.
I called you a liar 8 times because you lied 8 times; that's just plain
common sense.
Kevin L. O'Brien