Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

A Response To John Warren, The Lying Dominant

37 views
Skip to first unread message

deanhi...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to


As usual, Mr. Warren is dead wrong on every front cited in his
malicious, self-serving post to the quite valid, literary public
service announcement that he is attacking.

(I’ll stop here and note how interesting it is that Warren thinks David
Lindsay’s Mercy was kind to the scene – it actually showed the SM
component as dirty, sleazy and quite for profit. Mr. Kadet’s book
portrays the scene quite differently with a balanced and less than
sickly sweet, cozy view.)

Now, we all know that Warren - strictly a small press vanity author of
little note – is himself an on-going spam campaign for his own meager
products and services and to raise his avowed and still unachieved
professional position as a leader in a scene he has barely known
anything about much less practiced within since he crossed over from
LifeStyles less than ten years ago.

We all know that he has never done much of anything that he
amateurishly cribbed of alt.sex.bondage in his laughable catalog guide
for the defunct porn press Masquerade often referred to as "The Lying
Dominant," especially by those who know him best. Many of us saw him
swipe the posts right off ASB, rewrite them and whine about he how he
knew better.

Like his crackling scalp stimulator the violet wand, John has been a
running public joke in the real scene for quite sometime. And for those
of you who don’t know this, less drag out a few open secrets and known
facts about this "Mentor."

John Warren routinely lies, creates false resumes, histories scenarios
– and why not? He has the time. He insinuated himself into the life of
a lonely unattractive woman with capital who blithely pays his bills
and pays the vanities and small presses like Greenery – which is
nowhere near a St. Martins Press, or Tor/Forge in terms of recognized
literary merit.

Warren launched himself in the Boston scene some eight or nine years
ago after literally fleeing New York debt and animus over his
inability to pass himself off there are something he was not. He had
better luck in Boston, but not before inaugurating his career there by
being thrown out the then only Fetish club in town for throwing fits
over how things were run. I witnessed this to some mirth way back when.

Mr. Warren used his benefactor’s capital to acquire a scene BBS – the
Former Fantasy Realization, formerly run by the man who ran the fetish
night that tossed him out – and use its base of users as a captive
market for his pamphlets, workshops and general unknowing conman
Tartuffery. And of course, as a pool of potential new confused women
that he could, uh, Mentor in his own special way, which was also the
reason he was unable to continue teaching English at a nearby community
college. He liked to Mentor the young co-eds just a tad much.

Warren has since tried recruiting avowed submissive women off his BBS
for the purposes of opening a house of dominance in his "Inner
Explorations" business space, which failed and nearly arose in his
arrest, has thrown unsafe "edge" parties in the same space, allowing
needle and scat scenes in a place lacking running water or any safety
oversight except of newbies thrilled to be allowed to do something,
such as wearing a monitor’s banner. This "educational" space has since
been given up – even John’s now-wife’s financial resources have their
limit, if not her patience.

Once again we have a splendid example of the Lying Dominant at work, in
his profound jealousy and, of course, fear.

"After Kadet (Petronius, Gothmuscle) was thrown out of Restraints, the
only local BDSM, club (as opposed to organization), he and Purringsub
joined forces with the local mayor to attempt to close the club. When
the legal challanges failed, a undercover police officer was brought
into the club, witnessed the owner doing a fisting and charged him with
sodomy. Faced with a possible 20 years in prison, the owner closed the
club."

The author – who was never thrown out of this club – but instead had an
unstable woman with him who made a threatening remark to club recruiter
Msugarkane about following her home and getting her address.

Subsequently, the author was asked not to return to the club by e-mail
after alerting people in an AOL chatroom that Restraints – a public
club skirting the terms of a court order like a swing-sex speak-easy –
was actually an unsafe free-for-all where SM was used as a cover for
unprotected sex and open oral sex where condoms, gloves, dental dams
were never being used, much less bleach clean-up or any sterilization
after sex scenes whatsoever. Inexperienced, unsafe play went
unmonitored, the owner suggesting : "Everyone is responsible for
himself – it’s not my business. What can I do?"

Interestingly, the author was immediately upon the e-mail banishment
asked to provide a list of what he thought good precautions should be.
The club summarily posted these rules to be appear responsible but of
course never implemented them. Worse, the club aggressively recruited
new curious people right from the chatrooms and DIRECTLY FROM PUBLIC
MUNCHES (supposed to be a safe introductory gathering for ideas, not
exploitation) – solely for profit -- which of course pricked the
interest of the police who had been trying to close down what was a
patent health and safety hazard. Mr. Warren had been working in concert
with the Restraints owner as a late-comer (getting over a former feud),
also a swinger who had run a swingsex club in a furniture store
basement called Sinners Lounge (also shut down by police) to put
together events and weekends to help line his own pockets – and at 200
dollars a year with a compounded twenty to thirty dollar cover with the
knowledge that as long as you signed some spurious agree, you could do
whatever you wanted to whomever, business was sucked from AOL was
brisk.

After the two rapes, the three cases of infectious disease, including
one of Hepatitis B, and the incompetent bullwhipping scene that caused
a man to intervene to prevent bone damage, certainly something should
have been said. But people were afraid of flaming in a taboo scene by
such minor Tartuffes as John Warren, and they are afraid of not being
given access to parties where they might not get what they seek

Nowhere in any public record is Warren’s libelous assertion backed, but
the undercover cop, recruited – surprise! -- from the Boston Dungeon by
one MSugarKane, a newbie arbiter of the local scene who left that
position almost as soon as she assumed it. William Mahoney, Ramp, was
given a choice to leave or prosecuted for a number of public
violations. As far as the author and any of his friends befriending a
city Mayor, this is ridiculous since he is far from political and has
not cared to make himself a voice or factor in any scene save as a
candid person speaking to other people one-on-one.

Warren is threatened by this - but then again, what isn’t Warren
threatened by? A kept-gigolo-Dom with a good deal to hide has much to
fear from one who doesn’t.

Of course, malefactors and criminals often work diligently to find
persons to use as scapegoats for their ill acts. And candor in the SM
scene is frowned upon, as so many frauds and abusers depend upon the
hush and the false bonhomie to get away with whatever abuses they
commit.

Mr Kadet, an inventor, respected reporter and critic as well as
novelist has not been sued for libel not because he’s penniless (unlike
Mr. Warren, he seems to be self-sufficient), but because things he says
tend to be factual and fact is a bad basis for a libel suit -- such as
noting that Mr. Warren has been investigated by Boston Police for
selling and facilitating the sale of kiddie porn. This is not to say he
does so, not even in the where-there’s-smoke, there’s-fire-sense. This
is not to say he doesn’t.

What Warren does do is lie and lie unconvincingly. The reviews he
mentions on Amazon of a negative nature placed by his own
"sock-puppets," to use his quaint coinage, have largely been removed by
the site as they were simply patent personal attacks – one that Warren
wrote recognizeably himself as Ted from Arizona calling the book a
"cheap knock off" of his unreadable, vanity published Murder at Roissy
still remains amusing and transparent, as well as his "Pollack" review,
riddled with typos of anger and silly Warrenisms.

As for damaging the Boston scene, the greatest damage has been caused
by irresponisble self-serving predatory petty conmen like Warren who
disinform, misinform, charge people for the privilege and then attempt
to prey on them sexually. Meaning that he is just another full time
regional self-appointed scene-leader with a clearcut agenda.

As for netcops, please attend -- Diversified Services Books Toys and
Videos to the Scene since 1993 www.diversified--services.com (new
webpage as of 6/25/00). This tagline is quite enough of a spam in
itself and more of one than the announcement of a new literary novel
that just happens not to be pornography.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

DonSideB

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
Wow! I thought I was the only one who was able to generate such animosity
around here.

It is a sign of honor to be hated by the right people. Way to go, John.

don

That which does not kill us is a good scene,

SSBB Diplomatic Corps: Tidewater Virginia

Kevin Craig

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
In article <8jvobd$fj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:

> As usual, Mr. Warren is dead wrong on every front cited in his
> malicious, self-serving post to the quite valid, literary public
> service announcement that he is attacking.

Dammit, how about a keyboard warning next time?!?!?!

I *hate* getting coke all over my brand-new monitor, but you're just too
hilarious to not spew....

Kevin

l...@netcom.com

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:
a lengthy rant, not only disputing Mentor's allegations, but thoroughly
slandering him from stem to stern.

I searched the web for other accounts of the closing of Restraints.
You can read more detail at http://www.cufsmaine.org/newslett5.htm
Search for the bulletins titled "The Restraints Club Closes Its Doors"
and "Boston BDSM.....The Saga Continues"

Needless to say, it agrees quite closely with Mentor's description of
the events. I welcome you all to read it for yourselves.

Annwyn

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to

<deanhi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8jvobd$fj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...

>
>
>
> As usual, Mr. Warren is dead wrong on every front cited in his
> malicious, self-serving post to the quite valid, literary public
> service announcement that he is attacking.

<snipetty snip>

methinks the thingummy doth protest too much


~A~

Gryph

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
<snippage>

Boy, did *you* ever pick the wrong forum to post this in.

<laughter>


--
Gryph
Het poly dominant sadist

Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other "sins"
are invented nonsense. - Robert Anson Heinlein

Reply to: Gryph AT altcastlenet DOT com

Darkginger

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
Now this *is* funny (OK, so I'm warped):

deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote >
<snippage>


>Now, we all know that Warren - strictly a small press vanity author of
>little note

whilst Sherman wrote (long ago in another thread):

>Now, I can see why you're an unpublished author of international
>no repute.

Does anybody spot the similarity in sentence structure? I can't find it, but
I remember Shermie using more or less the same phrasing as in the first clip
above in another of her posts. It's clear to me that this 'deanhightower' is
Shermie again, wearing yet another mask - but what it really interesting is
the knowledge of the Boston scene she reveals in the rest of this latest
diatribe. Now I'm convinced she's got a grudge against someone (could it be
you, John? <g>) because of her previous involvement in BDSM.

Sorry if I'm pointing out the bleeding obvious above, but I thought it might
be worth mentioning. I also find it rather amusing that she has chosen to
target one of the people I (and, I believe, others) find most worthy of
respect around here. Funny that Shermie claims she ain't into BDSM, cos
she's sure fond of flogging - dead horses, that is!

DG


TyMeDwn1st

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:

<<ravings snipped>>

Geez, guy, call your dealer and tell him the last shit he sold you is giving
you paranoid delusions and a bad case of grandiosity.


Ty
Who is mostly just
a slightly skewed
Donna Reed

Official Depooty of Sheriff of Nettingham's Charter Enforcers on SSBB
(To reply via email, simply remove my pearls...)

adrian...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
Darkginger:

>Now this *is* funny (OK, so I'm warped):

I agree that it's funny, but disagree with
your other conclusions.

>deanhi...@my-deja.com (Gary Kadet):
><snippage>


>>Now, we all know that Warren - strictly a small press vanity author of
>>little note
>

>whilst Sherman wrote (long ago in another thread):
>
>>Now, I can see why you're an unpublished author of international
>>no repute.
>
>Does anybody spot the similarity in sentence structure?

The sentence structure is not especially similar. The use
of "Now, I can see..." is a very common rhetorical device
for making a concession and seeming cooperative. Gary used
the (slightly more sophisticated) common rhetorical device
of "Now, we all know..." to imply the writer and his
audience are really allies, not opponents.

It seems fairly common for authors to throw "My publisher
can beat up your publisher!" into losing arguments (though
the better authors only do so when very, very drunk). Grad
students use "My advisor can beat up your advisor!" and
little kids use "big brother" or "daddy." It all means about
the same thing. I do not believe Sherman McCoy = Gary Kadet.
It's absurd to suggest that only one person on the net can
dislike John Warren, and all the rest of us have to be sock
puppets.

Darkginger continues:


>I can't find it, but
>I remember Shermie using more or less the same phrasing as in the first clip
>above in another of her posts. It's clear to me that this 'deanhightower' is
>Shermie again, wearing yet another mask - but what it really interesting is
>the knowledge of the Boston scene she reveals in the rest of this latest
>diatribe. Now I'm convinced she's got a grudge against someone (could it be
>you, John? <g>) because of her previous involvement in BDSM.

Bostonians have Gary Kadet, John Silber, horrendous traffic,
and a polluted harbor (though it's better than it used to be).
Don't blame us for Shermie as well!

>Sorry if I'm pointing out the bleeding obvious above, but I thought it might
>be worth mentioning. I also find it rather amusing that she has chosen to
>target one of the people I (and, I believe, others) find most worthy of
>respect around here. Funny that Shermie claims she ain't into BDSM, cos
>she's sure fond of flogging - dead horses, that is!

Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male? If "she"
implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
ugly when women do it.

Adrian
adrian...@hotmail.com
Opportunity knocks once. Temptation leans on the doorbell.


Angel

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to

SilverOz <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:slrn8m7uo3...@zipperii.zip.com.au...
> In soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm on 5 Jul 2000 19:18:53 -0700

> adrian...@hotmail.com <adrian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
> >pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male? If "she"
> >implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
> >than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
> >ugly when women do it.
>
> I think the "she" is because some people believe that the postings
> indicate the individual posting as "Sherman McCoy" is female.
>
> SilverOz

I used to refer to Shermie as a she for that reason:) Now, Shermie is a "it"
to me. That is not used to insult Shermie, per se. It is just how I feel
about *it* now.

Angel
AMB- Assertive Masochistic Bottom
"Believe me, when I bottom, I want it MY way :)" - Trouble841

~Remove the kitty to email me~

Binder

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
deanhi...@my-deja.com (and who the fuck is he?) spewed all over...

Not exactly raising any points in defense of it's earlier spewish "news
releases."

insta-PLONK

Binder
--
***to reply, remove the idjit***
contrary to any other appearances, this work is protected by copyright.
SSBB Charter is at: http://www.mindspring.com/~frites/charter.htm

Janet Hardy

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to

<deanhi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8jvobd$fj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>

> Now, we all know that Warren - strictly a small press vanity...

> "cheap knock off" of his unreadable, vanity published Murder at Roissy...

John's many (and justified) admirers can speak for him, with my wholehearted
support. But I have to speak for Greenery Press, which has published John's
"Murder At Roissy" and the new second edition of his widely respected "The
Loving Dominant."

Greenery Press has never accepted a subsidy to publish any book. (Hell, I
would have no particular problem doing so... but nobody's ever offered me
one.) We are a conventionally structured small press which accepts books
based on our best estimation of their market potential, which pays for
production of those books out of its own pocket, and which pays royalties
according to accepted industry standards.

Yes, we are small (very). But we are not a "vanity" or subsidy publisher.

Janet Hardy
President/Publisher
Greenery Press

SilverOz

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
In soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm on 5 Jul 2000 19:18:53 -0700
adrian...@hotmail.com <adrian...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
>pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male? If "she"
>implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
>than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
>ugly when women do it.
>


I think the "she" is because some people believe that the postings
indicate the individual posting as "Sherman McCoy" is female.

SilverOz

--
========================================================================
Australian BDSM Information Site
http://www.master.webcentral.com.au/abis/
========================================================================


Hans

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
tymed...@aol.comPEARLS (TyMeDwn1st) wrote:

>deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> <<ravings snipped>>
>
>Geez, guy, call your dealer and tell him the last shit he sold
>you is giving you paranoid delusions and a bad case of
>grandiosity.

Well, that's a pretty charitable interpretation of his post. After
all, it presupposes that he's normally not quite so paranoid.

I somehow doubt that myself.

Hans

Darkginger

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to

adrian...@hotmail.com wrote

>Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
>pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male? If "she"
>implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
>than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
>ugly when women do it.
>

>Adrian

I didn't use the pronoun to insult (after all, I'm female myself, so why
would I consider it an insult? Why do you?). As SilverOz says, I'm just
certain that Sherm is female, and it would be silly to continue referring to
it as male when I don't for a moment believe it is. YMMV, and you are, of
course, welcome to address Sherm, and anyone else for that matter, as you
see fit..

DG

pijay

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
"Darkginger" <darkg...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>Does anybody spot the similarity in sentence structure? I can't

find it, but
>I remember Shermie using more or less the same phrasing as in
the first clip
>above in another of her posts. It's clear to me that this
'deanhightower' is
>Shermie again, wearing yet another mask

I'm not so sure about this, because this dean idiot has also
appeared in soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm.femdom. shermie confines
his activities to this newsgroup.

~ ~ pijay{LK}

-----------------------------------------------------------

Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com


Anthony Hilbert

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
adrian_turtle writes

>I do not believe Sherman McCoy = Gary Kadet.

Agreed - sorry, DG, but your enthusiasm is running away with you. Even
before Gary's background was elucidated (and I'd heard most of it
before), one thing was perfectly clear: Shermie couldn't write a book
that Amazon would waste shelf space on. Nor, if he were really a person
with such an obsessive hatred of John, could he have kept it hidden
among general condemnation of the scene till now.
--
Anthony Hilbert SSBB Diplomatic Corps - North England

If you love her, let her go.
If she comes back, she is truly yours.
If she doesn't, drag her back in chains and train her better.

Anthony Hilbert

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
Binder writes

>deanhi...@my-deja.com (and who the fuck is he?) spewed all over...
>
>Not exactly raising any points in defense of it's earlier spewish "news
>releases."
>
>insta-PLONK
>
Alas, it won't help. Like any serious spammer, he has an inexhaustible
supply of throwaway names and addresses.

--
Anthony Hilbert SSBB Diplomatic Corps - North England

"This is my costume. I'm a homicidal maniac. They look
just like everybody else." - Wednesday Addams

Darkginger

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to

Anthony Hilbert wrote

sorry, DG, but your enthusiasm is running away with you

Lol...you could be right, but I just *know* I saw Sherm use exactly the same
words to describe John in an earlier post which has now died on my server.
Don't think I can be arsed to plough through dejanews to find it - but I
know it's out there somewhere....

If anyone else remembers it, please help me out here.....

DG (more with not enough to do than too much enthusiasm!)

little_toad

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
adrian_turtle wrote in message
[...]
: Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine

: pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male?

no, but then again, i don't start my sentences on
usenet with a capital letter either. ;->


: If "she"


: implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
: than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
: ugly when women do it.

it's not. both are ugly.

little toad

anne f

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
On 5 Jul 2000 19:18:53 -0700, adrian...@hotmail.com wrote:

<others snipped>


>
>Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
>pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male?

I don't know if you're the only one or not, adrian. I am not using a
feminine pronoun to insult, but because I believe quite firmly that
Shermie is a female.

> If "she" implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
>than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
>ugly when women do it.

Yanno, adrian, I really can't imagine why you would believe that use
of a feminine pronoun implies all those pejorative things.
Personally, I use them to convey my impression of the gender of the
speaker.

Not quite sure where *you* are coming from, if you think use of
feminine pronouns is an indication of contempt.

regards,

anne f (very pleased to be female, thank you, but certainly not locked
in "sisterhood" with all of my sex)
SSBB Diplomatic Corps
San Francisco-East Bay Area, CA

deanhi...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
There's no obsessive hatred here of the irrelevant little gnome, John
Warren. Actually, it's his petty hacneyed attacks on that are being
responded to with fact, not calumny. Do a little checking on our local
joke Warren of the Wand here sometime -- it all bears out. As for
Warren's "elucidation," well he spelled the surname right. But he has
no facts that check. Not a one.

The Savanorala/Wolf reference is oddly touching.


In article <COjBwaA$hDZ5...@hilbert.demon.co.uk>,


Anthony Hilbert <Ant...@hilbert.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> adrian_turtle writes
> >I do not believe Sherman McCoy = Gary Kadet.
>
> Agreed - sorry, DG, but your enthusiasm is running away with you.
Even
> before Gary's background was elucidated (and I'd heard most of it
> before), one thing was perfectly clear: Shermie couldn't write a book
> that Amazon would waste shelf space on. Nor, if he were really a
person
> with such an obsessive hatred of John, could he have kept it hidden
> among general condemnation of the scene till now.

> --
> Anthony Hilbert SSBB Diplomatic Corps - North England
>

> If you love her, let her go.
> If she comes back, she is truly yours.
> If she doesn't, drag her back in chains and train her better.
>

CRC

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to

deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> As usual, Mr. Warren is dead wrong on every front cited in his
> malicious, self-serving post to the quite valid, literary public
> service announcement that he is attacking.


Mr. Hightower

I like to indulge in the process of free thinking. To me that means
the analytical evaluation of any given concept, idea or statement in
terms of how that meets the objective of the contributor and then
contemplating how that relates to my objectives and means.

But as I contemplate your words I find I can not get past the first
stage of my self defined free thinking process. You see Mr.
Hightower, I can not see how any of these thoughts meet your
objectives. So my conclusion is that one of us is mixed up about
what your objective is. In the hopes that you will be kind enough
to help me across this hurdle of comprehension I shall list what I
think your objectives are. Could you and would you please clarify
for me where I have misunderstood your objectives or if I am correct
about your objectives could you tie in for me where your thoughts
lead to that objective.

The first possible objective I considered was that you wish to
present your chosen author as an informed and knowledgeable person
with valid and helpful insight into the subject matter we discuss
here.

The most obvious means to that objective would be to demonstrate
that you have the ability to discern good material, to show how the
material can actually create opportunity for self improvement and
increased awareness on the part of the reader, and or show how the
material is relevant and comprehensible to people sharing this
interest.

But this does not add up for me. The means you used was to
demonstrate that you have devoted a lot of time to the study of
and/or fabrication of details in Mr. Warrens life. All the while
not presenting anything to indicate that you have also devoted any
time to the understanding and study of the subject matter.

So the next objective I considered was that you wished to create
room in the market for the works of this author.

But this does not add up either. There is always room for another
author in any subject matter as long as that author can be presented
as having something to contribute. But your tactics are not coming
close to pointing towards demonstrating such. I am pretty sure you
do not believe that the discrediting of a single author out of many
would get you the results of space in the market to the extent that
would warrant spending so much time and resources on studying and/or
fabricating details about Mr. Warrens life. So I moved on to the
next possibility.

You wish to protect the readers of this group from their inability
to make discerning judgments about what material to take seriously
as to how it relates to their objectives and gains in their pursuits
of this subject matter.

But this does not add up for many of the same reason already
mentioned. There is no presentation of ideas and concepts. There
is no logic as to why they are or are not functional in helping us
readers reach our objectives in this subject matter. There is only
study and/or fabrication about the details of Mr. Warrens personal
and professional life. Most of which seems irrelevant anyway.

I had to stop my contemplation of your objectives and how I could
benefit from them here because to continue farther would put me in
an area of thought that would be most unflattering to you. I like
to give people the benefit of the doubt in my pursuit of
understanding. So could you please help me to do that?

Chris

deanhi...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
Yes -- but The Lying Dominant fed that spurious account to Cuffs Maine,
namely Ren -- both involved supporters of the ill-fated, illegal club.
And the allegations might be libel, never slander, if not all proved
and openly known.

Mr. Warren's comments are far more actionable.

In article <8k08ik$qq8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

JOHN WARREN

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
It might be useful to anyone still in doubt to contact Cuffs through the
email link on their page. As far as I know, the report mainly came from
Ramp, the guy who was the victim of the setup. At no time did Cuffs ask me
for my input.

Some people find enemies where there are none... others fixate on one person
because it is difficult for them to realize how widespread distaste
concerning their actions have spread.


--
Diversified Services Books Toys and Videos to the Scene since 1993
www.diversified--services.com (new webpage as of 6/25/00)

<deanhi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8k2ctt$6aq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...

victorian squid

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
Darkginger wrote:

(snip)

> If anyone else remembers it, please help me out here.....

I do. It was something to the effect of "vanity published" and "small
time", yes, but nothing unique enough to scream "hey, this is the same
person!".

It did strike me as moderately interesting that shermster has an
uncommon familiarity with true crime stories and gary karten is someone
who reads crime books for a living, but I think it's probably a
coincidence.

Love on ya,
squid

Elisabeth Anne Riba

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:
: Yes -- but The Lying Dominant fed that spurious account to Cuffs Maine,

: namely Ren -- both involved supporters of the ill-fated, illegal club.

Actually, if you had read the URL I posted, the article
first lists "Ramp's Story"
then lists "Purringsub's Story"
and then provides "CUFS Opinion" based on these stories and other
accounts they heard.

They even provide a separate link to Purringsub's website so folks can
read her comments on the situation unedited (it was too long for their
newsletter).

A balanced Rashomon approach, allowing both sides to have their say.


:l...@netcom.com wrote:
:> I searched the web for other accounts of the closing of Restraints.


:> You can read more detail at http://www.cufsmaine.org/newslett5.htm
:> Search for the bulletins titled "The Restraints Club Closes Its Doors"
:> and "Boston BDSM.....The Saga Continues"
:> Needless to say, it agrees quite closely with Mentor's description of
:> the events. I welcome you all to read it for yourselves.

--
---------------> Elisabeth Anne Riba * l...@netcom.com <---------------
Marriage, n. The state or condition of a community consisting of a
master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two.
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

Sherman McCoy

unread,
Jul 6, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/6/00
to
Darkginger <darkg...@iol.ie> wrote:

> Does anybody spot the similarity in sentence structure?

I hate to defend myself, but it was Anne F who first claimed that John
Warren was a "published author of international repute...." I merely
noted he has no reputation other than one invented by a vanity press.
Anne's post can be found on Deja.com, with its grammatical errors and
syntactical incompetence preserved for posterity.

"Oh, to beat a woman is heaven!" Ira Einhorn

Psyfuru

unread,
Jul 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/7/00
to
>Sherman McCoy doc...@mccoy.com

wrt sin tax

>[Her] post can be found on Deja.com, with its grammatical errors and


>syntactical incompetence preserved for posterity.

Unless the clause refers to the entire site, this sentence has a misplaced
modifier, incompetent syntax preserved for no one in particular.

f

People who live under glass bridges shouldn't throw stones.

DonSideB

unread,
Jul 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/7/00
to
In article <20000707121402...@ng-fp1.aol.com>, psy...@aol.com
(Psyfuru) writes:

syntactical??

Isn't that syntactic?

Must be a trollish dialect

don

That which does not kill us is a good scene,

SSBB Diplomatic Corps: Tidewater Virginia

mady

unread,
Jul 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/7/00
to
On 07 Jul 2000 16:14:02 GMT, psy...@aol.com (Psyfuru) wrote:

::::::::::::snipped:::::::::::


>People who live under glass bridges shouldn't throw stones.

Or stow thrones.

(sorry, it just slipped out)

mady

--
madylarian OCL(OCF)
*take hobinrood out of email address to reply*
#Kill all spammers! Neuter/spay so they can't breed!#
Honi soit qui mal y pense

deanhi...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/7/00
to
You've been misinformed, likely due to smallness of niche and house.
There is almost no one who respects Warren's alt.sex.bondage-crib-noted
slapdash effort at S&M self help, ("composed" at a time when he was just
beginning to help himself).

I'm sure the less obtuse posters of articles from back then that he
plagiarised and bowdlerised are offended, rather than flattered.

You should have at least taken the check, Ms. Hardy.

In article <tHQ85.38089$_b3.10...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,


"Janet Hardy" <ver...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> <deanhi...@my-deja.com> wrote in message

Kook Monitor

unread,
Jul 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/7/00
to
On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 21:30:51 GMT, in message
<8k5i6b$7qi$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:

>There is almost no one who respects Warren's alt.sex.bondage-crib-noted
>slapdash effort at S&M self help, ("composed" at a time when he was just
>beginning to help himself).

In the timeless words of our dear departed you-know-who,
mrdeanhightower "needs to get out more often."

Regards, Serion
Volunteer Kook Monitor
Adding mrdeanhightower to the "PossibleProtoKooks" list of the
Official Usenet Cabal.

Janet Hardy

unread,
Jul 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/8/00
to

"Kook Monitor" <kookm...@usa.net> wrote in message
news:m2kcms0vk50dq2b0p...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 07 Jul 2000 21:30:51 GMT, in message
> <8k5i6b$7qi$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, deanhi...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >There is almost no one who respects Warren's alt.sex.bondage-crib-noted
> >slapdash effort at S&M self help, ("composed" at a time when he was just
> >beginning to help himself).
>
> In the timeless words of our dear departed you-know-who,
> mrdeanhightower "needs to get out more often."

Indeed. There is, in my experience, no such thing as a well-known
heterosexual male top without a passel of enemies, some of them very
virulent indeed. It's either live with that, or decline to publish the
writings of heterosexual male tops. Guess which one I pick?

Verdant
www.greenerypress.com


Binder

unread,
Jul 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/8/00
to
anne f wrote:

>
> On 5 Jul 2000 19:18:53 -0700, adrian wrote:
>
> <others snipped>
> >
> >Am I the only person to take offense at the use of feminine
> >pronouns to insult someone who identifies as male?

Nope.

> > If "she" implies Shermie is more weak, contemptible, laughable, etc
> >than "he" would be...that's ugly. I don't think it's any less
> >ugly when women do it.
>
> Yanno, adrian, I really can't imagine why you would believe that use
> of a feminine pronoun implies all those pejorative things.
> Personally, I use them to convey my impression of the gender of the
> speaker.

When in doubt, or in contempt, I use "it." Reference to the nameless
capitalized. Frankly, I have more verbose ways of expressing disgust, when
I have time. And, as far as using feminine pronouns to insult another
male-type person? IMO, that's more often a complement.



Binder
--
***to reply, remove the idjit***

"If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I wouldn't have been so bothered by
it."

Jubal Harshaw

unread,
Jul 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/8/00
to
On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 13:27:57 -0700, Binder <Bin...@idjit.jps.net>
wrote:


>When in doubt, or in contempt, I use "it." Reference to the nameless
>capitalized. Frankly, I have more verbose ways of expressing disgust, when
>I have time. And, as far as using feminine pronouns to insult another
>male-type person? IMO, that's more often a complement.
>

It's also why we squids call ships "she."


V/R


Jubal


>Binder
>--
>***to reply, remove the idjit***
>"If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I wouldn't have been so bothered by
>it."
>SSBB Charter is at: http://www.mindspring.com/~frites/charter.htm

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
-- Gene "spaf" Spafford (1992)

NrrdGrrl

unread,
Jul 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/8/00
to

Binder <Bin...@idjit.jps.net> wrote in message
news:39678ECD...@idjit.jps.net...

>
> When in doubt, or in contempt, I use "it." Reference to the nameless
> capitalized. Frankly, I have more verbose ways of expressing disgust, when
> I have time.

Best of all is the Latin pronoun "iste," which implies contempt. I once
translated "iste homo" (technically "that man") as "that creep," and got
much praise from the professor.

NG

JOHN WARREN

unread,
Jul 10, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/10/00
to
Jubal Harshaw <jub...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:396795a9....@news.uswest.net...

> On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 13:27:57 -0700, Binder <Bin...@idjit.jps.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >When in doubt, or in contempt, I use "it." Reference to the nameless
> >capitalized. Frankly, I have more verbose ways of expressing disgust,
when
> >I have time. And, as far as using feminine pronouns to insult another
> >male-type person? IMO, that's more often a complement.
> >
> It's also why we squids call ships "she."


But captains say "he," referring to the other captain... another usage that
is going to have to change.

0 new messages