[LONG] PaganFiles, Drak.Net, URP and me...
Carl Inglis
alt.witchcraft, uk.religion.pagan
Followup-To NOT set.
--------------------------------------
I do not normally respond to postings in newsgroups to which I am
not subscribed, however serious allegations have been made concerning
myself, and therefore I wish to reply to them. It is unfortunate that the
allegations were made whilst I was away from my computer and therefore
I have been unable to reply whilst the threads had grown. Rather than
repeat myself in reply to each message on each thread on each newsgroup,
I am posting this one reply to all of the affected groups.
I realise that, based on the postings that I have already seen (thanks to
the wonders of Google Groups), some people have already made their minds
up, and have decided that I am to be the scapegoat in this matter. I
would hope that these people would be prepared to listen since this
posting is aimed at those who are intelligent enough to listen to both
sides of an argument and make their own minds up.
If you don't want to think about what I have to say, or if you have
already made your mind up and won't change it, then you might as well
stop reading at this point.
--------------------------------------
First, we need to define some terminology, to make sure that when I talk
about a document, it is clear what I am referring to...
"The Charter" - this is the original document under which
uk.religion.pagan was formed, in accordance with the procedures and
policies of the UK Usenet Committee.
"The FAQ" - this document contains definitions and some (hopefully useful)
URLs and book details.
"The Posting Guidelines" (PGL) - this document extends the Charter,
and provides guidance as to acceptable behaviour within uk.religion.pagan
In addition there is also a Mini-FAQ which is posted on Sundays and
contains pointers to the PGL and FAQ. It will very shortly contain a
link to the Charter as well, however at the time of this incident, it
did not. The PGL, however, does contain the section from the Charter
which is relevant to this incident.
Now to the meat of the matter...
As others have alluded to, this whole thing hinges on the definition of an
"advertisement". Since there is no definition of an "advertisement" in
the Charter or PGL, let's look at some dictionary definitions (taken
from Merriam-Webster, whose website proclaims "Back in the 1820s,
Noah Webster was on the cutting edge of American English. Today,
Merriam-Webster carries forward his legacy into the electronic age.")...
[For those who are not used to using these more formal dictionaries,
I should point out that where there are multiple definitions given,
*any* of them are valid uses or definitions of the word.]
http://www.m-w.com/
=================================
advert
Main Entry: ad暇ert
Pronunciation: 'ad-"v&rt
Function: noun
Date: 1860
chiefly British : ADVERTISEMENT
advertisment
Main Entry: ad暇er暗ise搶ent
Pronunciation: "ad-v&r-'tIz-m&nt; &d-'v&r-t&z-m&nt, -t&-sm&nt
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : the act or process of advertising
2 : a public notice; especially : one published in the press or broadcast
over the air
advertise
Main Entry: ad暇er暗ise
Pronunciation: 'ad-v&r-"tIz
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -tised; -tis搏ng
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French advertiss-, stem of advertir
Date: 15th century
transitive senses
1 : to make something known to : NOTIFY
2 a : to make publicly and generally known <advertising their readiness to
make concessions> b : to announce publicly especially by a printed notice
or a broadcast c : to call public attention to especially by emphasizing
desirable qualities so as to arouse a desire to buy or patronize : PROMOTE
intransitive senses : to issue or sponsor advertising
- ad暇er暗is搪r noun
=================================
It should be noted that nowhere in the above definitions is there any
mention (other than 2c of advertise "...desire to buy...") of an advert
being necessarily of a commercial nature.
Having defined an advertisement (see 2 of "advertisment" and 1, 2a,
2b and the latter part of 2c in "advertise" above), we now move to the
part of the Charter that states "Advertisements of UK pagan related
goods and services only are welcome. ..."
Thus there has been raised the question of the Pagan Files Archive as
"goods or services". Let's go back to Merriam-Webster...
http://www.m-w.com/
=================================
Main Entry: ser暇ice
Pronunciation: 's&r-v&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin servitium
condition of a slave, body of slaves, from servus slave
Date: 13th century
1 a : the occupation or function of serving <in active service> b :
employment as a servant <entered his service>
2 a : the work performed by one that serves <good service> b : HELP,
USE, BENEFIT <glad to be of service> c : contribution to the welfare of
others d : disposal for use <I'm entirely at your service>
3 a : a form followed in worship or in a religious ceremony <the burial
service> b : a meeting for worship -- often used in plural <held evening
services>
4 : the act of serving : as a : a helpful act <did him a service> b :
useful labor that does not produce a tangible commodity -- usually used
in plural <charge for professional services> c : SERVE
5 : a set of articles for a particular use <a silver tea service>
6 a : an administrative division (as of a government or business) <the
consular service> b : one of a nation's military forces (as the army
or navy)
7 a : a facility supplying some public demand <telephone service> <bus
service> b : a facility providing maintenance and repair <television
service>
8 : the materials (as spun yarn, small lines, or canvas) used for serving a rope
9 : the act of bringing a legal writ, process, or summons to notice as
prescribed by law
10 : the act of copulating with a female animal
11 : a branch of a hospital medical staff devoted to a particular
specialty <obstetrical service>
=================================
2b and 2c obviously apply to the Pagan Files Archive. 4b could also apply,
in so much as Terry laboured to put the files up and keep the archives
up to date. 7a could apply also.
Therefore it is clear that, by the above definitions, Terry's postings
*were* "Advertisements for ... goods and services ..." and therefore in
breach of Charter since the Charter requires that adverts not be posted
more than once a month, and that they have the "AD:" or "[ADVERT]"
tag applied. Terry was posting _weekly_, and didn't have any tag applied.
It should also be noted that Terry didn't post his "updates"
to uk.religion.pagan until after he was involved in a cross-posted
flame war which was being posted between alt.religion.wicca.moderated,
soc.religion.paganism and uk.religion.pagan. It would seem that he was
unaware of the existence of uk.religion.pagan until this time. Indeed,
until the above-mentioned cross-posted messages, Terry had not posted
to uk.religion.pagan.
The URL for the Charter, and a copy of it, were posted to threads
which Terry was reading (since he was replying to other messages in
those threads). Therefore Terry cannot claim to have been unaware of
the Charter.
Terry stated in several threads that he had no intention of abiding by
our Charter, citing the "usenet rules". He was not able (or willing)
to provide a URL or other reference for these "usenet rules".
Terry was given several chances (in open group) to agree to post according
to our Charter, all of which he declined.
Therefore, in accordance with a long established procedure and in
accordance with the Charter, I emailed the provider of Terry's email
address which he was posting under, his ISP and his news service provider,
informing them of the Charter, the postings in breach of it and the
unwillingness to abide by the Charter; requesting them to review the
situation in light of their Terms of Service. I did not (and do not)
*demand* action; and I certainly do not have any control over these
organisation. (I perform this task on behalf of the rest of the group,
and I have the support of the group for this role.)
Drak.Net chose to take action since Terry's postings were in breach of
their terms and conditions of service, _which Terry agreed to_ when he
set up the site. I do not know if either of the others that I emailed
have taken action.
I would encourage those who wish to make up their own minds about this
to read the archives on Google.
(As Jen has said), Drak.Net were given a timeline which they could verify
against the newsgroup postings as available on Google. I believe they
did so. Therefore the statement that they were only given half the story
is also factually incorrect.
Once again, let me point out that Terry broke the terms and conditions
of service which he agreed to when he set up the PFA. Therefore he was
in breach of contract.
I have been asked to contact Drak.Net and request that the PFA be
restored. I have *NO* intention of asking Drak.Net to reinstate the Pagan
Files Archive. If you read Jen's postings you will see that Drak have
stated their position clearly. If people want to petition them directly
then of course they have that right, however I can't see it doing anything
more than strengthening Drak's resolve. It should be noted that (despite
certain posters opinions) I have no control or influence over Drak.Net.
As to the charges of being anti-American, anti-Free Speech and anti-Wiccan
(or was it anti-Non Wiccan? It's not that clear), I have no animosity
towards any of these groups. I fail to see where any of those accusations
come from.
I note that the person who started this discussion has been at his most
vitriolic outside of newsgroups where my posting history shows that
I am normally to be found. His postings within uk.religion.pagan have
been much more polite and reasonable. I fail to see what this person is
trying to achieve apart from stirring up trouble.
It should also be noted that personal abuse and arguing about definitions
will not in any way affect what has gone before.
As far as I am concerned, the matter is closed. Terry broke the rules
and procedure was followed. The vast majority of the files within the
PFA are available elsewhere, and there is nothing to stop Terry from
setting up elsewhere with a different hosting provider.
I hope this has clarified things a little.
Carl
The Talesin
"Carl Inglis" <ut...@yoshiwara.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:slrn9onreb...@ivanova.home.cci...
> Posted to alt.pagan, alt.traditional.witchcraft, alt.religion.wicca,
> alt.witchcraft, uk.religion.pagan
>
> Followup-To NOT set.
>
> --------------------------------------
>
> I do not normally respond to postings in newsgroups to which I am
> not subscribed, however serious allegations have been made concerning
> myself, and therefore I wish to reply to them. It is unfortunate that the
> allegations were made whilst I was away from my computer and therefore
> I have been unable to reply whilst the threads had grown. Rather than
> repeat myself in reply to each message on each thread on each newsgroup,
> I am posting this one reply to all of the affected groups.
Sorry old chap, but I had no way of knowing your personal itinerary.
Welcome
back, I hope the meet was enjoyable.
I am the one you are answering to although I note you do not address
me directly. That is rude, but I will not take offense.
>
> I realise that, based on the postings that I have already seen (thanks to
> the wonders of Google Groups), some people have already made their minds
> up, and have decided that I am to be the scapegoat in this matter. I
> would hope that these people would be prepared to listen since this
> posting is aimed at those who are intelligent enough to listen to both
> sides of an argument and make their own minds up.
>
"Scapegoat." Now, that's an interesting word. You are the one who
started in
on Terry, you are the one who escalated the conflict, you are the one
who
reported him to DrakNet and deprived us all of the wonderful resource
called
the PFA, yet, even though you are a dictionary loving sort of fellow,
you
still use this word.
> If you don't want to think about what I have to say, or if you have
> already made your mind up and won't change it, then you might as well
> stop reading at this point.
>
Au contraire, discussion is what we are all about here on Free Pagan
UseNet.
> --------------------------------------
>
> First, we need to define some terminology, to make sure that when I talk
> about a document, it is clear what I am referring to...
>
> "The Charter" - this is the original document under which
> uk.religion.pagan was formed, in accordance with the procedures and
> policies of the UK Usenet Committee.
>
> "The FAQ" - this document contains definitions and some (hopefully useful)
> URLs and book details.
>
> "The Posting Guidelines" (PGL) - this document extends the Charter,
> and provides guidance as to acceptable behaviour within uk.religion.pagan
>
> In addition there is also a Mini-FAQ which is posted on Sundays and
> contains pointers to the PGL and FAQ. It will very shortly contain a
> link to the Charter as well, however at the time of this incident, it
> did not. The PGL, however, does contain the section from the Charter
> which is relevant to this incident.
>
> Now to the meat of the matter...
>
> As others have alluded to, this whole thing hinges on the definition of an
> "advertisement". Since there is no definition of an "advertisement" in
> the Charter or PGL, let's look at some dictionary definitions (taken
> from Merriam-Webster, whose website proclaims "Back in the 1820s,
> Noah Webster was on the cutting edge of American English. Today,
> Merriam-Webster carries forward his legacy into the electronic age.")...
>
Oh but there is a definition in your charter:
Advertising
Advertisements of UK pagan related goods and services only are
welcome. All such advertisers should use the word "ADVERT:" in
their
subject line and not post an advert more than once a month.
You specifically define it as the offering of goods and services. I
know
that we are going to talk about this at length in a moment, but I just
wanted to point out that you made false statement- you do in fact
define
advertising in your charter- and that any *reasonable* person would
assume
that, as long as they did not offer goods and/or services, they were
operating within your rules.
<snip more of the same "advert" stuff we have heard a gazillion times>
> =================================
> Main Entry: ser·vice
Actually they were not by any stretch of the imagination.
How is one to know which particular definition of "service" to use?
There
are so many. You could be forbidding people from offering bestiality
under
one definition and from conducting rituals under another. All very
confusing.
Well, old chum, as a literate person I can tell you what I always do.
I
consider the word in *context.* The context here is "goods and
services."
Now to anyone who has made it past economics 101 , that can be taken
in
only
one possible way: things for sale.
I am taking it that you have not yet attained that lofty goal, so let
me
provide some education for you:
http://pittsford.monroe.edu/jefferson/calfieri/economics/GoodService.html
"Economics is concerned with the production and distribution of goods
and
services. Goods would be defined as anything that anyone wants or
needs.
Services would be the performance of any duties or work for another;
helpful
or professional activity. The distribution of goods and services is
referred
to as marketing. The marketing of goods and services can add almost as
much
to the cost as the actual manufacturing of the goods. Marketing a
product
refers to the advertising, and other efforts to promote a products
sale."
Oh look! "Advertising and *other efforts to promote a product's SALE.*
So much for this portion of your argument. There is no way any person
would
consider the PFA to be advertising. It does not fit the dictionary
definition, the contextual definition, or the definition set forth in
your
own FAQ.
What Terry offered was information, Mr. Inglis, in direct adherence to
what
you claim the purpose of your group is.
If this is not so, if the meaning you intended is so crystal clear,
then why, Mr. Inglis, are you scurrying to change your charter?
>
> It should also be noted that Terry didn't post his "updates"
> to uk.religion.pagan until after he was involved in a cross-posted
> flame war which was being posted between alt.religion.wicca.moderated,
> soc.religion.paganism and uk.religion.pagan. It would seem that he was
> unaware of the existence of uk.religion.pagan until this time. Indeed,
> until the above-mentioned cross-posted messages, Terry had not posted
> to uk.religion.pagan.
>
This is immaterial.
> The URL for the Charter, and a copy of it, were posted to threads
> which Terry was reading (since he was replying to other messages in
> those threads). Therefore Terry cannot claim to have been unaware of
> the Charter.
>
No need to. As I have just proven, he did not violate the terms of
your
charter.
> Therefore, in accordance with a long established procedure and in
> accordance with the Charter, I emailed the provider of Terry's email
> address which he was posting under, his ISP and his news service provider,
> informing them of the Charter, the postings in breach of it and the
> unwillingness to abide by the Charter; requesting them to review the
> situation in light of their Terms of Service. I did not (and do not)
> *demand* action; and I certainly do not have any control over these
> organisation. (I perform this task on behalf of the rest of the group,
> and I have the support of the group for this role.)
>
> Drak.Net chose to take action since Terry's postings were in breach of
> their terms and conditions of service, _which Terry agreed to_ when he
> set up the site. I do not know if either of the others that I emailed
> have taken action.
>
> (As Jen has said), Drak.Net were given a timeline which they could verify
> against the newsgroup postings as available on Google. I believe they
> did so. Therefore the statement that they were only given half the story
> is also factually incorrect.
>
> Once again, let me point out that Terry broke the terms and conditions
> of service which he agreed to when he set up the PFA. Therefore he was
> in breach of contract.
>
Oh how very cagey you are Mr. Inglis! Cagey indeed. Are you trying to
tell
us that you reported Terry to DrakNet assuming nothing would be done
about
your report? I beg to differ. You knew exactly what you were doing.
DrakNet is very earthy, ground level, personal type service which is
very in
tune with the Pagan Community. You took advantage of this. Your
report, as
you are well aware, put Jen Bryan in a very bad situation. Not only
did you
force her into a corner vis a vis her reputation among the Pagan
Community,
you also placed a legal onus upon. She was well aware, as we all are,
that,
had she refused to close the PFA, your next step would have been to
threaten
if not actually bring legal action against her and her company.
This is a woman who has built a business up in a very difficult
environment.
She is justifiably proud of it and its reputation and justifiably
would like
to keep it in operation. You brag about not shooting her, Mr. Inglis,
but
you still held a gun to her head.
> I would encourage those who wish to make up their own minds about this
> to read the archives on Google.
>
Suddenly we are allowed to make up our own minds. How refreshing.
> I have been asked to contact Drak.Net and request that the PFA be
> restored. I have *NO* intention of asking Drak.Net to reinstate the Pagan
> Files Archive. If you read Jen's postings you will see that Drak have
> stated their position clearly. If people want to petition them directly
> then of course they have that right, however I can't see it doing anything
> more than strengthening Drak's resolve. It should be noted that (despite
> certain posters opinions) I have no control or influence over Drak.Net.
>
Well it is too late for that. Jen is not willing to risk her business
or her
reputation over this; she is not willing to risk you pulling that
trigger.
I will commend DrakNet for being so kind as to take the time and
effort to
post an explanation of what happened and why they acted as they did.
People
are still unable to access the resource you denied us, Mr. Inglis, but
at
least that mitigates the confusion.
> As to the charges of being anti-American, anti-Free Speech and anti-Wiccan
> (or was it anti-Non Wiccan? It's not that clear), I have no animosity
> towards any of these groups. I fail to see where any of those accusations
> come from.
>
It is quite simple: your actions. People have posted the URL to a
comparable
UK site at least ten times, presumably in violation of your charter
and yet
not a word has been said to them. Also, your minion Cursuswalker has
been on
Free Pagan UseNet bragging about how you set Terry up and how proud
you all
are at showing the Americans how tough URP is.
That, the fact that you twisted the meaning of your charter to an
unbelievable length, and that the result is that something that was
good and
beneficial to all of us has been destroyed by YOUR actions can lead us
to no
other conclusion.
> I note that the person who started this discussion has been at his most
> vitriolic outside of newsgroups where my posting history shows that
> I am normally to be found.
My name is Talesin ("tale-zin"). Tales is also fine.
> His postings within uk.religion.pagan have
> been much more polite and reasonable. I fail to see what this person is
> trying to achieve apart from stirring up trouble.
>
First of all, the groups on Free Pagan UseNet are my groups; my home.
Just
as when I am in my home, I may sit around in my underwear, drink beer,
fart,
and curse at the dog. URP is not my home. Despite the very rude and
shoddy
treatment you show your guests, I am still a guest and will conduct
myself
as one.
As to what I am trying to achieve, I have already accomplished the
first
goal. I have allowed the discussion- both sides- to be brought forth
on Free
Pagan UseNet. People here were hurt by your actions just as those on
the
moderated groups and they have a right to know what went on and to
face the
person who harmed them.
> It should also be noted that personal abuse and arguing about definitions
> will not in any way affect what has gone before.
No worry, the abuse I have received from your colleagues is totally
minor
league. No need to apologize
>
> As far as I am concerned, the matter is closed. Terry broke the rules
> and procedure was followed. The vast majority of the files within the
> PFA are available elsewhere, and there is nothing to stop Terry from
> setting up elsewhere with a different hosting provider.
>
> I hope this has clarified things a little.
Unfortunately, Mr. Inglis, I do not consider this matter closed. I
can't get
the PFA back, you did too good of a job eliminating it. The damage has
been
done and we have no choice but to suffer over what you did.
What I want now is an admission of the truth. Be honest, Mr. Inglis.
We
don't believe this tripe about "adverts" any more than you do. The
case is
simply that for whatever reason, Terry pissed you (or someone of
influence
on URP) off. Perhaps because of his abrasive manner.As is the norm on
moderated groups, you invoked some wild interpretation of the charter
to
support your retaliation. Now you not only have caused us to lose a
wonderful resource, you have insulted our intelligence with your
justification for doing so.
In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
enemies.
We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The
reason is
because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him. I am
actually
responsible for the PFA's creation.
You see, the Pagan Files Archive was once the Pagan Files List. Terry
used
to require people to e-mail him to
obtain the files. I saw this as possible cult activity and told him to
cease. I actually suggested that he put the files online so people did
not
have to give him their identities. After a heated battle that lasted
for
months, he finally acceded.
You see, Mr. Inglis, there is a proper way of doing things. As a
result of
my actions, not only did the cultish behavior stop but many more
people got
access to the files and Terry got the credit he deserves. Unlike what
you
did, everyone benefited instead of being hurt.
All I need from you is an admission that this catastrophe was the
result of
the desire to get back at Terry. You have all but admitted it already.
Just
a nice formal statement, perhaps a little expression of regret, and
our business is concluded and we as well as our
respective groups can be done with this.
Thanks for your time.
--
Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft (tm)
ICQ 86535317
AIM Tales1n
http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft
There are thousands of good reasons why magic doesn't
rule the world, they're called witches and wizards
- T. Pratchett.
One other thing, Mr. Inglis. I can imagine what might be running
through
your mind right now. I can assure you that things like, oh, trying to
provoke me into something you can "report' (a la Terry) are not going
to
work. I really think it best that we just settle this and move on.
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin
Carl Inglis
<witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote:
>[also posted to URP]
<snip>
And I shall be replying there alone.
Carl
Archaiser
>
>
> http://pittsford.monroe.edu/jefferson/calfieri/economics/GoodService.html
>
> "Economics is concerned with the production and distribution of goods and
> services. Goods would be defined as anything that anyone wants or needs.
> Services would be the performance of any duties or work for another;
> helpful or professional activity. The distribution of goods and services
> is referred to as marketing. The marketing of goods and services can add
> almost as much to the cost as the actual manufacturing of the goods.
> Marketing a product refers to the advertising, and other efforts to
> promote a products sale."
>
> Oh look! "Advertising and *other efforts to promote a product's SALE.*
>
There's none so blind as those that will not see.
"Services would be the performance of any duties or work for another;
helpful or professional activity. ".
Please tell me how the above did not apply to Terry ?
Leave it Talsein - you are just digging yourself a deeper hole.
Advertisement does NOT mean goods/services for sale, it means promulgation
of such goods/services, whether for sale or not.
Nothing you can quote or say or twist or fabricate or ignore or discount
for your own purposes can or will change the definitions or the facts.
> So much for this portion of your argument. There is no way any person
> would consider the PFA to be advertising. It does not fit the dictionary
> definition, the contextual definition, or the definition set forth in your
> own FAQ.
> What Terry offered was information, Mr. Inglis, in direct adherence to
> what you claim the purpose of your group is.
>
> If this is not so, if the meaning you intended is so crystal clear, then
> why, Mr. Inglis, are you scurrying to change your charter?
Simpy because when the charter was written they underestimated the power of
human stupididty, they have now rephrased it so that even Beavis and
Butthead could understand it.
--
Archaiser
By Thy Manners, Let thou be judged.
Chris Cottrell
news:4b805481.01082...@posting.google.com...
> [also posted to Free Pagan UseNet]
Still misconstruing? Still smear campaigning? Still reinterpreting,
misquoting, twisting and inventing "facts", presuming intent, making
unfounded accusations, crossposting ad nauseum, ignoring documented
facts, attempting to construct some paranoid landscape, and refuting
lamely the reality that is so at variance to your warped personal
view.
Lies, no matter how frequently you "sir" tell them, cannot change what
has been documented. And you are proving yourself a joke throughout
the newsgroups you crosspost this stuff to. It's pointless to attempt
discussion with you, though all and sundry have tried to show you that
courtesy. The facts (and they are documented and available publicly
to those that even care anymore) are quite different from what your
posts report.
It's sad that character assassination and hatemongering is all you
have to make your little life exciting. I have seen your vitriolic
posts and these recent posts have others across usenet discussing your
tactics and agenda(s). Interesting that the power of your passion
(when coupled with the severe inaccuracy of your posts) has begun to
call your reputation and your true intent into question. Could it be
the light of day breaking into your dark and dank corner?
I guess its time to retire the posting name "The Talesin"; it no
longer serves as a good club for bashing your selected targets. Be a
good little troll and get a new name, so you can pretend someone else
gives a fig about your vendetta. Better yet, get a life.
-'Thenie
Pete Teknomancer
>
> In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
> enemies.
> We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The
> reason is
> because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him.
You people _curse_ each other over something said on the stupid sodding
Internet??!?!?
For fucks sake...
--
Pete Teknomancer
"Education is the difference between an idiot and a qualified idiot"
Robert Moir in the SDM
Carl Inglis
re-reading (I didn't reply at once so that I would have time to
consider my choice of words and phrases) I have decided to let the
cross-posting stand.]
I should note that I have copied your message into an editor to tidy
up the wrapping. I shall, of course, not modify the text in any way
other than adding/removing whitespace to make it wrap better, and
<snip>ing as standard on Usenet.
On 29 Aug 2001 20:27:50 -0700, tal...@hotmail.com (The Talesin)
wrote:
>Sorry old chap, but I had no way of knowing your personal itinerary.
>Welcome back, I hope the meet was enjoyable.
It was indeed, thank you.
>I am the one you are answering to although I note you do not address
>me directly. That is rude, but I will not take offense.
My answer was aimed at not just yourself, but others on the other
groups who have commented on the situation.
<snip>
[this quote left in since I may refer to it later as {ref. 1}]
>> First, we need to define some terminology, to make sure that when I talk
>> about a document, it is clear what I am referring to...
>>
>> "The Charter" - this is the original document under which
>> uk.religion.pagan was formed, in accordance with the procedures and
>> policies of the UK Usenet Committee.
>>
>> "The FAQ" - this document contains definitions and some (hopefully useful)
>> URLs and book details.
>>
>> "The Posting Guidelines" (PGL) - this document extends the Charter,
>> and provides guidance as to acceptable behaviour within uk.religion.pagan
<snip>
>Oh but there is a definition in your charter:
>
>Advertising
> Advertisements of UK pagan related goods and services only are
> welcome. All such advertisers should use the word "ADVERT:" in
>their
> subject line and not post an advert more than once a month.
>
>You specifically define it as the offering of goods and services. I know
>that we are going to talk about this at length in a moment, but I just
>wanted to point out that you made false statement- you do in fact define
>advertising in your charter- and that any *reasonable* person would assume
>that, as long as they did not offer goods and/or services, they were
>operating within your rules.
I'm sorry to say that I do not see how that quote could be construed
as defining an advertisment. Perhaps the wording is not as clear as it
could be (personally I think it could have been better worded, but I
wasn't involved in the creation of the charter or newsgroup) however I
cannot, by any twist of the imagination read that as a *definition* of
an advertisment. However, even if I accept your point (which I should
reiterate that I do not), there is then the definition of a service...
<snip>
>How is one to know which particular definition of "service" to use?
>There are so many. You could be forbidding people from offering bestiality
>under one definition and from conducting rituals under another. All very
>confusing.
And any and all of them are valid definitions for the word "service".
>Well, old chum, as a literate person I can tell you what I always do.
>I consider the word in *context.* The context here is "goods and
>services."
<snip>
>http://pittsford.monroe.edu/jefferson/calfieri/economics/GoodService.html
>
>"Economics is concerned with the production and distribution of goods and
>services. Goods would be defined as anything that anyone wants or needs.
>Services would be the performance of any duties or work for another; helpful
>or professional activity. The distribution of goods and services is referred
>to as marketing. The marketing of goods and services can add almost as much
>to the cost as the actual manufacturing of the goods. Marketing a product
>refers to the advertising, and other efforts to promote a products sale."
>
>Oh look! "Advertising and *other efforts to promote a product's SALE.*
You were using the above quote to define the word "services" and the
definition in your quote is "Services would be the performance of any
duties or work for another; helpful or professional activity."
Therefore, since by your own admission the PFA was helpful and what
Terry did in putting them together was certainly an activity, then the
PFA was, by your own definition, a service.
The quote that you have used is from a document which is being written
from a business point of view. Since the vast majority of businesses
exist to make money, the definition could be said to be biased in that
way.
>So much for this portion of your argument. There is no way any person would
>consider the PFA to be advertising. It does not fit the dictionary
>definition, the contextual definition, or the definition set forth in
>your own FAQ.
1/ Are you saying that there are no "person"s reading urp? After all,
a majority of the posters agreed that what Terry was doing was
advertising.
2/ It fits the dictionary definition, the contextual definition (as
your quote shows) and there *is* no definition in the FAQ (see the
quote I kept earlier - {ref. 1})
>What Terry offered was information, Mr. Inglis, in direct adherence to
>what you claim the purpose of your group is.
I have never claimed anything about the purpose of this newsgroup.
>If this is not so, if the meaning you intended is so crystal clear,
>then why, Mr. Inglis, are you scurrying to change your charter?
I am not "scurrying" to change the charter. The charter cannot be
changed without going through the rules and procedures of the UK
Usenet Committee. What I am trying to do is to clarify what this
newsgroup sees as advertising to try and prevent this sort of problem
from arising again. The document being amended is the Posting
Guidelines (PGL) {ref. 1}.
>> It should also be noted that Terry didn't post his "updates"
>> to uk.religion.pagan until after he was involved in a cross-posted
>> flame war which was being posted between alt.religion.wicca.moderated,
>> soc.religion.paganism and uk.religion.pagan. It would seem that he was
>> unaware of the existence of uk.religion.pagan until this time. Indeed,
>> until the above-mentioned cross-posted messages, Terry had not posted
>> to uk.religion.pagan.
>This is immaterial.
I agree that this is immaterial to the definitions part of this
discussion, however it was included to give people the context of
Terry's posting.
>> The URL for the Charter, and a copy of it, were posted to threads
>> which Terry was reading (since he was replying to other messages in
>> those threads). Therefore Terry cannot claim to have been unaware of
>> the Charter.
>
>No need to. As I have just proven, he did not violate the terms of
>your charter.
You have proven nothing of the sort.
>> Therefore, in accordance with a long established procedure and in
>> accordance with the Charter, I emailed the provider of Terry's email
>> address which he was posting under, his ISP and his news service provider,
>> informing them of the Charter, the postings in breach of it and the
>> unwillingness to abide by the Charter; requesting them to review the
>> situation in light of their Terms of Service. I did not (and do not)
>> *demand* action; and I certainly do not have any control over these
>> organisation. (I perform this task on behalf of the rest of the group,
>> and I have the support of the group for this role.)
>
>> Drak.Net chose to take action since Terry's postings were in breach of
>> their terms and conditions of service, _which Terry agreed to_ when he
>> set up the site. I do not know if either of the others that I emailed
>> have taken action.
>>
>> (As Jen has said), Drak.Net were given a timeline which they could verify
>> against the newsgroup postings as available on Google. I believe they
>> did so. Therefore the statement that they were only given half the story
>> is also factually incorrect.
>>
>> Once again, let me point out that Terry broke the terms and conditions
>> of service which he agreed to when he set up the PFA. Therefore he was
>> in breach of contract.
>>
>
>Oh how very cagey you are Mr. Inglis! Cagey indeed. Are you trying to tell
>us that you reported Terry to DrakNet assuming nothing would be done about
>your report? I beg to differ. You knew exactly what you were doing.
I assumed (as I do with any abuse reports) that the abuse person will
read the report, look at the evidence, look at their terms and
conditions and make their *own mind* on what (if any) action to take.
>DrakNet is very earthy, ground level, personal type service which is very in
>tune with the Pagan Community. You took advantage of this. Your report, as
>you are well aware, put Jen Bryan in a very bad situation. Not only did you
>force her into a corner vis a vis her reputation among the Pagan Community,
>you also placed a legal onus upon. She was well aware, as we all are, that,
>had she refused to close the PFA, your next step would have been to threaten
>if not actually bring legal action against her and her company.
Since I had no knowledge of Drak.Net until this incident, your
statements are factually incorrect. And where did I threaten to bring
legal action? The only way that Jen (and everyone else) would be "well
aware" of that would be if I had threatened it.
Given that I am in the UK, how am I to bring a lawsuit against an
American company? And on what grounds would I be able to do so?
>This is a woman who has built a business up in a very difficult environment.
And credit to her for it.
>She is justifiably proud of it and its reputation and justifiably would like
>to keep it in operation. You brag about not shooting her, Mr. Inglis, but
>you still held a gun to her head.
I fail to see what you mean here. I never mentioned shooting.
>> I would encourage those who wish to make up their own minds about this
>> to read the archives on Google.
>
>Suddenly we are allowed to make up our own minds. How refreshing.
I've always encouraged people to read the archives and make up their
own mind. It appears that you have made up your mind in this matter
and decided that I am, in some way, on a personal crusade. I'm sorry,
but you are flat wrong. I have *no* animosity towards Terry, I have no
argument with Jen and I don't have an argument with you.
>> I have been asked to contact Drak.Net and request that the PFA be
>> restored. I have *NO* intention of asking Drak.Net to reinstate the Pagan
>> Files Archive. If you read Jen's postings you will see that Drak have
>> stated their position clearly. If people want to petition them directly
>> then of course they have that right, however I can't see it doing anything
>> more than strengthening Drak's resolve. It should be noted that (despite
>> certain posters opinions) I have no control or influence over Drak.Net.
>>
>
>Well it is too late for that. Jen is not willing to risk her business or her
>reputation over this; she is not willing to risk you pulling that trigger.
We're back to guns again - I fail to see where you have got this idea
from.
Actually, given the nature of Jen's postings, and the clear stance she
has taken in this matter, it would appear that you are implying that
she is not telling the truth. If she closed down PFA because of that
mythical gun that you are so fond of, then why would she be posting
such a clear statement that the choice was *hers* and hers alone. Why
would she have apologised to the newsgroup?
>I will commend DrakNet for being so kind as to take the time and effort to
>post an explanation of what happened and why they acted as they did.
And I also commend Drak for being so kind as to reply to an abuse
report within about 16 hours and for apologising to the group for the
problems this ex-customer of theirs had caused. And in their
explanation, no where was there any indication that they were under
any duress. If you disagree, perhaps you could post the relevant parts
of Jen's post?
>People
>are still unable to access the resource you denied us, Mr. Inglis, but at
>least that mitigates the confusion.
*I* denied? Terry denied it when he refused to post in accordance with
our charter.
>> As to the charges of being anti-American, anti-Free Speech and anti-Wiccan
>> (or was it anti-Non Wiccan? It's not that clear), I have no animosity
>> towards any of these groups. I fail to see where any of those accusations
>> come from.
>>
>
>It is quite simple: your actions. People have posted the URL to a comparable
>UK site at least ten times, presumably in violation of your charter and yet
>not a word has been said to them.
As others have tried to explain to you, posting a URL in reply to a
request for information is not an advertisment, neither is having a
URL in one's .sig line. When the sole purpose of the post is to
promote the site or service, and there has not been a specific request
for information, then that *is* an advertisment.
>Also, your minion Cursuswalker has been on
>Free Pagan UseNet bragging about how you set Terry up and how proud you all
>are at showing the Americans how tough URP is.
What CW chooses to do and say is totally his choice. I count him as a
friend, however he in no way, shape or form takes any sort of
instructions from me.
>That, the fact that you twisted the meaning of your charter to an
>unbelievable length, and that the result is that something that was
>good and beneficial to all of us has been destroyed by YOUR actions
>can lead us to no other conclusion.
As I believe others have told you, the files have *not* been
destroyed. They exist on the mirror site.
>> I note that the person who started this discussion has been at his most
>> vitriolic outside of newsgroups where my posting history shows that
>> I am normally to be found.
>My name is Talesin ("tale-zin"). Tales is also fine.
Is that a long 'a' (as in Tales) or a short 'a' (as in also)?
>> His postings within uk.religion.pagan have
>> been much more polite and reasonable. I fail to see what this person is
>> trying to achieve apart from stirring up trouble.
>
>First of all, the groups on Free Pagan UseNet are my groups; my home. Just
>as when I am in my home, I may sit around in my underwear, drink beer, fart,
>and curse at the dog. URP is not my home. Despite the very rude and shoddy
>treatment you show your guests, I am still a guest and will conduct myself
>as one.
I don't see what you mean by "Free Pagan Usenet"? Or are you lumping
all the alt.* groups together as "Free"?
However, thank you for the respect for the newsgroup.
>As to what I am trying to achieve, I have already accomplished the first
>goal. I have allowed the discussion- both sides- to be brought forth on Free
>Pagan UseNet. People here were hurt by your actions just as those on the
>moderated groups and they have a right to know what went on and to face the
>person who harmed them.
And since in order to find out what went on, all they have to do is
read the archives at Google and make their own mind up, I fail to see
what your role is in all this. If you were simply trying to inform
people of what happened, then (assuming that you have no other agenda)
I would expect you to have told people where the archives are and let
them make their own mind up.
>> It should also be noted that personal abuse and arguing about definitions
>> will not in any way affect what has gone before.
>
>No worry, the abuse I have received from your colleagues is totally minor
>league. No need to apologize
I wasn't.
>> As far as I am concerned, the matter is closed. Terry broke the rules
>> and procedure was followed. The vast majority of the files within the
>> PFA are available elsewhere, and there is nothing to stop Terry from
>> setting up elsewhere with a different hosting provider.
>>
>> I hope this has clarified things a little.
>
>Unfortunately, Mr. Inglis, I do not consider this matter closed. I can't get
>the PFA back, you did too good of a job eliminating it. The damage has been
>done and we have no choice but to suffer over what you did.
>What I want now is an admission of the truth. Be honest, Mr. Inglis.
I _am_ being honest. The truth is out there in the archives. If you
choose not to believe it, then that is your choice.
>We
>don't believe this tripe about "adverts" any more than you do.
And who (exactly) are you speaking for here? Or is that the "royal
we"?
>The case is
>simply that for whatever reason, Terry pissed you (or someone of influence
>on URP) off. Perhaps because of his abrasive manner.As is the norm on
>moderated groups, you invoked some wild interpretation of the charter to
>support your retaliation.
URP is *not* a moderated group. Read the charter again.
>Now you not only have caused us to lose a
>wonderful resource, you have insulted our intelligence with your
>justification for doing so.
>In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn enemies.
>We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The reason is
>because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him. I am actually
>responsible for the PFA's creation.
>You see, the Pagan Files Archive was once the Pagan Files List. Terry used
>to require people to e-mail him to
>obtain the files. I saw this as possible cult activity and told him to
>cease. I actually suggested that he put the files online so people did not
>have to give him their identities. After a heated battle that lasted for
>months, he finally acceded.
And good for you. It's just a shame that Terry refused to keep to the
charter of one of the newsgroups in which he was posting. At least the
mirror site is still available.
>You see, Mr. Inglis, there is a proper way of doing things. As a result of
>my actions, not only did the cultish behavior stop but many more people got
>access to the files and Terry got the credit he deserves. Unlike what you
>did, everyone benefited instead of being hurt.
You are correct in so much as there is a proper way of doing things.
Terry didn't do it properly. So he suffered the consequences. It is a
shame that others have to suffer because of Terrys intrangisence, but
it was *his* choice not to
>All I need from you is an admission that this catastrophe was the result of
>the desire to get back at Terry. You have all but admitted it already.
You won't get it, and I have not admitted it. I have (and had) no
animosity towards Terry. He refused to abide by our charter, and he
therefore suffered the consequences. As I said above, it is a shame
that Terry refused, but it was *his* call.
>Just a nice formal statement, perhaps a little expression of regret, and
>our business is concluded and we as well as our respective groups can be
>done with this.
The only formal statement I am prepared to offer is this:
Whilst it is regretful that the action which was taken (in accordance
with the charter) has caused the PFA (in it's original form) to be
lost, it must be noted that the reason for this is the refusal to
abide by the charter of the newsgroup by the person posting these
"updates".
And there's the regret too - OK, so that's our business concluded then
and we, as well as our respective groups, can be done with this.
>Thanks for your time.
Not at all, always willing to help.
>One other thing, Mr. Inglis. I can imagine what might be running through
>your mind right now. I can assure you that things like, oh, trying to
>provoke me into something you can "report' (a la Terry) are not going to
>work. I really think it best that we just settle this and move on.
Oh far from it. As I read your message the first time I was already
formulating my response. When I got to this part of your message I
smiled, since the idea hadn't crossed my mind.
It's a shame that you have such a warped and twisted image of me.
However that is, of course, your choice. The people who matter to me
know the real me.
As you say, it is best that we just settle this. As far as I am
concerned the matter is now settled.
Regards,
Carl
Carl Inglis
(Carl Inglis) wrote:
<snip>
>You are correct in so much as there is a proper way of doing things.
>Terry didn't do it properly. So he suffered the consequences. It is a
>shame that others have to suffer because of Terrys intrangisence, but
>it was *his* choice not to
It would appear that part of my post went missing when I transfered it
from the editor back to my newsreader... The last sentence should have
read:
It is a shame that others have to suffer because of Terrys
intrangisence, but it was *his* choice not to follow the charter of
the newsgroup that he was posting to.
<snip>
Sorry 'bout that.
Carl
birdtribe
Carl Inglis wrote:
because he has kicked your ass and you have nothing of true value to add.
You have done the pagan community a disservice and it is obvious that it is
a "country" dispute in your petty minds.
BirdTribe
>
> Carl
--
"Clowns are attracted to any number of absurd realities"
visit http://www.birdtribe.net for games, animations, keys
Zahryn
In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
> > enemies.
> > We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The
> > reason is
> > because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him.
>
> You people _curse_ each other over something said on the stupid sodding
> Internet??!?!?
> For fucks sake...
<big, yellow, hairy laugh> that's the best laugh I've had since Jackdaw
last wrote ...........
Thanks
Z xxoo
birdtribe
Zahryn wrote:
You people knock each other off of real life website accounts over something
said on Usenet.. haahahha bloody hairy hahah right back atcha bozos..I am
going to have to get my patented ARW Irony Meter recalibrated again with a
British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
Yer Pal
BirdTribe
>
>
> Thanks
> Z xxoo
birdtribe
Carl Inglis wrote:
Yer a lying hypocrite. We don't like you posting your site here ARW and
spamming it but you have and will continue to do so and will in the
future in the name of supporting this dispute. Your immense pettifoggery
and obfuscatory manipulation of the situation coupled to key phrases
shows me that this is an american vs british dispute in some of your
fevered minds. I am canadian myself, which is culturally where I gain
this insight. You brits have won the battle and lost the war. You have
been shown for the simpleminded, thin skinned control freaks with
hyperaesthesia from tooo much back patting gonne awry.
BirdTribe
>
>
> <snip>
>
> Sorry 'bout that.
>
> Carl
--
Pete Teknomancer
>
> Zahryn wrote:
>
> > In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
> > > > enemies.
> > > > We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The
> > > > reason is
> > > > because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him.
> > >
> > > You people _curse_ each other over something said on the stupid sodding
> > > Internet??!?!?
> > > For fucks sake...
> >
> > <big, yellow, hairy laugh> that's the best laugh I've had since Jackdaw
> > last wrote ...........
>
> You people knock each other off of real life website accounts over something
> said on Usenet..
I am not URP, I am not "you people", I am me. I haven't been involved in
this matter except to highlight the comment made above, which I found to
be so totally fucking stupid it needed to be mocked.
> haahahha bloody hairy hahah right back atcha bozos..I am
> going to have to get my patented ARW Irony Meter recalibrated again with a
> British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
You do that. Want a clue where you can stick it when yer finished?
Rhyanon
"Zahryn" <amy...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:HEpj7.8277$%P3.6...@news11-gui.server.ntli.net...
You gotta love the "Internet Majikul Dooel" gambit ....
Funny, whenever one of the little dorks does that to me, my life is graced
by good fortune... hehehehe......
Rhyanon
"Pete Teknomancer" <teknom...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3B8E45BB...@nospam.hotmail.com...
Hehehehe, it's gettin' crowded in there, I'd wager!
Pete Teknomancer
>
> >
> > You do that. Want a clue where you can stick it when yer finished?
>
> Hehehehe, it's gettin' crowded in there, I'd wager!
>
Oh, like that is it? I've not encountered this particular little ray of
sunshine before.
Fang
disengaged their brain and wrote the following:
>Yer a lying hypocrite.
<snip>
1) Learn the facts before shouting your mouth off.
2) Get a life.
*Plonk*
Cheers
Neil
--
May laughing Pigmies invade your personal space and
tickle you with feather dusters!
Rhyanon
> Rhyanon wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > You do that. Want a clue where you can stick it when yer finished?
> >
> > Hehehehe, it's gettin' crowded in there, I'd wager!
> >
>
> Oh, like that is it? I've not encountered this particular little ray of
> sunshine before.
>
He's a very funny little man. It's easy to set him into fizzy tissfits. A
sort of cyber St. Vitus' Dance......
birdtribe
Pete Teknomancer wrote:
> birdtribe wrote:
> >
> > Zahryn wrote:
> >
> > > In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
> > > > > enemies.
> > > > > We have been for years, even to the point of trading curses. The
> > > > > reason is
> > > > > because, as a champion of Free Pagan UseNet, I went after him.
> > > >
> > > > You people _curse_ each other over something said on the stupid sodding
> > > > Internet??!?!?
> > > > For fucks sake...
> > >
> > > <big, yellow, hairy laugh> that's the best laugh I've had since Jackdaw
> > > last wrote ...........
> >
> > You people knock each other off of real life website accounts over something
> > said on Usenet..
>
> I am not URP, I am not "you people", I am me.
Charmed to meet you..
> I haven't been involved in
> this matter except to highlight the comment made above, which I found to
> be so totally fucking stupid it needed to be mocked.
Censorship and authoritarianism need to be mocked.
>
>
> > haahahha bloody hairy hahah right back atcha bozos..I am
> > going to have to get my patented ARW Irony Meter recalibrated again with a
> > British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
>
> You do that. Want a clue where you can stick it when yer finished?
Up yer fundament?
BirdTribe
>
>
> --
> Pete Teknomancer
> "Education is the difference between an idiot and a qualified idiot"
> Robert Moir in the SDM
--
Pete Teknomancer
<some more shit>
cross-posting annoys people and you aren't worth talking to so I'm going
to stop now.
Nigel Bourne
"birdtribe" <bird...@birdtribe.net> wrote in message
news:3B8E2997...@birdtribe.net...
SNIP of incomprehensibe stuff.
> British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
Just wait till puberty kicks in.....
Jani
Rhyanon <rhy...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bPqj7.6514$aC1.5...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Hehehehe, it's gettin' crowded in there, I'd wager!
Heya, Rhy, welcome to URP .... Couldja leave the flamebuster over in ARW,
though? ;)
Jani
david
> consider the word in *context.* The context here is "goods and
> services."
when freeserve came out, it was not charging for its "services" and yet its
clear that
there marketing campain clearly included advertising, even when a "service"
is free, it still has to comply
with the law, so if i made a free service, told people about it, and
advertising can be done in alot of suttle ways,
and then refused to provide it, that would be breaking trade agreements,
even tho the trade is only one sided, The PFA is one
sided and therefore when telling people about it, it is advertising in some
way, like me saying, "did you see my site, its
www.insertrubbishhere.fakeisp, take a look, its good", that is advertising
of a differant method, but its still advertising
> What Terry offered was information, Mr. Inglis, in direct adherence to
> what
> you claim the purpose of your group is.
i think you miss the point, its the way terry did it, and his total lack of
repect that he adopted after
> No need to. As I have just proven, he did not violate the terms of
> your
> charter.
this is where you are totally wrong, he topposted on almost all of his
replys dispite being told not to on more than enough times
This was not the case, Carl gave terry more then enough chance to play by
the rules,
if he had of played by the rules, then after a bit, when he the group got to
know him for what i assume he is "a nice guy"
they maybe a blind eye might have been turned, but he chose to come over as
arrogent and nasty, and he got what all people
with an attute gets when joining this group and getting pissy
> Suddenly we are allowed to make up our own minds. How refreshing.
it seems you already have, have you seen all the posts, and the chances we
gave before terry dug his hole
> It is quite simple: your actions. People have posted the URL to a
> comparable
> UK site at least ten times, presumably in violation of your charter
> and yet
> not a word has been said to them.
how many times a month did they post, was they respectful, did they read the
charter and obey it
All questions that would affect how they are dealt with, if someone listens
and thinks, ok, thats fair, ill do that and only post
1 time a month, or, ok i didnt know i shouldnt top post, so ill stop, or the
simple words "im sorry", then maybe some slack might get cut
> Unfortunately, Mr. Inglis, I do not consider this matter closed. I
> can't get
> the PFA back, you did too good of a job eliminating it. The damage has
> been
> done and we have no choice but to suffer over what you did.
> What I want now is an admission of the truth. Be honest, Mr. Inglis.
hmmm, truth, ok, lets see, terry was rude, broke the charter in a more than
1 place, refused to play nicely,
resisted all attempts to sort it out, and if Carl hadnt reported him, i
would have
> We
> don't believe this tripe about "adverts" any more than you do. The
> case is
> simply that for whatever reason, Terry pissed you (or someone of
> influence
> on URP) off. Perhaps because of his abrasive manner.As is the norm on
> moderated groups, you invoked some wild interpretation of the charter
> to
> support your retaliation.
this group is not moderated, it has no moderator of sorts, its a "uk" group
and comes under
the rules of the uk groups, also...someone of influence!!! what are you on,
theres no one person above others, we all
sort out the people that think they can walk over us, you insult one of us,
you insult all of us.
> Now you not only have caused us to lose a
> wonderful resource, you have insulted our intelligence with your
> justification for doing so.
> In case you didn't know, on a personal level Terry and I are sworn
> enemies.
im sorry the resouce had to go, some of the best sites are run by assholes,
but sometimes that hole gets too loud and needs a foot or a cork.
> You see, Mr. Inglis, there is a proper way of doing things. As a
> result of
> my actions, not only did the cultish behavior stop but many more
> people got
> access to the files and Terry got the credit he deserves. Unlike what
> you
> did, everyone benefited instead of being hurt.
> All I need from you is an admission that this catastrophe was the
> result of
> the desire to get back at Terry. You have all but admitted it already.
> Just
> a nice formal statement, perhaps a little expression of regret, and
> our business is concluded and we as well as our
> respective groups can be done with this.
> Thanks for your time.
there was nothing that was going to stop terry posting every week when he
was asked nicly to make it once a month
with [advert] or [AD] in the header, some people pay for net access and
downloading ad's or promotional posts cost them money, so carl followed the
method employed when someone will not take advice and follow the rules and
guidelines layed down, he was warned and warned, some people are there own
worse enemy, Terry is one
oh, BTW, your sig lines too long for this group, i think we agreed on 6
lines, but im not sure, Carl will correct me if im wrong
Dave
Trin
> Carl Inglis wrote:
> > Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin wrote:
> > >[also posted to URP]
> > <snip>
> > And I shall be replying there alone.
> because he has kicked your ass and you have nothing of true value to
> add.
Nope, because Carl isn't an obnoxious gjnaal, unlike some people.
> You have done the pagan community a disservice
Nope, Terry did that by thinking he could run riot in a place with
enforced rules/charters/whatever.
> and it is obvious that it is a "country" dispute in your petty minds.
How the frig did you work that one out??????? <boggle>
--
Trin
Love isn't brains, children, it's blood... blood screaming inside you to
work its will.
I may be love's bitch, but at least I'm man enough to admit it.
Spike - Lovers Walk
birdtribe
Fang wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:06:04 -0400 birdtribe <bird...@birdtribe.net>
> disengaged their brain and wrote the following:
>
> >Yer a lying hypocrite.
> <snip>
>
> 1) Learn the facts before shouting your mouth off.
> 2) Get a life.
>
> *Plonk*
Wow. You sure are the master of verbosity..Was that *plonk* the sound of
yer last brain cell kicking the bucket?
BirdTribe
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Neil
> --
> May laughing Pigmies invade your personal space and
> tickle you with feather dusters!
--
The Olphardt
> Yer a lying hypocrite. We don't like you posting your site here ARW and
> spamming it but you have and will continue to do so and will in the
> future in the name of supporting this dispute. Your immense pettifoggery
> and obfuscatory manipulation of the situation coupled to key phrases
> shows me that this is an american vs british dispute in some of your
> fevered minds. I am canadian myself, which is culturally where I gain
> this insight. You brits have won the battle and lost the war. You have
> been shown for the simpleminded, thin skinned control freaks with
> hyperaesthesia from tooo much back patting gonne awry.
>
> BirdTribe
>
issue.
Joe
birdtribe
Nigel Bourne wrote:
> "birdtribe" <bird...@birdtribe.net> wrote in message
> news:3B8E2997...@birdtribe.net...
>
> SNIP of incomprehensibe stuff.
I'll bet you were incapable of parsing multisllabics.. Par for the
course from the replies I have seen in defense of the bogified
authoritarianism and censorship as punishment crew..
>
>
> > British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
>
> Just wait till puberty kicks in.....
Why? You'll be able to count your pubes for amusement?
Birdribe
ren
was offered a place to keep "HIS" Pagan files on the web for public viewing
I voiced my concern that he was not a man of good character and that there
had been emails from angry parents sent to both alt.religion.wicca and to my
private email address about Terry. I took this into consideration along with
the posts he has sent to USENET and had decided that though he states that
he is not Wiccan he was indeed using the name of Wicca and
alt.religion.wicca to promote his Pagan File Archives. In turn it is my
opinion that he was using those archives for something other that the
promotion of Pagan, Occult, or Wiccan knowledge. I believe that Terry was
using these files to make contacts with others for his sinister purposes. I
believe Terry to be a Predator and not interested in Paganism, the Occult or
Wicca.
If you read the history of these
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Pagan+Files&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&site=groups
You will find Terry's sinister hidden agenda.
Just look at one of the titles. "Pagan Files List Update -- No Strings
Information Files"
If someone uses the term "No Strings Attached" in America you would think
that this salesman is hiding the fact that there is a catch to it. He also
uses the term "FREE!" Everything on the Internet is Public Domain so why
would he use that term other than to monitor who visits that site. Before he
was just getting emails. And sending these files by email. But he discovered
that people would email him anyway to comment about the files. So he was
still able to maintain his contact base.
Trin
> Friends, family, countrymen and women of the Pagan newsgroups.
Ok, I know I'm not liable to be included in the above list, being a UK
URPer an' such... ('less I've misread/misremembered summat somewhere -
always a possibility <g>)... but can I just ask... what the heck're you
on about???????
I've looked at some of the posts thatyou dragged out of Google, and
aside that they're not even all from Terry, I can't see anything
resembling a "hidden agenda" anywhere.
Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
--
Trin - wondering just what's going on in this oh-so confusing world.
anthrax
> --
> Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft (tm)
>
> ICQ 86535317
> AIM Tales1n
>
> http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft
>
> There are thousands of good reasons why magic doesn't
> rule the world, they're called witches and wizards
> - T. Pratchett.
>
> One other thing, Mr. Inglis. I can imagine what might be running
> through
> your mind right now. I can assure you that things like, oh, trying to
> provoke me into something you can "report' (a la Terry) are not going
> to
> work. I really think it best that we just settle this and move on.
Is it ignorance, bad netiquette or just the desire to irritate which causes
you to
post a sig this long ?
Just curious
luv n hugs
--
anthrax
The Olphardt
Trin <tequilatrinit...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9mm9mf$32puf$1...@ID-45284.news.dfncis.de...
> ren <r...@bookofshadows.org> wrote
>
> > Friends, family, countrymen and women of the Pagan newsgroups.
>
> Ok, I know I'm not liable to be included in the above list, being a UK
> URPer an' such... ('less I've misread/misremembered summat somewhere -
> always a possibility <g>)... but can I just ask... what the heck're you
> on about???????
>
> I've looked at some of the posts thatyou dragged out of Google, and
> aside that they're not even all from Terry, I can't see anything
> resembling a "hidden agenda" anywhere.
>
> Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
ren is probably impossible to pin down with labels, but among the more
accurate labels which might be applied to him are "discordian" and
"trickster". If his posts make no sense to you at all, then it is quite
likely that you are understanding them perfectly.
Joe
Trin
> Trin <tequilatrinit...@btinternet.com> wrote
> > ren <r...@bookofshadows.org> wrote
> > > Friends, family, countrymen and women of the Pagan newsgroups.
> > what the heck're you on about???????
> ren is probably impossible to pin down with labels, but among the
> more accurate labels which might be applied to him are "discordian"
> and "trickster". If his posts make no sense to you at all, then it
> is quite likely that you are understanding them perfectly.
<Trin breathes a massive sigh of relief>
Thanks for that hon :-)
<<<<<Joe>>>>>
--
Trin
Raven
>> Advertising
>> Advertisements of UK pagan related goods and services only are
>> welcome. All such advertisers should use the word "ADVERT:" in their
>> subject line and not post an advert more than once a month.
...
> I'm sorry to say that I do not see how that quote could be construed
> as defining an advertisement.
It doesn't. It specifies what *sort* of advertisement "only" is welcome,
i.e. says that any *other* kind of advertisement is *not* welcome.
If your debater wishes to insist that the particular advertisement under
discussion was *not* for "UK pagan related goods and services" (which is
what he seems to be insisting), then by that rule it wouldn't be welcome
at *all*, even with the [AD] tag, even limited to once per month.
Of course, one *can* "advertise" other things than goods and services:
for instance, websites. The banners and pop-ups cluttering commercial
websites very frequently advertise *other* websites -- which may in
turn offer goods or services, but may also merely offer "memberships",
or even just wish *viewers* (e.g. being advertiser-supported themselves,
or being promotional sites for religious or political propaganda, etc).
If *one* website gets to be advertised more often than once per month,
without objection, then *other* websites could insist on the same --
and point to the first one as precedent, even scream "discrimination!"
Then the floodgates would open, and this would be a newsgroup for spam.
>> So much for this portion of your argument. There is no way any person
>> would consider the PFA to be advertising. It does not fit the dictionary
>> definition, the contextual definition, or the definition set forth in
>> your own FAQ.
>
> 1/ Are you saying that there are no "person"s reading urp? After all,
> a majority of the posters agreed that what Terry was doing was
> advertising.
>
> 2/ It fits the dictionary definition, the contextual definition (as
> your quote shows) and there *is* no definition in the FAQ (see the
> quote I kept earlier - {ref. 1})
You have omitted the most important reply:
3/ PFA's own webhost (and Terry's posting ID's host) considered those posts
to be unsolicited and too-frequent advertising, in violation of charter AND
Drak.net's own Terms of Service. Jen Bryan specifically pointed this out,
noting that those ToS ban such adverts, whether *for* a Drak.net-hosted site
or *from* a Drak.net-hosted ID -- and in this case *both* were involved.
Note: Drak.net was *not* obliged to take your version of events as gospel.
If your objection (or even a unanimous objection by an entire newsgroup)
had been unfounded, Drak.net would have seen that and ignored the objection.
On the contrary, Drak.net, under no pressure or compulsion, concluded that
its Terms of Service had been violated, and took the action it specifically
warns members it will take in such a case.
It would take a crazy person to imagine that you were holding a gun to the
collective head of an ISP on the other side of the Atlantic, to FORCE them
to enforce their own Terms of Service, as if they'd never do so otherwise.
> I am not "scurrying" to change the charter. The charter cannot be
> changed without going through the rules and procedures of the UK
> Usenet Committee. What I am trying to do is to clarify what this
> newsgroup sees as advertising to try and prevent this sort of problem
> from arising again. The document being amended is the Posting
> Guidelines (PGL) {ref. 1}.
Where a rule has fuzzy areas, the question becomes: "Who Decides?"
Who decides how the ambiguities will be resolved? Who decides when
enough warnings have been given, and the next step should be taken?
In government, at least some such discretion is usually given to the
same regulatory agency charged with enforcing the rule.
In *this* context, the appointed regulator would be *you*; you were
acting within the area of your discretion to ask for the [AD] tag and
the once-per-month limit. Otherwise, how could the decision be made?
In government, there's usually an appeal process to challenge such
decisions, either to a higher officer within the agency, or to the
greater organization containing that agency, or to a court.
In *this* context, the appeal (which *you* offered Terry) was to the
newsgroup membership itself; and they overwhelmingly upheld your decision.
Terry seemed to feel that the laws of his own tribe were the laws of nature,
to paraphrase Shaw (see the quote from "Caesar and Cleopatra" which prefaces
Robert A. Heinlein's novel "Glory Road") -- that the "Usenet Rules" he was
accustomed to on alt. groups should and must and *did* apply on uk. groups --
and no amount of contradiction was enough to correct this misconception.
He wanted what he wanted, and was not going to let anything get in the way:
not charters, not Terms of Service, not the consensus of the newsgroup.
The troll you have been patiently answering doesn't really care about facts,
so citing facts at him is not going to persuade him. You've provided quite
enough information for more impartial readers, and that'll have to do.
After this, just cite the URLs for your reply posts, and use the time you'll
save for other, more productive or enjoyable, activities. Example:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b8e0fa2.85382314%40news.demon.co.uk
--
Raven | Words. Thoughts. Phosphor dots.
| Modem SCREECH and BUZZ.
ra...@solaria.sol.net | All this thread must have a point.
| (Wonder what it was!)
Cardinal Fang
>Talesin wrote:
>>First of all, the groups on Free Pagan UseNet are my groups; my home. Just
>>as when I am in my home, I may sit around in my underwear, drink beer, fart,
>>and curse at the dog. URP is not my home. Despite the very rude and shoddy
>>treatment you show your guests, I am still a guest and will conduct myself
>>as one.
>
>I don't see what you mean by "Free Pagan Usenet"? Or are you lumping
>all the alt.* groups together as "Free"?
What Taleswhine means is that "Free Pagan Usenet" is any alt.* pagan-related group that is not
moderated and hasn't banned him from posting there because he's a rude, obnoxious troll pushing
an agenda of religious intolerance. He's loves to play the victim card, as he holds the bloody knife
of his own hypocrisy.
Cardinal Fang ho...@earthlink.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead me not to temptation, I enjoy finding it myself.
Cardinal Fang
>ren <r...@bookofshadows.org> wrote
>
>> Friends, family, countrymen and women of the Pagan newsgroups.
>
>Ok, I know I'm not liable to be included in the above list, being a UK
>URPer an' such... ('less I've misread/misremembered summat somewhere -
>always a possibility <g>)... but can I just ask... what the heck're you
>on about???????
>
>I've looked at some of the posts thatyou dragged out of Google, and
>aside that they're not even all from Terry, I can't see anything
>resembling a "hidden agenda" anywhere.
>
>Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
No, you are not being dense. ren has an agenda. Years of study has not revealed the purpose of said
agenda beyond causing general chaos and mayhem.
Raven
> No, you are not being dense. ren has an agenda. Years of study has not
> revealed the purpose of said agenda beyond causing general chaos and mayhem.
Oh, now, I might agree with you on many things, even on *everything* else,
but here, much to my regret, I must disagree and correct you on ONE point:
That should read "Years of study _have_ not..." rather than "_has_ not".
*Otherwise*, you're quite right. <grin>
Trin
> "Trin" <tequilatrinit...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
> No, you are not being dense. ren has an agenda. Years of study
> has not revealed the purpose of said agenda beyond causing general
> chaos and mayhem.
Fairy nuff :-)
> Lead me not to temptation, I enjoy finding it myself.
<ggggggggg> Is fun innit <vbg>
--
Trin
Noinden
<r...@bookofshadows.org> wrote:
> Friends, family, countrymen and women of the Pagan newsgroups. When Terry
> was offered a place to keep "HIS" Pagan files on the web for public viewing
> I voiced my concern that he was not a man of good character and that there
> had been emails from angry parents sent to both alt.religion.wicca and to my
> private email address about Terry. I took this into consideration along with
> the posts he has sent to USENET and had decided that though he states that
> he is not Wiccan he was indeed using the name of Wicca and
> alt.religion.wicca to promote his Pagan File Archives. In turn it is my
> opinion that he was using those archives for something other that the
> promotion of Pagan, Occult, or Wiccan knowledge. I believe that Terry was
> using these files to make contacts with others for his sinister purposes. I
> believe Terry to be a Predator and not interested in Paganism, the Occult or
> Wicca.
Come of it ren! terry was a PRAT a royal one ... but this had nothing
to do with his suitability to wicca (something YOU have no right to
judge) nor his supposed ripping of posters with no credit!
You and I donšt get on .. all know that. I see you as a Liar a cheat
and a menace to intellect. You see me as a prat among other things. Let
it drop. Terry got his comeuppance (in probably too harsh a manner) and
a somewhat valuable resource was lost! Do you advocate the loss of such
knowledge?? After all you told me off for throwing some books away once
... this is akin to throwing away such!
Many of us are getting mighty tired of your silly little vendetta
against Terry and Rhy! Yes both may deserve it. But in this case you
are stabbing a guy in the back when he is unable (or unwilling)to
answer. That is neither fair nor honourable.
Noinden
<tequilatrinit...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I've looked at some of the posts thatyou dragged out of Google, and
> aside that they're not even all from Terry, I can't see anything
> resembling a "hidden agenda" anywhere.
>
> Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
NO you are seeing through some shite! Just hold your nose as you do it1
Noinden
<ho...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 10:17:05 GMT, ut...@yoshiwara.demon.co.uk.invalid (Carl
> Inglis) wrote:
>
> >Talesin wrote:
>
> >>First of all, the groups on Free Pagan UseNet are my groups; my home. Just
> >>as when I am in my home, I may sit around in my underwear, drink beer, fart,
> >>and curse at the dog. URP is not my home. Despite the very rude and shoddy
> >>treatment you show your guests, I am still a guest and will conduct myself
> >>as one.
> >
> >I don't see what you mean by "Free Pagan Usenet"? Or are you lumping
> >all the alt.* groups together as "Free"?
>
> What Taleswhine means is that "Free Pagan Usenet" is any alt.* pagan-related
> group that is not
> moderated and hasn't banned him from posting there because he's a rude,
> obnoxious troll pushing
> an agenda of religious intolerance. He's loves to play the victim card, as
> he holds the bloody knife
> of his own hypocrisy.
Yah mean like the groups this is posted too .....
Trin
> Trin <tequilatrinit...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > Or am I just being blind and dense as usual?
> NO you are seeing through some shite!
Thought I might've been somehow <g>
> Just hold your nose as you do it1
I was, don't worry ;-)
--
Trin
Fang
wrote:
>What Taleswhine means is that "Free Pagan Usenet" is any alt.* pagan-related group that is not
>moderated and hasn't banned him from posting there because he's a rude, obnoxious troll pushing
>an agenda of religious intolerance. He's loves to play the victim card, as he holds the bloody knife
>of his own hypocrisy.
<fx: Fang waves claw>
Hello, are you family? }:O)=
--
Fang - The Athda Inquithitor
Fear and thurprithe, thurprithe and fear...
bwahahahaha, permanently low pritheth, cackle...
and the Athda prithe promithe.
Drool, drool, thlobber, drool. }:O)=
Cardinal Fang
>On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:12:55 GMT Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>
>>What Taleswhine means is that "Free Pagan Usenet" is any alt.* pagan-related group that is not
>>moderated and hasn't banned him from posting there because he's a rude, obnoxious troll pushing
>>an agenda of religious intolerance. He's loves to play the victim card, as he holds the bloody knife
>>of his own hypocrisy.
>
><fx: Fang waves claw>
<the big rat on the Cardinal's shoulder waves a greeting in semaphore using two Hustler magazines>
>Hello, are you family? }:O)=
I'm from the Spanish side of the family, if their is one. +:-)
Cardinal Fang
>Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote
>> Lead me not to temptation, I enjoy finding it myself.
>
><ggggggggg> Is fun innit <vbg>
Especially when you have at least one hand free. +:-)
Cardinal Fang ho...@earthlink.net
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Cardinal Fang
>Many of us are getting mighty tired of your silly little vendetta
>against Terry and Rhy! Yes both may deserve it. But in this case you
>are stabbing a guy in the back when he is unable (or unwilling)to
>answer. That is neither fair nor honourable.
Since when was Usenet EVER honorable? Its a seething morass of diseased tentacles.
I like it that way. +:-)
Noinden
<ho...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:11:31 +1200, Noinden <sla...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
>
> >Many of us are getting mighty tired of your silly little vendetta
> >against Terry and Rhy! Yes both may deserve it. But in this case you
> >are stabbing a guy in the back when he is unable (or unwilling)to
> >answer. That is neither fair nor honourable.
>
> Since when was Usenet EVER honorable? Its a seething morass of diseased
> tentacles.
>
> I like it that way. +:-)
Perhaps but when someone berates another for a certain action then does
it themself ..... they tend to get my attention
It's just a cultural percularity of New Zealanders! WE don't like
hypocrites! Comes from seeing some of the larger nations in action ....
My problem I know but some of us are cursed with a conscience!
Melanie Rhianna Lewis
>Hehehehe, it's gettin' crowded in there, I'd wager!
Nah, URPs not crowded. If you want crowded try uk.rec.motorcycles. The
last troll/flame attack, despite concerted efforts from the trollers
including garbage posting mechanisms caused a 5% increase in traffic and
didn't even appear on the monthly statistics.
Melanie
--
======================================================================
Melanie Rhianna Lewis mel...@molanie.org
'An it hurt none, do what thou wilt' http://www.molanie.org/melanie/
GS550EZ 'Suzi' - Zephyr ZR1100A2 'The bike formerly known as Mr Al'
======================================================================
Melanie Rhianna Lewis
wrote:
>Censorship and authoritarianism need to be mocked.
It's time for that post again. Usenet groups are like pubs or bars. Each
has it's own ways and quirks. You wouldn't walk in to a biker bar a shout
your mouth off would you. Well you might. Most people would end up being
a bit battered after such an event. Anyway you moved in to an area and
want the frequent the local hostalry. You go there, buy a drink, and sit
quietly learning about the place, before politely introducing yourself and
becoming one of the regulars. Usenet is the same. Jumping in with your
size twelves is only antagonistic. But then you lot over the other side of
the pond have never been the most suibtle of species.
Chris Cottrell
news:slrn9p1jj9....@defaid.demon.co.uk...
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:20:10 -0400, birdtribe
<bird...@birdtribe.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Censorship and authoritarianism need to be mocked.
>
> It's time for that post again. Usenet groups are like pubs or bars.
Each
> has it's own ways and quirks. You wouldn't walk in to a biker bar a
shout
> your mouth off would you. Well you might. Most people would end up
being
> a bit battered after such an event. Anyway you moved in to an area
and
> want the frequent the local hostalry. You go there, buy a drink,
and sit
> quietly learning about the place, before politely introducing
yourself and
> becoming one of the regulars. Usenet is the same. Jumping in with
your
> size twelves is only antagonistic. But then you lot over the other
side of
> the pond have never been the most suibtle of species.
I beg to differ. I have experience otherwise.
-'Thenie
please don't bash the colonials; especially when it's being spread all
over several U.S. ng's...
Edward Potts
news:g1l0ptcmt2761i9cc...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:40:41 +0100, Fang <fangN...@postmaster.co.uk> wrote:
> >On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:12:55 GMT Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net>
> >wrote:
Two Fangs??? Oobldy heck!!!
Eddie 'MAdMaN' Potts
--
Nurse! Bring me my medication!
Cardinal Fang
>"Cardinal Fang" <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:g1l0ptcmt2761i9cc...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:40:41 +0100, Fang <fangN...@postmaster.co.uk> wrote:
>> >On Fri, 31 Aug 2001 05:12:55 GMT Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net>
>> >wrote:
>
>Two Fangs??? Oobldy heck!!!
I am sometimes known as "Your Eminence"....... +:-)
Fang
wrote:
><the big rat on the Cardinal's shoulder waves a greeting in semaphore using two Hustler magazines>
Oooo clever!
<fx: the nits in Fang's hair moon at the rat on Cardinal's shoulder>
>I'm from the Spanish side of the family, if their is one. +:-)
I'm from the themi-human thide of the family. }:O)=
Nithe to meet you, do pop in to URP'th dungeon thometime and thay
hello.
--
Fang - The Athda Inquithitor
Rethpect mah authoritay!! }:O)=
Rosine
> > tentacles.
So? That doesn't mean that we, as individuals, are required to accept or
encourage such behaviour, nor does standing by and being silent help change
it. Calling someone on their postings or behaviour has sometimes caused them
to re-examine their views and lead to growth.
Terri
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Nigel Bourne <nigel....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:uGqj7.46157$hm3.2...@news1.cableinet.net...
>
> "birdtribe" <bird...@birdtribe.net> wrote in message
> news:3B8E2997...@birdtribe.net...
>
> SNIP of incomprehensibe stuff.
>
> > British designed bozometric telemetry parser chip installed.
>
>
> Just wait till puberty kicks in.....
>
>
Cardinal Fang
Uhm...it looks like my following sentence "I like it that way" got snipped out.
As far as calling someone on their posting behaviors.....I've seen it happen enough, and very few times
when calling them on it actually worked. Making people change their behavior typically works only with newbies,
who seem to be more malleable. Once you've been posting for quite some time, rigor mortis of Usenet behavior patterns
kick in.
Rosine
out.
*snipping all the rest*
You're right - I started to read your message, decided that I wanted to
respond to the previous one, got distracted by a cat, a kitten, and a dog
(don't ask. The glass didn't break.) and never noticed that I hadn't gone
back up the message tree to the previous posting. Sorry!
Terri
Kurt Doughty
Rosine wrote in message ...
Lush
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Rosine <DameR...@stopspammsn.com> wrote in message
news:tp7ipd2...@corp.supernews.com...
Lush
pagan-related group that is not
> moderated and hasn't banned him from posting there because he's a rude,
obnoxious troll pushing
> an agenda of religious intolerance. He's loves to play the victim card,
as he holds the bloody knife
> of his own hypocrisy.
Hear! Hear!
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lb6uotcrmb2mmo694...@4ax.com...
Chris Croughton
your own group(s).
Chris C
Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)
> This thread is being widely crossposted, please set followups only to
> your own group(s).
What kind of an idiot thinks that people have their "own
groups?" Listen, you pompous, infectious moron: you don't
own Usenet and you bloody well don't get to make demands
and order your intellectual superiors around. If you don't
like it, take it up with Al Gore.
--
http://www.skeptictank.org/ http://www.keithhenson.org/
http://www.skepticfiles.org/ http://www.slatkinfraud.com/
http://www.raullopez.org/ http://www.ronthenut.org/
http://www.bobminton.org/ http://www.crackpots.org/
http://www.torymagoo.org/ http://www.holysmoke.org/
http://www.nots.org/ http://www.xenu.net/ http://www.raids.org/
Mr. Rice may leak or explode if recharged or inserted improperly.
Wechsler
> Chris Croughton wrote:
>
>> This thread is being widely crossposted, please set followups only to
>> your own group(s).
>
> What kind of an idiot thinks that people have their "own
> groups?" Listen, you pompous, infectious moron: you don't
> own Usenet and you bloody well don't get to make demands
> and order your intellectual superiors around. If you don't
> like it, take it up with Al Gore.
Which bit of the word "please" is confusing your supposed intellectual
superiority here?
Wechsler
Tracey
"own" groups, as in the ones you yourself use,post to and read, not the ones
you own!!
"doh" as said by homer simpson
"Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)" <fr...@skeptictank.org> wrote
in message news:3B967664...@skeptictank.org...
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin
"catweazle" <devass...@purpleturtle.com> wrote in message
news:3b8d32ac...@news.freeserve.net...
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:15:32 +0100,
> ut...@yoshiwara.demon.co.uk.invalid (Carl Inglis) wrote:
>
> >Posted to alt.pagan, alt.traditional.witchcraft, alt.religion.wicca,
> >alt.witchcraft, uk.religion.pagan
> >
>
> >
> >Therefore, in accordance with a long established procedure and in
> >accordance with the Charter, I emailed the provider of Terry's email
> >address which he was posting under, his ISP and his news service
provider,
> >informing them of the Charter, the postings in breach of it and the
> >unwillingness to abide by the Charter; requesting them to review the
> >situation in light of their Terms of Service. I did not (and do not)
> >*demand* action; and I certainly do not have any control over these
> >organisation. (I perform this task on behalf of the rest of the group,
> >and I have the support of the group for this role.)
> >
> >Drak.Net chose to take action since Terry's postings were in breach of
> >their terms and conditions of service, _which Terry agreed to_ when he
> >set up the site. I do not know if either of the others that I emailed
> >have taken action.
> >
>
> If, say, I took offence to someones website, would it not be possible
> for me to post adverts for that site on a newsgroup server with an
> assumed identity of the person who runs the site?
Yes
> For instance I could change my signature to that of 'Terry', promote
> his site and thus he would be in breech of agreement and the site
> removed?
Yes
> If Terry denied that he had placed those 'adverts' whose word is
> gospel??
See, they don't care. If they wanted to nail Terry they would claim they had
no way of knowing it was not him. Even if they were shown the in correct
bang-path, IP address, or whatever, they would claim Terry was posting
anonymously just so they could not touch him.
> I don't know, Just all seems a bit silly.
What you state could happen in exactly this way, and that is precisely how
these "charters" are developed. Taken literally, they are completely
meaningless which allows the moderator to claim that anyone they don't like
is "violating the charter." This example is pretty stupid, but I have seen
stupider.
--
Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft (tm)
ICQ 86535317
AIM Tales1n
http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft
There are thousands of good reasons why magic doesn't
rule the world, they're called witches and wizards
- T. Pratchett.
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin
impose their censorship on the rest of us.
It is time to take a stand
"Chris Croughton" <ch...@keristor.org> wrote in message
news:slrn9pccot...@dayspring.firedrake.org...
> This thread is being widely crossposted, please set followups only to
> your own group(s).
>
> Chris C
birdtribe
"doh"
BirdTribe
Tracey wrote:
--
"Clowns are attracted to any number of absurd realities"
visit http://www.birdtribe.net for games, animations, keys
Kurt Doughty
Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.) wrote in message
<3B967664...@skeptictank.org>...
>Chris Croughton wrote:
>
>> This thread is being widely crossposted, please set followups only to
>> your own group(s).
>
>What kind of an idiot thinks that people have their "own
>groups?" Listen, you pompous, infectious moron: you don't
>own Usenet and you bloody well don't get to make demands
>and order your intellectual superiors around. If you don't
>like it, take it up with Al Gore.
>
>--
Yeah!!! What he said<grins>
de Valois
> uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
> impose their censorship on the rest of us.
> It is time to take a stand
>
On your fat old throat, perhaps?
Carl
We're bigger than Jesus! - JWLennon
Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)
What kind of an idiot thinks one can presume to dictate
fascist contro,ls over another's freedom of speech and
get away with it by saying "please?"
Focus on the Family would be so proud.
Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)
> uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
> impose their censorship on the rest of us.
> It is time to take a stand
It's disappointing, to say the least, to see such an ideal
expressed by a Wiccan or neo-Pagan.
> "Chris Croughton" <ch...@keristor.org> wrote in message
> news:slrn9pccot...@dayspring.firedrake.org...
> > This thread is being widely crossposted, please set followups only to
> > your own group(s). Chris C
--
Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)
> "Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin" <witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote in message news:<HwCl7.257119$Jg.32...@typhoon.kc.rr.com>...
> > uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
> > impose their censorship on the rest of us.
> > It is time to take a stand
>
> On your fat old throat, perhaps?
<laughing!> That chokeing sound you hear is someone's
freedom of speech being stepped on. }:-}
de Valois
> "Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin" <witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote in message news:<HwCl7.257119$Jg.32...@typhoon.kc.rr.com>...
> > uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
> > impose their censorship on the rest of us.
> > It is time to take a stand
>
> On your fat old throat, perhaps?
><laughing!> That chokeing sound you hear is someone's
>freedom of speech being stepped on. }:-}
>
Frederick, there are some people for whom I would wish the First
Amendment didn't apply, Dave here being one of them, because they
abuse it by abusing others, and then hiding behind it.
Unfortunately, for me to enjoy these protections, I have to put up
with useless, manipulative, abusive jerks like Tailpipes. That's the
price of being an American and adhering to a living Constitution.
Fortunately, he's so fat and stupid the Amendment can't cover him
completely.
Chris Cottrell
<snip>
> What you state could happen in exactly this way, and that is
precisely how
> these "charters" are developed. Taken literally, they are completely
> meaningless which allows the moderator to claim that anyone they
don't like
> is "violating the charter." This example is pretty stupid, but I
have seen
> stupider.
URP has no moderator. uk.hierarchy requires newsgroups to submit a
charter in order to be allowed to exist; that's how it works in
Britain. You have not done your homework, therefore you are
demonstrating a lack of knowledge about the subject. Your claims are
incorrect and your assessments are prejudiced. But don't let simple
facts get in your way.
-Chris
Cardinal Fang
>Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin wrote:
>
>> uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
>> impose their censorship on the rest of us.
>> It is time to take a stand
>
>It's disappointing, to say the least, to see such an ideal
>expressed by a Wiccan or neo-Pagan.
Talespin's just a lapsed fundamentalist with a messiah-complex. Pay it no mind.
Rosine
> Can you give me one example?
Which statement were you referring to? That USENET is a seething morass of
diseased tentacles, or that by calling someone on their behavior, you may be
able to enocurage them to re-examine their views?
Terri
catweazle
<MTN-...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>URP has no moderator. uk.hierarchy requires newsgroups to submit a
>charter in order to be allowed to exist; that's how it works in
>Britain. You have not done your homework, therefore you are
>demonstrating a lack of knowledge about the subject. Your claims are
>incorrect and your assessments are prejudiced. But don't let simple
>facts get in your way.
>
>-Chris
>
>
Once upon a tie their was a charter for the way in which we should be
treated should we act in a manner that would denote us as a witch. the
Malleus Malefacarum issued a charter for local councils,showing them
how the trials of witches would be approached.
There are no charters for people to spray their message on the walls,
though this is of course is not allowed.
The problem with society is that the verbal truth is always easier
because the written is circumspect to judgement by people who value
their authority more than the wroiters freedom.
Freedom is expression and nnothing and no charter should ever impede
the natural progress of somebodys message.
If I didn't want to listen to 'Terry' advertise his site i'd put him
on a spam block.
--
-----
I call the wise man ignorant for following some plan,
of his text book lies and IQ rhymes can that really test the mind
Or rearrange those paths in my brain I have found, I say...'
Let him try, he'll never build his fences in my mind
********
WWW.hedgewitch.com
birdtribe
catweazle wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 22:28:33 GMT, "Chris Cottrell"
> <MTN-...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >URP has no moderator. uk.hierarchy requires newsgroups to submit a
> >charter in order to be allowed to exist; that's how it works in
> >Britain. You have not done your homework, therefore you are
> >demonstrating a lack of knowledge about the subject. Your claims are
> >incorrect and your assessments are prejudiced. But don't let simple
> >facts get in your way.
> >
> >-Chris
> >
> >
> Once upon a tie their was a charter for the way in which we should be
> treated should we act in a manner that would denote us as a witch. the
> Malleus Malefacarum issued a charter for local councils,showing them
> how the trials of witches would be approached.
> There are no charters for people to spray their message on the walls,
> though this is of course is not allowed.
> The problem with society is that the verbal truth is always easier
> because the written is circumspect to judgement by people who value
> their authority more than the wroiters freedom.
> Freedom is expression and nnothing and no charter should ever impede
> the natural progress of somebodys message.
> If I didn't want to listen to 'Terry' advertise his site i'd put him
> on a spam block.
Hear hear here here!.. This is the imporant message about the battle
against censorship via bogus administrative authority within the Pagan
community.. You could swear that Carl Ingliss was a Jesuit with his ego
tripping control freak gambit. He struck out at one and hurt many and
wants off scot free by caterwauling ake definitions and appealing to
bogus authority.
BirdTribe
>
> --
>
> -----
> I call the wise man ignorant for following some plan,
> of his text book lies and IQ rhymes can that really test the mind
> Or rearrange those paths in my brain I have found, I say...'
> Let him try, he'll never build his fences in my mind
> ********
> WWW.hedgewitch.com
--
de Valois
> On Thu, 06 Sep 2001 19:17:00 GMT, "Fredric L. Rice (Damoclese a.k.a Not David.)" <fr...@skeptictank.org> wrote:
>
> >Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin wrote:
> >
> >> uk.religion.pagan has gained victory of the PFA and now they think they can
> >> impose their censorship on the rest of us.
> >> It is time to take a stand
> >
> >It's disappointing, to say the least, to see such an ideal
> >expressed by a Wiccan or neo-Pagan.
>
> Talespin's just a lapsed fundamentalist with a messiah-complex. Pay it no mind.
>
>
Got my doubts about the "lapsed" part, Fang. After all, he can't even *see* his.
Chris Cottrell
That's your choice, and you're welcome to it. But like it or not, the
government of Britain has set down rules on how their internet
facilities will be run, and a charter is required.
As for charters and rules and the "natural" way of things, no law or
rules or charters would be required if there was common courtesy at
work in the world. But as there will always be disagreement and
discord between people (as this bouhaha will attest), laws and rules
and charters are necessary to circumvent bullies running roughshod
over others.
Is it censorship if you restrain another from stabbing you or from
stealing your property? Is it censorship if I ask nicely for you to
try not to knock me down in passing again? 'Rules' are a subject that
never comes up between parties that express a mutual respect. Rules
are only required in places where negative and selfish emotions run
viciously.
And you are free to be respectful or not to me. And I am free to walk
away or not listen if you act towards me with disrespect. Your
choice, my choice.
-Chris
Lush
I have seen many people called on their behaviour on usenet but I cannot
recall it ever having an effect.
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Rosine <DameR...@stopspammsn.com> wrote in message
news:tpgqk6g...@corp.supernews.com...
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin <witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote in
message news:HwCl7.257119$Jg.32...@typhoon.kc.rr.com...
Cardinal Fang
>Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<5rigpt8sj2jf132qk...@4ax.com>...
>> Talespin's just a lapsed fundamentalist with a messiah-complex. Pay it no mind.
>Got my doubts about the "lapsed" part, Fang. After all, he can't even *see* his.
Well, maybe he's a fundamentalist with a lapsed intelligence? For some, that's pretty much saying the
same thing twice.
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin
"Chris Cottrell" <MTN-...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:Dmbm7.30065$R57.400...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com...
And why do we give a rat's ass? We are American citizens and UseNet is an
American invention that belongs to America. Some dust covered bureaucrat in
some third-world Socialist country has no authority over us.
Chris Cottrell
> [someone please xpost this to uk.religion.pagan]
One has to ask why he could include this little note, yet not do it
himself.
Rosine
> The latter.
>
> I have seen many people called on their behaviour on usenet but I cannot
> recall it ever having an effect.
Hmmm... we must be reading different groups. On the medieval studies
groups that I read, it does frequently happen that a person will post
something in anger or a desire to invoke a negative response, but find that
among their responders, someone answers with politeness and reason while
pointing out that their message does not further their argument. Often, this
results in a rather humble (okay, well, *sometimes* humble) message from the
original poster with a totally different tone and sometimes, even, an
apology. In all cases where I have seen such a thing happen the thread has
been diverted from a feeding-frenzy into an exchange of ideas and solutions
and a sharing of purpose. I find those moments to be worth the risk of an
"up yours" crudity.
I admit that most of the groups and lists that I read are geared towards
heavily-academic subjects (this being one of the least studious ones), but
they all have their "loons", and they all have developed methods to deal
with disrupters.
Terri
Lush
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Rosine <DameR...@stopspammsn.com> wrote in message
news:tpod703...@corp.supernews.com...
Lush
> American invention that belongs to America. Some dust covered bureaucrat
in
> some third-world Socialist country has no authority over us.
You went to the trouble of asking someone to post just that lousy paragraph
to UKRP? Well fucking done, Tally.
Lush
--
"life is a creation, not a discovery"
Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin <witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote in
message news:wxAm7.260158$GN.36...@typhoon.kc.rr.com...
de Valois
> On 7 Sep 2001 12:33:18 -0700, de_v...@my-deja.com (de Valois) wrote:
>
> >Cardinal Fang <ho...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<5rigpt8sj2jf132qk...@4ax.com>...
>
> >> Talespin's just a lapsed fundamentalist with a messiah-complex. Pay it no mind.
>
> >Got my doubts about the "lapsed" part, Fang. After all, he can't even *see* his.
>
> Well, maybe he's a fundamentalist with a lapsed intelligence? For some, that's pretty much saying the
> same thing twice.
>
Again, the "lapsed" thing...he *had* intelligence, you say?
Day Brown
Gimbutas outlines the prehistoric monotheistic faith in
the Great Earth Mother of Chalcolithic Europe, Joseph
Campbell, in his forward: "The message here is of an
actual age of peace and harmony with the creative energies
of Nature, which for a spell of some 4000 prehistoric years,
anteceded the 5000 of what James Joyce has termed the
"nightmare" (of contending tribal and national interests)
from which it is certainly time for the planet to wake.
his parens.
I think the planet is waking, but the warrior mentality
which has ruled this planet for the last 5000 years is not
going to go quietly. We may even face a period of extended
terror, violence, and anarchy before they are all disarmed.
Ironically, we will havta fight fire with fire. Force is
the only thing the self righteous warrior mentality can
understand, and it is the only thing we can use to protect
the peaceful spirits. However, it is not the only tool; we
need to apply dispassionate reason, which the zealot lacks.
Campbell and Gimbutas see the monotheism of the Gaians. But
they do not explain why that produced the mythic Golden Age
of peace. However one clue lies in the character of the
cosmologies which have produced the most dangerous pervasive
zealotry. They are all devoted to a patriarchic tyrant concept
of a willful god known for his vengeance. Gaia was not at all
like that; to be sure, there are ideas of Her being dangerous,
seen in the natural calamities the ancients saw. But She was
seen mostly as a loving, but powerful force, which people had
sometimes inadvertantly gotten in the way of.
If you lived by the river, sometimes you drown in a flood. It
was not seen as an act of retribution for sin, but as just an
accident. Your own Kharma was being fulfilled, not that needed
to fulfill a divine plan. Gaia did not plan the world to
create it, She just gave birth to it out of the natural process
of Her own being.
The tyrant gods speak of the 'blessed' and the 'damned', the
'evil' and the 'good', but there was none of that dualism in
the cosmology of the Goddess. The zealots of course, all see
themselves as among the blessed, and everyone else as the damned.
Being damned, any means necessary to fulfill the efforts of the
Blessed to fulfill what they say is the 'will of God' is, and
always has been, justified... no matter what it did to the damned.
However, in every case, where I see terrorism promoted, justified,
and expressed, what I see are men claiming to do the will of God.
Could such characters claim that they do the will of the Goddess?
I dont _think_ so. They all suffer from testosterone overdose. It
seems to be a terminal condition. The only thing that we can do
is to disempower them, and for Goddess' sake, never appoint them
to positions of power. Some cultures have already appointed large
numbers of women to office, and increasingly I see that transnat
corporations are doing the same. Simply put, it pays, and reduces
the cost and risk of litigation or distraction from the business
at hand. Women in high office dont try to maintain mistresses,
and dont fill up the scandle sheets with their sex life.
But if women would put a stop to the terrorism, they might give
serious consideration to a weapon they have which men lack. There
are many times in history where whores were recruited for the
purpose of intelligence, and among these zealots, whose sex
drive is so perverted, it would be incredibly effective.
The Sarmatians gave Roman General Proculus 100 virgins for a week.
In exchange, they got him and five legions to cross Turkey and
kick ass on the Persians so bad it was fifty years before the
Persians tried to come back to the Caucuses. It was a deal he
could not refuse. It was also a deal that only the mothers and
grandmothers had the moral authority to make. And only a deal
that women in power would have the creativity to come up with.
Is there a patriarchic power structure that could withstand it?
Is there a patriarchic cosmology that could? For the last 5000
years, these power structures have depended on the strong right
arm of the zealot, sword in hand. But Smith & Wesson has solved
that problem, and all that is required now is for women to be
as proficient. And they wont be acting in the name of god, but
in the name of their families and the sisters they want to see
liberated from tyranny.
Richard Ballard
Day Brown <dayb...@cei.net> writes:
>The Sarmatians gave Roman General Proculus 100 virgins for
>a week. In exchange, they got him and five legions to cross
>Turkey and kick ass on the Persians so bad it was fifty years
>before the Persians tried to come back to the Caucuses. It was
>a deal he could not refuse. It was also a deal that only the
>mothers and grandmothers had the moral authority to make.
>And only a deal that women in power would have the creativity
>to come up with.
I believe that women "entertainers" traveled with the Roman
Legions. Their presence boosted legionaires' morale and
discouraged the legionaires from fraternizing with civilian
populations.
No reference, from memory.
Richard Ballard MSEE CNA4 KD0AZ
--
Consultant specializing in computer networks, imaging, and security
Listed as rjballard in "Friends & Favorites" at www.amazon.com
Last book review: "The Immortals" by Andrew Neiderman
Day Brown
> I believe that women "entertainers" traveled with the Roman
> Legions. Their presence boosted legionaires' morale and
> discouraged the legionaires from fraternizing with civilian
> populations.
>
> No reference, from memory.
Another incident comes to mind which cost the Romans, when
general Varus took two legions into the Black Forest and
was never seen again. It boggles my mind. We lost 147 men
at the Little Big Horn with Custer, and the whole Nation
freaked; The Romans lost something in excess of 12,000
out of a much smaller population. I think every family
in Rome lost someone.
The point being, that someone knew Varus was going in, and
was ready for him. The witches of the 'Black Forest' were
infamous even in midieval times. There are numerous extant
letters to the bishop explaining that some brother had been
AWOL because he had been 'bewitched', and that the witches
had 'had their way with him.' I'll bet. I can see them
using sex to motivate him to bust ass for them all summer
and get the harvest in, but then send him back to the
Bishop, and let the monastery feed him thru the winter.
The witches send some bimbos into the camps to suck up to
the officers, and the male macho ego thinks it is cause
he's such a fine specimen and cant keep it in his kilt. It
has always worked, and always will. How many women have
slept their way up thru the glass ceiling?
Richard Ballard
Day Brown <dayb...@cei.net> writes:
>Richard Ballard wrote:
>
>>I believe that women "entertainers" traveled with the Roman
>>Legions. Their presence boosted legionaires' morale and
>>discouraged the legionaires from fraternizing with civilian
>>populations.
>>
>> No reference, from memory.
>
>hardly seems necessary. The reports are too abundant.
>
>Another incident comes to mind which cost the Romans, when
>general Varus took two legions into the Black Forest and
>was never seen again. It boggles my mind. We lost 147 men
>at the Little Big Horn with Custer, and the whole Nation
>freaked; The Romans lost something in excess of 12,000
>out of a much smaller population. I think every family
>in Rome lost someone.
>
>The point being, that someone knew Varus was going in, and
>was ready for him. The witches of the 'Black Forest' were
>infamous even in midieval times. There are numerous extant
>letters to the bishop explaining that some brother had been
>AWOL because he had been 'bewitched', and that the witches
>had 'had their way with him.' I'll bet. I can see them
>using sex to motivate him to bust ass for them all summer
>and get the harvest in, but then send him back to the
>Bishop, and let the monastery feed him thru the winter.
You miss my point. The Roman legions did not want to
fraternize with indigenous populations, so they brought their
own women with them and took care of themselves. This solution
also avoided language problems and difficulties with bitter
conquered women.
<snip>
My opinions.
Day Brown
> You miss my point. The Roman legions did not want to
> fraternize with indigenous populations, so they brought their
> own women with them and took care of themselves. This solution
> also avoided language problems and difficulties with bitter
> conquered women.
they were ever, or any army ever, satisfied, and
were, like every army since, eager to explore novel
vaginal orifices.
what the generals wanted, and what the men did, were
not always the same. Even the leaders themselves, as
leaders (Condit & Clinton) now, were not able to
abide by their own rules.
Which is an advantage ancient witches had, that they
tried to avoid making rules that would not be kept.
Of course the male leaders only had the tools of
negative re-inforcement, violence and threats, to try
to control men, whereas the witches had vaginal orifices
which they were willing to apply as a tool of positive
re-inforcement. Whether the Roman term, referring to
them as 'poisoners' was accurate I cannot say, but
for sure they also had the positive re-inforcement of
health services in an era when death by disease came
early and often.
What is transitioning now, is that women can make the
very same threats of violence with modern weapons,
whereas formerly only men had the physical strength
to effectively use weapons. So, while the male leaders
have lost an advantage, women, willing to use the
methods of the ancient witches, have not, but can
avail themselves of both positive and negative
re-inforcement. A no-brainer as to who will win.
Nightshade and Flat
"Day Brown" <dayb...@cei.net> wrote in message
news:3BA59CAB...@cei.net...
Well, even the Romans were dismayed by the ferocity of the Picts and Celts,
whose women went into battle naked and fought smeared with gore just as the
men did. (Boudicea made a good showing for awhile, but the numbers were
against her.) Physical strength is not the only way to win a battle, as the
martial arts traditions of Asia prove.
On a side note, I saw on television a few weeks ago that in the Phillipines,
women have a great majority on the police force, and they have proven far
more effective in quelling violence than their male counterparts. Not
through physical strength or through their shooting, either.
Love & Laughter,
Nightshade
Richard Ballard
Day Brown <dayb...@cei.net> writes:
I recognize that you do not speak for all women, but this
thread is becoming very hostile.
Are you implying that all men should learn to take care
of themselves, and exclude women from their lives?
aa
BTW, I'm still waiting for that spell you cast on me 3 or 4 years ago
(During your warlocking stage) to take effect...
Remember,
Tale= a story
sin= an old archers term meaning to fall short of the target
Talesin= a storyteller who always falls short...
"Special Guest Appearance by The Talesin" <witc...@bigfoot.XXcom> wrote in
message news:wxAm7.260158$GN.36...@typhoon.kc.rr.com...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.277 / Virus Database: 146 - Release Date: 09/06/2001
Day Brown
> I recognize that you do not speak for all women, but this
> thread is becoming very hostile.
noting how I see the culture to be evolving. The negative
re-inforcement of threats and violence have always been a
part of controlling the behavior of both sexes. What is
new, as noted with Phillipine female cops, is that size is
no longer an advantage. And in the case of women on the
beat, the fact is that emotionally aggressive men react
differently to women authority figures, far less often
with more physical violence.
You even see it in dogfights, where a male will go for
the kill, but when fighting an alpha female, will only
try to inflict pain without injury. He does not want to
kill something he might want to fuck later.
> Are you implying that all men should learn to take care
> of themselves, and exclude women from their lives?
Nope. Consider the Etruscans. The Romans report that the
women were so wanton and free that no one knew who sired
the children, and that the kids were all raised by the
whole village.
But now, go into the tombs, and look at all the loving
couples obviously devoted to each other. Only conclusion
I can draw is that sexual exclusivity was not the symbol
of attachment. That had to be earned the same way done
with friends, by sharing good company.
Richard Ballard
Day Brown <dayb...@cei.net> writes:
>Richard Ballard wrote:
>
>>I recognize that you do not speak for all women, but this
>>thread is becoming very hostile.
>
>I'm not even female, ...
I apologize for my mistake.
> ... so I dont speak for any of them. Just
>noting how I see the culture to be evolving. The negative
>re-inforcement of threats and violence have always been a
>part of controlling the behavior of both sexes. What is
>new, as noted with Phillipine female cops, is that size is
>no longer an advantage. And in the case of women on the
>beat, the fact is that emotionally aggressive men react
>differently to women authority figures, far less often
>with more physical violence.
Your statement often is correct -- the underlying psychology
is that female officers initially appear less threatening, and
are less likely to *automatically* trigger hostility or violence.
(This does not necessarily equate to psychological positive
reinforcement.) The EXCEPTION is when female officers are
forced to deal with individuals with impaired judgment (e.g.,
chronic alcoholics or drug addicts). These impaired individuals
might be incapable of differentiating between male and female
officers when confronted by a lone officer -- they react to
"a cop". In this case, a female officer (of smaller stature
than the average male officer) might require use of deadly force
(draw her sidearm) to control an individual in cases where a
larger male officer could handle the situation merely by
being more physically menacing. [Comment: I believe that no
armed officer wants to grapple with an opponent and risk the
opponent's seizing their sidearm during the struggle.] In my
opinion, anytime an officer draws his/her sidearm the officer
has used deadly force, an event to be avoided.
>You even see it in dogfights, where a male will go for
>the kill, but when fighting an alpha female, will only
>try to inflict pain without injury. He does not want to
>kill something he might want to fuck later.
Your example is inappropriate because canine psychology
differs from human psychology. Canines are pack animals,
the pack is structured, and the pack leader (alpha canine)
is male, typically the largest strongest adult male.
(Canine females also have a "pecking order".) When
canine males and females fight it is a disciplinary matter,
not a fight to the death. Male canines inflict minimal
damage on female canines (and smaller male canines)
because the male canines instinctively want the pack
to survive. [Reference: Junior-level animal psychology
course in college.] This pack social structure supports
pack survival by avoiding anarchy and constant battle within
the pack. I believe that (unfortunately) human conflict is
not structured equivalently.
>>Are you implying that all men should learn to take care
>>of themselves, and exclude women from their lives?
>
>Nope. Consider the Etruscans. The Romans report that the
>women were so wanton and free that no one knew who sired
>the children, and that the kids were all raised by the
>whole village.
>
>But now, go into the tombs, and look at all the loving
>couples obviously devoted to each other. Only conclusion
>I can draw is that sexual exclusivity was not the symbol
>of attachment. That had to be earned the same way done
>with friends, by sharing good company.
Your example predates sexually-transmitted diseases such
as HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, I believe that communal raising
of children weakens the nuclear family, and makes it more
difficult for parents to instill their own moral and ethical
values in their children.
My opinions.
Day Brown
> I apologize for my mistake.
...Etruscan culture.
> as HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, I believe that communal raising
> of children weakens the nuclear family, and makes it more
> difficult for parents to instill their own moral and ethical
> values in their children.
that human is not, but here you say it is. I say
the more primitive still has some effect, but from
the standpoint of female police, I'd recommend mace
or a taser rather than a larger male officer trying
to 'manhandle' a suspect.
But my opinion is not the critical factor in any of
these cases. The liberation of women is not going
away, at least for talented and intelligent females.
They no longer need the physical protection of a man,
and they rely on their own career to provide for the
support of progeny.
Had male philandering, especially of men of means,
been less, and their ability therefore to support a
wife and kids more reliable, I dont spoze even smart
women would have given the idea of doing without the
institution of marriage any serious thought.
However, the homeless population contains enough women
in their 40's & 50's who were dumped for a younger one.
Smart young women, paying attention, have seen this, and
looked ahead, wanting something more than the typical
50-50 chance that the marriage they might get into will
be one that lasts.
Communal life weakens the nuclear family, but I dont see
that that is bad for children. We see happy kids being
raised in indigenous tribal longhouses. To say that such
culture is backward, may be, but it dont prove that they
were not happy and did not have decent lives.
There may be a way to integrate high technology and the
communal lifestyle. For one thing, any closed group can
make sure there are no carriers of any contagious disease,
not just the STDs. For another, the hand crafts have many
emotional and instinctive satisfactions, while communal
life has a low enough cost of living to make the affordable.
Lastly, I saw video of an Amazon tribe that was marketing
it's crafts on the web.