FUller is an idiot
Dan Cash
>Let this be the beginning, my friends, of a boycott of all things Fuller. In
>short, they no longer exist.
>--Rich
May I refer you to Eric Marsh's post "A proposed Boycott of Fuller &
Associates, 12/8/95.
I wonder if this may be an alternative to a moderated newsgroup,
considering the apparently huge amount of work this would involve, and
many members' opposition to it. At the very least, we could try it
until the debates over will we/won't we and the wording of the charter
are worked out.
Dan
Neal Klein
> May I refer you to Eric Marsh's post "A proposed Boycott of Fuller &
> Associates, 12/8/95.
>
> I wonder if this may be an alternative to a moderated newsgroup,
> considering the apparently huge amount of work this would involve, and
> many members' opposition to it. At the very least, we could try it
> until the debates over will we/won't we and the wording of the charter
> are worked out.
Look, I don't support flame wars and bashing, but this newsgroup has
a HUGE chunk of itself devoted to bashing the Fullers et. al. and
coming up with ways to rid ourselves of them. Now that JMS has a way
to receive our feedback, we can IGNORE these abusive microbrains and
get on with healthy discussions about topics that interest us.
I just looked at a several days worth of posts and I saw a
smattering of posts from the named idjits. I pity Theron because he
is now without the object of his abuse and envy, so he relies on
making more arguments about being attacked. And what is worse, he's
actually got a POINT! (God help me for agreeing with such a
jackass.) There are people venting at the trio worse than I have
seen the trio do, and it justifies their martyr complexes.
Let's ignore them. Once and for all. Please. These jokers have had
more free press than they deserve. Ignore them and they will have no
more fun. Ignore them and they will lose their importance and maybe
the newsgroup will have a day when their names never appear in a
Subject header again.
--
Neal Klein e-mail: Neal...@aol.com
"The Universe knows what it is doing." - Delenn
Rich Handley
actually believes that there are people on this board with even an inkling of
interest in what he's saying. He reminds me of one of those pathetic souls
you see standing in major cities yelling at passersby about the end of the
world, the damnation of their souls, it's not too late to convert, etc.... No
one ever stops to listen to them, but they'll still stand on the same street
corner for eight hours and harrass everyone around them.
Listen, a lot of you are letting him and his cronies bother you. I say, "Why
bother?" The only things that should bother you are those that matter in
life, those that make a difference in the cosmic scheme of things. Are these
guys assholes? Certainly. Are they blowhards? Most definitely. Do I wish
they'd crawl back under their birth-rocks and rejoin the primordial ooze that
makes up their ancestry? Of course.
However, is my feeling this way going to, in any way, drive these guys from
the board? No way. You have to realize that Fuller and the others who
supposedly drove JMS away are desparate for attention. They're probably dull,
timid little sheep in the real world who never stand up to anyone and never
have the balls even to send back a hamburger that's uncooked, let alone
boisterously spout ignorant drivel as they do here. In short, their
immaturity and ranting here is probably compensation for something else that's
lacking in their lives. Maybe their mothers made them wear dresses when they
were kids. Maybe they haven't had dates since 1972. Maybe they have tiny
penisis. I don't know, and frankly, I don't care. What really matters is
that they're definitely not going anywhere, either here or in real life.
So, how best to deal with them? Do we send them harrassing e-mail? Do we
post death threats? Do we let them bait us with statements that are obviously
made with the sole intention of getting much-needed attention that they can't
get from their mothers or in singles' bars?
No, the only way to deal with these morons is to ignore them. Just ignore
them. Don't respond to anything else they write. Don't e-mail them about
anything. The moment you see anything from them, don't read it. Don't even
refer to them in postings made to others. In short, deny their existence.
There's nothing that an exhibitionist hates more than having no audience.
When all of the hoopla is gone, these slugs will presumably crawl back into
their slimepits. And if they don't, it's still no problem, because we will
all still have the option of ignoring them.
Fuller and his associates may intend to ruin your day. But don't let them.
Just console yourself with the knowledge that nothing they say has any merit.
They're Fuller themselves, excusing the pun. And they think they're more
important and intelligent than they really are, which is why they try to stick
big words and strong-sounding phrases into their posts, and which is why they
make broad-reaching accusations that have no basis in any reality with which
the rest of us are familiar.
Theron Fuller
(Stuff Deleted)
>I wonder if this may be an alternative to a moderated newsgroup,
>considering the apparently huge amount of work this would involve, and
>many members' opposition to it. At the very least, we could try it
>until the debates over will we/won't we and the wording of the charter
>are worked out.
>
>Dan
>
I would be delighted if someone would compile my posts and re-post them
here. For one thing, it would put an end to all the "Fuller says B5
sux, calls JMS a liar, and is continually harrassing JMS" bullshit.
But be careful, compilation-tactic doors swing both ways. For example,
there's a thread where Joe Straczynski posts a phony e-mail message on
this newsgroup, falsely accuses Deb Fuller of harrassment, and urges
his fans to send harrassing e-mail to a Ms. Cynthia Barnes. It's real
easy to post this in response to any kind of "Fuller Boycott" bullshit.
as...@orion.alaska.edu
I haven't seen the post with the allegdely phony e-mail message
from Deb Fuller, so I can't say for sure if it's true or false. I'm
certainly not going to believe it's true, Fuller, until you can prove that
the message was phony and not one she actually sent him. If you can provide
outside evidence to substantiate that claim, then I will agree that JMS was
wrong to do this. But if you can't, then there's no reason I should take
your word over his, since you have posted many false things to this group
before. (Oh, btw, just remember, your word does NOT equal proof, which you
seem to believe, at times).
Theron Fuller
> I haven't seen the post with the allegdely phony e-mail message
>from Deb Fuller, so I can't say for sure if it's true or false. I'm
>certainly not going to believe it's true, Fuller, until you can prove
that the message was phony and not one she actually sent him. If you
>can provide outside evidence to substantiate that claim, then I will
>agree that >JMS was wrong to do this. But if you can't, then there's
>no reason I >should take your word over his, since you have posted
>many false >things to this group before. (Oh, btw, just remember, your
>word does >NOT equal proof, which you seem to believe, at times).
This is a case of "Show me yours, I'll show you mine." I'm not going
to get into a "My collection of your posts are uglier than your
collection of my posts" unless somebody else wants to start it in some
sort of "boycott" bullshit.
If you want proof, ask Jay Denebeim for details of the Cynthia Barnes
affair. He seems to speak for Joe Straczynski here
Charles J Walther
Here Here. I agree with uyou completely.
--
Send Replies to the Following
Charles J. Walther
a024...@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us
Alan D Earhart
Theron Fuller <ful...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In <4aa0tc$1f...@news.doit.wisc.edu> dmc...@students.wisc.edu (Dan Cash)
>(Stuff Deleted)
>
>>I wonder if this may be an alternative to a moderated newsgroup,
>>considering the apparently huge amount of work this would involve, and
>>many members' opposition to it. At the very least, we could try it
>>until the debates over will we/won't we and the wording of the charter
>>are worked out.
>>
>>Dan
>>
>I would be delighted if someone would compile my posts and re-post them
>here. For one thing, it would put an end to all the "Fuller says B5
>sux, calls JMS a liar, and is continually harrassing JMS" bullshit.
>
>But be careful, compilation-tactic doors swing both ways. For example,
>there's a thread where Joe Straczynski posts a phony e-mail message on
>this newsgroup, falsely accuses Deb Fuller of harrassment, and urges
>his fans to send harrassing e-mail to a Ms. Cynthia Barnes. It's real
>easy to post this in response to any kind of "Fuller Boycott" bullshit.
Is 'phony' the correct word to use? I don't think so. The email message
he posted was one in which he misunderstood the message and where it
came from. I'm not saying that this validates the posting. However, you
have a habit of distorting some things.
Also, I've never read any post by you stating that JMS is/was a liar.
You have made allusions to some untruths, though, and those can be
interpreted in many ways.
as...@orion.alaska.edu
But I didn't ask about your collection of posts, or threaten
to post my collection of posts (which I don't have, incidentally). I
simply asked you to prove that JMS did fabricate this email message
from Deb Fuller. I asked for you to show outside evidence that this
accusation was true, that's all. I never said I wanted to start a
"post war." Which brings us back to the original question, can you
prove your allegations?
Theron Fuller
(Stuff Deleted)
> But I didn't ask about your collection of posts, or threaten
>to post my collection of posts (which I don't have, incidentally). I
>simply asked you to prove that JMS did fabricate this email message
>from Deb Fuller. I asked for you to show outside evidence that this
>accusation was true, that's all. I never said I wanted to start a
>"post war." Which brings us back to the original question, can you
>prove your allegations?
Joe Straczynski posted a phony e-mail message on this newsgroup,
asserted that it was from Deb Fuller, and urged everyone to e-mail Ms.
Cynthia Barnes and complain about Deb Fuller's "harrassment" of him.
This resulted in a flood of e-mail to a Ms. Cynthis Barnes, and lots of
flames directed toward Deb Fuller on this newsgroup.
Ms. Barnes followed up Joe Straczynski's post with a post of her own to
this newsgroup stating she had never received such an e-mail from Joe
Straczynski, complained about the flood of e-mail she was receiving,
and requested an immediate end to it.
Joe Straczynski made no attempt to verify with Deb Fuller that Deb had
sent Ms. Barnes e-mail about anything, and if so, that the message he
posted was indeed from Deb. Even a casual examination of the "e-mail
message" indicated it was of suspicious origin.
That's the facts. Joe Straczynsi's actions and those of his fans
harrassed both Cynthia Barnes and Deb Fuller.
I don't see where any burden of proof is on me in this situation. I
suggest you ask Joe Straczyski for whatever proof you need, then post
that proof on this newsgroup to refute me. As Joe Straczynski once
noted, I'm not going to do all your homework for you.
Christine Raasch
: In <1995Dec14...@orion.alaska.edu> as...@orion.alaska.edu writes:
[snip]
:
: >... Which brings us back to the original question, can you
: >prove your allegations?
:
: Joe Straczynski posted a phony e-mail message on this newsgroup,
: asserted that it was from Deb Fuller, and urged everyone to e-mail Ms.
: Cynthia Barnes and complain about Deb Fuller's "harrassment" of him.
: This resulted in a flood of e-mail to a Ms. Cynthis Barnes, and lots of
: flames directed toward Deb Fuller on this newsgroup.
Okay, I was hoping this would die down, but it's back and getting hotter,
so...here's what really happened; no flames, just the facts:
Dateline: March 15 1995
A heated argument had taken place in the previous few days, involving
JMS and Deb Fuller (among others, of course) about B5 ratings
(GMT times from posts)
02:56 JMS posted that he had gotten e-mail indicating he was being accused
of sexual harassment (he did *NOT* post the e-mail), and asked that
people tell the administrator in charge, CB, "what you've seen"
13:37 Deb posted that she had not filed any sexual harassment complaint,
and didn't know CB, who was not even at her university
16:32 JMS posted that people should stop contacting CB
17:00 JMS posted that he is "confused": he had received e-mail from
CB and another person, but now CB tells him no claim has been filed
18:18 Deb posted that she had actually e-mailed SASH-L, a sexual-
harassment listserv, to ask about making a harassment claim for
"harassing flames"
I have these posts if you wish to see them. CB also posted briefly
asking people not to e-mail (I don't have that one, but it was also
the same day).
There was no e-mail posted by any party. Remember, JMS's posts are
logged; you can check yourself. Apparently, someone gave JMS some
erroneous information (and, perhaps, forwarded e-mail from SASH-L).
Okay, here's the IMHO part:
Theron, I'm not saying JMS was right to post what he did. I do think
it is exaggeration to say there were lots of flames posted to Deb
because of this; I recall the incident was cleared up rather quickly,
mainly because both Deb and Jon Blum posted explanatory follow-ups
before any explosion occurred.
If you want to say JMS posted without thinking, well, I agree. But I
*don't* agree with this tactic of pointing out JMS's mistakes as a
defense for your own. Come on, you are a cool, collected person who
usually thinks things through (often to insidious ends, ha-HA! ;-).
You made a small etiquette boo-boo by posting someone's idiotic e-mail
flame (and I think you were just trying to be funny, not so much
acting in anger). Of course, everyone jumped on you about it because
you are Chief Pariah in Charge (that selfsame everyone did NOT jump on
someone else who posted e-mail in another thread to point out a
flamer's ironic username). Sigh. I'm at a loss as to how to stop
this kind of thing. Can everyone just take a pill, please?
- Chris
--
Christine C. Raasch <*> Neuromuscular Biomechanist <*> Bikerbabe
Stanford University <*> VA Palo Alto Rehab R&D Ctr <*> 86 CB700S
"...short, to the point, utterly useless, and totally consistent."
Robert W. Igo
>I don't see where any burden of proof is on me in this situation. I
>suggest you ask Joe Straczyski for whatever proof you need, then post
>that proof on this newsgroup to refute me.
which had no proof to back them up, and had done so on more than one occasion,
it would cause Cheron's credibility and believability to drop rapidly, to the
point where I wouldn't believe Cheron if Cheron told me my name is Robert.
There's an interesting parable about a boy who cried wolf. Perhaps you've never
read it?
[********************** Bob Igo (gryp...@cmu.edu) **********************]
"There're enough people in the world that you're going to be able to
find every kind of moron there is." --Gerry Deckert
[************** http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~gryphon **************]
Theron Fuller
<gryp...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
(Stuff Deleted)
>It's all about credibility. If someone, say, Cheron Muller, had made
>statements which had no proof to back them up, and had done so on more
>than one occasion, it would cause Cheron's credibility and
>believability to drop rapidly, to the point where I wouldn't believe
Cheron if Cheron told me my name is Robert.
Which is why Cheron ain't going to get caught up in the "your proof
isn't good enough. Send me a notorized statement from everyone
involved" game. I suggest you or anyone else ask for the details of
the Cynthia Barnes incident from whomever you consider credible.
>
>There's an interesting parable about a boy who cried wolf. Perhaps
>you've never read it?
Sure. When Fuller "cried wolf" about the relationship between AOL and
Joe Straczynski, Joe Straczynski broke his own resolve never to respond
to me again and pointed out I was wrong. And I was flamed by the Sheep
and some others for my action.
So, why doesn't someone send Joe Straczynski Fuller's posts in "a
private mail message" so he can again attack me for "crying wolf."
Theron Fuller
(Stuff Deleted)
> So JMS never posted a false email message from Deb Fuller.
>So, Theron's accusation has been proven false. Thank you for clearing
>this up.
>
> Btw, Theron, whenever anyone makes an accusation about anyone
>else, the burden of proof is on the accuser to prove it is true, not
>the accused to prove it isn't. If it were the other way around, anyone
>could accuse anyone else of basically anything, and the accused would
>then have to spend possibly enormous amounts of time defending himself
>(which seems to be what you want JMS to do). Sensibly, our system
>places the burden on the accuser.
>
O.K. then I'll put it in terms that even the most literal-minded can
understand. Joe Straczynski's actions, as described above are as
harrassing and on a low a level of ethics, or lower, than any of the
incidents or acts he condemns Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland for.
Another assertion. Anyone who examines the whole history of Joe
Straczynski's participation on this newsgroup and applies the same
standards of judgement to his actions as are applied to those of
Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland will conclude that many of his actions
are comparable to those he is condemning.
Final assertion. Some of those who are the most verbal critics of
Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland, such as Jay Denebeim, have credibility
and integrity problems of their own. Denebeim, for example, has been
accused on this newsgroup of taking video tapes under promise of
copying Babylon 5 episodes and never returning them.
Suggestion. Sometimes when you're in a tranquil and reflective
mood--perhaps sitting on the john and contemplating; or taking a
reflective walk in the park or woods--ask the philosophical question:
Why would any professional writer get angry and upset by the written
words of anyone else to the point of allowing those words to drive
him/her away from dialogue with his/her audience.
Wouldn't any professional writer consider any attempt to intefere with
his/her contact with his/her audience through verbal harrassment and
"stalking" as an act of intolerable censorship?
Ask yourself: "What words would upset a professional writer,
screenwriter, and television producer away from interaction with
his/her fans?"
If you're honest with yourself, and actually think instead of repeating
phrases you've programmed yourself to accept as a substitute for the
difficult and uncomfortable task of thinking, you may surprise yourself
with the conclusions you draw.
as...@orion.alaska.edu
[snip]
Slc.dennis Bishop
I never see what he has to say. If everyone would do the same thing,
very soon he'id find no one reading his messages!
... It IS Babylon 4!
___ Mountain Reader II - #Demo 001
Theron Fuller
(Stuff Deleted)
> Excuse me? What actions are those? Sure, if JMS had posted a
>false email message, that would indeed have shown a low level of
>ethics on his part. But the facts indicate that he did no such thing.
Therefore, you were either mistaken, or lied. Now, I won't presume to
>say which, but either way, you owe JMS an apology. But do you
>apologize? No. You simply change the subject and try to draw attention
>away from the fact that you made a false accusation. Well, I certainly
>won't be taking any of your accusations seriously again.
I'll type this real slow for those who move their lips as they read my
posts. >Really< examine what Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland have posted
(not what you >think< they've posted, or not what some net clown like
Jay Denebeim keeps insisting we've posted). Now compare its substance
and impact in terms of "harrassment" and "stalking" to what Joe
Straczynski has posted during his flame wars and unprovoked rants
against Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland.
I assert you will find that Joe Straczynski's actions in the Cynthia
Barnes affair to be as questionable, and if you're really objective,
even more questionable as anything Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland have
ever done to Joe Straczynski.
Furthermore, if you're honest with yourself, you'll find his various
flames and unprovoked rants against Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland to be
as wild and as reprehensible as anything Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
have ever aimed at Joe Straczyski.
As for apologies, even some of the Net clowns on this newsgroup have
pointed out to Joe Straczynski that he has flamed me in error on
occasion. And the Great Man has >never< apologized to me for his
flames, or the subsequent manure dumped on me by his Sheep in response
to the mistaken flame.
When I mis-spoke about Joe Straczynski's relationship with America on
Line, I admitted my mistake, and if Joe Straczysnki wants an apology
for my statements in this regard, all he has to do is ask.
If Joe Straczysnki feels I'v substantively misrepresented his actions
in the Cynthia Barnes affair, same situation.
as...@orion.alaska.edu
> In <1995Dec17...@orion.alaska.edu> as...@orion.alaska.edu writes:
> (Stuff Deleted)
>
>>So, Theron's accusation has been proven false. Thank you for clearing
>>this up.
>>
>> Btw, Theron, whenever anyone makes an accusation about anyone
>>else, the burden of proof is on the accuser to prove it is true, not
>>the accused to prove it isn't. If it were the other way around, anyone
>>could accuse anyone else of basically anything, and the accused would
>>then have to spend possibly enormous amounts of time defending himself
>>(which seems to be what you want JMS to do). Sensibly, our system
>>places the burden on the accuser.
>>
>
> understand. Joe Straczynski's actions, as described above are as
> harrassing and on a low a level of ethics, or lower, than any of the
> incidents or acts he condemns Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland for.
[snip]
Britton Steven C
: (Stuff Deleted)
: Wouldn't any professional writer consider any attempt to intefere with
: his/her contact with his/her audience through verbal harrassment and
: "stalking" as an act of intolerable censorship?
: Ask yourself: "What words would upset a professional writer,
: screenwriter, and television producer away from interaction with
: his/her fans?"
: If you're honest with yourself, and actually think instead of repeating
: phrases you've programmed yourself to accept as a substitute for the
: difficult and uncomfortable task of thinking, you may surprise yourself
: with the conclusions you draw.
It all boils down to one thing -- jms was on here for his own enjoyment.
He is a hobbyist like the rest of us. Some people (Thaxton et al) made
the environment less than favourable (to say the least). Thus, he left.
In his position, I would too. He didn't have to be on here in the first
place. It's like what happened one time at my old campus radio station -
a bunch of volunteers signed a petition against a station policy, and
were all fired for it. If I were one of them, I'd be saying, "fine. I
wasn't being paid to be there, they don't want me there, so I won't
go."
Put another way: the few have ruined it for the many.
--
Our Last, Best Hope for Good Government... The Reform Party of Canada
* Steven C. Britton Virtual Admiral Beaker McNugget
* brit...@cuug.ab.ca and his Amazing Elbow Sparky
Morgan
ful...@ix.netcom.com(Theron "Theron Fuller " writes
>or not what some net clown like Jay Denebeim
Interesting to note, that if we were fortunate enough to have a
moderated group to participate in, comments such as above, would
result in the trib being bounced as it is personally abusive.
--
Morgan
Baa, baa black sheep have you any wool?
Yes ma'am, yes ma'am three bags full.
One for the master, and one for the dame,
and one for the little girl who lives down the lane.
Theron Fuller
writes:
(Stuff Deleted)
>Interesting to note, that if we were fortunate enough to have a
>moderated group to participate in, comments such as above, would
>result in the trib being bounced as it is personally abusive.
>
>
Also interesting to note that Jay Denebeim, one of the major forces for
moderation and one of the persons who continually attacks the integrity
of Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland has had his own integrity questioned
in a quite serious manner on this newsgroup, and has neither denied nor
explained his questionable actions.
And if your concern is the elimination of personally abusive posts on
this newsgroup, then focus your attention on Jay Denebeim's endless
stream of personal abuse. His continuing flames, trolls, and personal
attacks are as bad as, or worse than anything he claims to be working
to eliminate.
I invite you to objectively examine Jay Denebeim's comments regarding
Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland over the past several weeks. I would be
very interested in your conclusions. In your opinion, has Jay been
engaging in a campaign of personal abuse under the guise of advocating
newsgroup moderation?
And while we're discussing personal attacks, Morgan, what is the
motivation for your above post? Are your comments motivated solely by
a concern for controlling personal abuse in all its forms on this or
some moderated newsgroup, or are you just taking the opportunity for
your own form of personal attack?
Jeff Wilson
>
>Also interesting to note that Jay Denebeim, one of the major forces for
>moderation and one of the persons who continually attacks the integrity
>of Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland has had his own integrity questioned
>in a quite serious manner on this newsgroup, and has neither denied nor
>explained his questionable actions.
>
>And if your concern is the elimination of personally abusive posts on
>this newsgroup, then focus your attention on Jay Denebeim's endless
>stream of personal abuse. His continuing flames, trolls, and personal
>attacks are as bad as, or worse than anything he claims to be working
>to eliminate.
>
You can dish it out...but you sure can't take it!
>I invite you to objectively examine Jay Denebeim's comments regarding
>Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland over the past several weeks. I would be
>very interested in your conclusions. In your opinion, has Jay been
>engaging in a campaign of personal abuse under the guise of advocating
>newsgroup moderation?
>
My opinion, even though no one asked, is that Jay's posts are right on. It's
funny how the critics and flamers are all alike in any newsgroup you go to.
They all through around criticisms while whining about the abuse they get
back in return. They also lump anyone who disagrees with their opinions as
mindless sheep. I find it amuzing how easy it really is to sit back and
criticize the work of others while not producing a thing. All this while at
the same time thinking their doing everyone a service only they can provide.
I can't understand why these people can't comprehend the difference between
constructive criticism and personal attacks (unless, of course, it's directed
at them). They also can't seem to understand that Bab5 to us is a TV show,
but to JMS it's a life. Naturally, he takes criticism of the show a little
more personally than anyone else. Also, the criticisms about JMS and his
"sticking it" to the fans for money. OF COURSE HE WANTS MONEY! Doesn't
everyone? Bab5 is how he makes a living! If no one pays for it, the show
will not be broadcast. If it's only "just a show", why do these
individuals spend SO much time critiquing it? If you don't like it...leave.
It's that simple. We certainly do not need your advice or opinions in order
to decide for ourselves if we like the show.
Glad to get that off my chest...
--
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
In space, no one can hear you scream!!
Jeff Wilson
jdwi...@bnr.ca
Richardson, Tx - my opinions are...MINE.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Teresa Lhotka
>In <819336...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
>writes:
>
>And while we're discussing personal attacks, Morgan, what is the
>motivation for your above post? Are your comments motivated solely by
>a concern for controlling personal abuse in all its forms on this or
>some moderated newsgroup, or are you just taking the opportunity for
>your own form of personal attack?
Now wait a minute. I have lurked here for quite some time now,
and I have not seen Morgan engage in "abusive" behavior. I HAVE seen
other people use offensive language, call you names, etc. HOWEVER, I
have never known Morgan to use offensive language.
Her posts have been humerous, erotic, or quietly resistant to
abuse (as in the mass mailings from that raceist org.). Morgan is
noting but an asset to this group.
She was pointing out that personal attacks against anyone are not
productive, and in a moderated group they would be chucked out.
I have seen some posts from you that were truly reasonable. If
you limited yourself to those, you would be considered an asset as
well.
--
--
Kemaris
kem...@winternet.com
What's the difference between an optimist and a pessimist? An
optimist believes that he lives in the best of all possible worlds...a
pessimist fears the same.
--Over-heard paraphrase of a quote of unknown origin.
Robert W. Igo
>When I mis-spoke about Joe Straczynski's relationship with America on
>Line, I admitted my mistake, and if Joe Straczysnki wants an apology
>for my statements in this regard, all he has to do is ask.
>
>If Joe Straczysnki feels I'v substantively misrepresented his actions
>in the Cynthia Barnes affair, same situation.
incident, this implies to me that you're ready to admit that you were wrong.
Is this what you meant?
Besides, wanting jms to ask you for your apology was the wrong move, and it's
inconsistent with what you've done so far. See, he doesn't care whether or
not you apologize, but I can understand your desire to want him to acknowledge
you directly again. That would have been a big payoff for you, but I don't
see it happening.
Here's what you should have done. You should have apologized to JMS anyway,
in a big open way. Then you'd be the bigger man. "Oh, that salty old JMS
would never apologize for anything he did wrong, but look, everyone, I admit
when I bite the big one!" 100 points for you.
But I've jinxed you, since if you did it now, you'd have just followed the
advice of one of us sheep. Man, that's pretty low, following a sheep.
Baa.
Even so, I think most of us would be in agreement that if you avoided these
situations where you would have to apologize in the first place,
we'd all be happier.
[********************** Bob Igo (gryp...@cmu.edu) **********************]
"You can only handle so many Drosophila before you succumb to the urge
to eat them." -- Phil Stroffolino
[************** http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~gryphon **************]
as...@orion.alaska.edu
> In <1995Dec18...@orion.alaska.edu> as...@orion.alaska.edu writes:
>
> (Stuff Deleted)
>>false email message, that would indeed have shown a low level of
>>ethics on his part. But the facts indicate that he did no such thing.
> Therefore, you were either mistaken, or lied. Now, I won't presume to
>>say which, but either way, you owe JMS an apology. But do you
>>apologize? No. You simply change the subject and try to draw attention
>>away from the fact that you made a false accusation. Well, I certainly
>>won't be taking any of your accusations seriously again.
>
> posts. >Really< examine what Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland have posted
> (not what you >think< they've posted, or not what some net clown like
> Jay Denebeim keeps insisting we've posted). Now compare its substance
> and impact in terms of "harrassment" and "stalking" to what Joe
> Straczynski has posted during his flame wars and unprovoked rants
> against Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland.
[snip]
Ok, I'll type real slow too, since you seem to have missed my
point again. I wasn't making a sweeping generalization about Fuller/
Fuller/Thaxton/Holland. I wasn't even making a sweeping generalization
about you. My post dealt with *one* accusation from you, and one
accusation *only*. Now, let me put this as simply as I possibly can:
1) Did you assert that JMS posted a false email message from Deb
Fuller? A yes or no question. Answer: Yes
2) Did JMS in fact post a false email message from Deb Fuller? Again,
a yes or no question. Answer: No
3) What can we conclude about your accusation? Answer: That it was false.
4) What can we conclude about the reason you made a false accusation?
Answer: Nothing, since we cannot see into your mind. However, the only
possible explainations are either that you were mistaken, or lied.
5) If you lied, do you owe JMS an apology? Answer: Yes, because you
lied about his conduct.
6) If you were mistaken, do you owe JMS an apology? Answer: Yes, because
you were in error, and by apologizing, you admit to the truth of the
situation.
This one situation is all I was discussing in my posts on this
thread. Yet you respond by saying all sorts of things that are irrelavant
to this topic. You have yet to address the issue I originally raised,
which is about the allegedly false email message from Deb Fuller. I have
heard you refer to this message in other posts also, so I called you on
it. I'm not interested in hearing you or anyone else, on either side of
the issue, claim that they were grossly mistreated by the other. That'll
just lead to another flamewar, which I don't want. Now, can you respond
to this *one* issue I've raised here, without saying things like, "JMS
has been more abusive to me than I have ever been to him", which are
completely irrelavant to *this* topic?
KROMKAMP ANDY
Theron Fuller <ful...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>In <819336...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>
>writes:
>
>
>>Interesting to note, that if we were fortunate enough to have a
>>moderated group to participate in, comments such as above, would
>>result in the trib being bounced as it is personally abusive.
>>
>>
>moderation and one of the persons who continually attacks the integrity
>of Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland has had his own integrity questioned
>in a quite serious manner on this newsgroup, and has neither denied nor
>explained his questionable actions.
>
>And if your concern is the elimination of personally abusive posts on
>this newsgroup, then focus your attention on Jay Denebeim's endless
>stream of personal abuse. His continuing flames, trolls, and personal
>attacks are as bad as, or worse than anything he claims to be working
>to eliminate.
>
>Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland over the past several weeks. I would be
>very interested in your conclusions. In your opinion, has Jay been
>engaging in a campaign of personal abuse under the guise of advocating
>newsgroup moderation?
>
>motivation for your above post? Are your comments motivated solely by
>a concern for controlling personal abuse in all its forms on this or
>some moderated newsgroup, or are you just taking the opportunity for
>your own form of personal attack?
I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize for everybody shitting on
you and your 3 henchmen, but can you not see how it is justified considering
that YOU and THEM RUINED what made this group different than all other
groups on Usenet? Whatever you feel is right and whatever you feel is
justified, that basic truth remains throughout all of it. YOU. There is
nobody to blame but YOU and THEM. You excuse us for being angry and
resorting to the same personal attacks we have grown accustomed to from you.
Excuse JMS from doing the same. You are starting to get on this kick of
'Well, look at JMS's posts, they are every bit as viscios as mine' but the
sad truth is that your provoked every last one of them. So excuse JMS for
doing the same thing that you do, only BETTER, when prodded enough.
Andy K.
Theron Fuller
<gryp...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
(Stuff Deleted)
>Same situation? If you're ready to apologize about the Cynthia Barnes
>incident, this implies to me that you're ready to admit that you were
>wrong. Is this what you meant?
No. What I mean is that when I was wrong about Joe Straczynski's
relationship with America On Line, Joe Straczynski made sure his
message pointing out I was wrong was posted on this newsgroup. So,
even though Joe Straczynski isn't directly participating on this
newsgroup any more, he made sure he pointed out my mis-statement.
You will notice that he has made no such effort regarding my statements
about his actions in the Cynthia Barnes affair. And if you will read
the actual set of posts that took place, you will understand why. You
will discover that Joe Straczynski's actions in this incident are as
bad, or worse, as anything he has accused Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton Holland
of doing to him.
>
>Besides, wanting jms to ask you for your apology was the wrong move,
>and it's inconsistent with what you've done so far. See, he doesn't
>care whether or not you apologize, but I can understand your desire to
>want him to acknowledge you directly again. That would have been a
>big payoff for you, but I don't see it happening.
What I was pointing out is, that if Joe Straczynski is due an apology,
then Joe Straczynski as the injured party should ask for that apology.
Persons such as yourself who have only secondary, distorted information
and mistaken impressions about what took place are in no position to
demand an apology from me.
But Joe Straczynski never asked for an apology from me, because that
would have meant that he would have had to apologize to me when he
attacked me in error, and had his attack chihuahuas attack me. And Joe
Straczynski never exibited that much class and grace in his flame wars.
>
>Here's what you should have done. You should have apologized to JMS
>anyway, in a big open way. Then you'd be the bigger man. "Oh, that
>salty old JMS would never apologize for anything he did wrong, but
>look, everyone, I admit when I bite the big one!" 100 points for you.
I'll tell you what. You take the effort to read the series of messages
that were exchanged in the Cynthia Barnes affair. Then you can discuss
the situation from a position of knowledge, rather than a position of
ignorance. You'll be in a much better position to tell me what I
should have done.
>
>But I've jinxed you, since if you did it now, you'd have just followed
>the advice of one of us sheep. Man, that's pretty low, following a
>sheep.
>
>Baa.
>Even so, I think most of us would be in agreement that if you avoided
>these situations where you would have to apologize in the first place,
>we'd all be happier.
Again, read the Cynthia Barnes messages. Then you can make assertions
about my need for apologies to Joe Straczynski. Speak from an informed
postion instead of an ignorant position.
Jay Denebeim
Morgan <Mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <4b4o1o$j...@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>
> ful...@ix.netcom.com(Theron "Theron Fuller " writes
>
>
>
>moderated group to participate in, comments such as above, would
>result in the trib being bounced as it is personally abusive.
Hey Morgan,
Just ignore him. All he'll do is answer you with more flames.
Theron is unable to let anything slide. Untill everyone ignores him
he won't go away.
He's been in my killfile for several weeks now and, believe me,
things are much calmer around here. The only time I see any of his
text is when someone quotes him.
I guess he's ragging on me now huh? Well, Theron, this particular
target couldn't care less what your opinions are. So, by all means,
flame me all you want, you'll just continue to embarass yourself.
Jay
--
Jay Denebeim dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us
duke.edu!wolves!deepthot!denebeim
Fuck censorship! Oh *shit* there goes another 100, er $200,000
Jay Denebeim
<as...@orion.alaska.edu> wrote:
> Now, can you respond to this *one* issue I've raised here, without
> saying things like, "JMS has been more abusive to me than I have
> ever been to him", which are completely irrelavant to *this* topic?
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he won't do this. The sort of
behavior you outlined in your post is Theron's stock in trade. That's
how he works, he makes false, inflamatory, disgusting, accusations,
hopefully ones that cannot be proven, but if caught, he'll ignore the
evidence and take the argument on an irrelevant tangent.
As we've been saying, the only way to deal with him is to ignore him.
You won't be able to get him removed from the system he's posting on,
your flames and insults won't hurt him, heck he thrives on them.
Just ignore him, if you've got a killfile, use it, otherwise just
don't reply to him or if you can't keep from replying if you read him,
skip over his messages.
Until everyone does this, he won't go away.
Theron Fuller
writes:
(Stuff Deleted)
>You can dish it out...but you sure can't take it!
Depends on what's being ladled out, and if the disher-outer is on
target or not. I make a very poor victim, true.
>My opinion, even though no one asked, is that Jay's posts are right
>on. It's funny how the critics and flamers are all alike in any
>newsgroup you go to. They all through around criticisms while whining
>about the abuse they get back in return. They also lump anyone who
>disagrees with their opinions as mindless sheep. I find it amuzing
>how easy it really is to sit back and criticize the work of others
>while not producing a thing. All this while at the same time thinking
>their doing everyone a service only they can provide.
I repeat--Jay Denebeim has integrity problems on this newsgroup that
are as serious in nature, or more serious, than any of the
integrity/credibility problems he attacks Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
for. He refuses to address those integrity issues while continuing his
attacks on me and others. Seems like someone who asserts that he
speaks for everyone on a newsgroup should deal with his/her own
credibility/integrity problems before prescribing what should be done
to otheres.
As for criticizing the work of others while not producing anything, I
look forward to your substantive contributions to the understanding and
enjoyment of the series.
>
>I can't understand why these people can't comprehend the difference
>between constructive criticism and personal attacks (unless, of
>course, it's directed at them). They also can't seem to understand
>that Bab5 to us is a TV show, but to JMS it's a life. Naturally, he
>takes criticism of the show a little more personally than anyone else.
>Also, the criticisms about JMS and his "sticking it" to the fans for
>money. OF COURSE HE WANTS MONEY! Doesn't everyone? Bab5 is how he
>makes a living! If no one pays for it, the show will not be
broadcast. If it's only "just a show", why do these
>individuals spend SO much time critiquing it? If you don't like
>it...leave. It's that simple. We certainly do not need your advice or
>opinions in order to decide for ourselves if we like the show.
But I've never attacked Joe Straczynski for making money off the
Babylon 5 series. I've repeated over and over and over to each new
"Fuller Flamer" that comes along that I've never criticized Joe
Straczynski for participating in the free enterprise system. That's
one distinction between constructive criticism and personal attacks.
>
>Glad to get that off my chest...
But you still didn't address the issue of Jay Denebeim's credibility
problems. Why won't he clear up the accusatons that he took video
tapes from someone and refuses to return them? And if you're going to
make a real good case for constructive criticism, then criticize me for
something I really did. I take those criticisms rather well.
Theron Fuller
Denebeim) writes:
(Stuff Deleted)
>I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he won't do this. The sort of
>behavior you outlined in your post is Theron's stock in trade. That's
>how he works, he makes false, inflamatory, disgusting, accusations,
>hopefully ones that cannot be proven, but if caught, he'll ignore the
>evidence and take the argument on an irrelevant tangent.
>
>As we've been saying, the only way to deal with him is to ignore him.
>You won't be able to get him removed from the system he's posting on,
>your flames and insults won't hurt him, heck he thrives on them.
>
>Just ignore him, if you've got a killfile, use it, otherwise just
>don't reply to him or if you can't keep from replying if you read him,
>skip over his messages.
>
>Until everyone does this, he won't go away.
>
And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
Robert W. Igo
>And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
>discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
>blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
>encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
gladly read it.
It is not our role to find this evidence so that we can believe what you're
saying, and if you're unwilling to provide us with it, then you must not
really care very much about your argument.
Ok, is there anyone who recalls anything about Jay having a credibility
problem regarding some video tapes? Besides Theron, of course.
[********************** Bob Igo (gryp...@cmu.edu) **********************]
"This EMACS only handles records of finite length." --mjl
[************** http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~gryphon **************]
Robert W. Igo
common statements and questions into simple macros. "Do you have
any evidence?" will be denoted as (1), and "Show us your evidence,
and we'll gladly look it over." will be (2).
Theron:
>Bob:
>>Same situation? If you're ready to apologize about the Cynthia Barnes
>>incident, this implies to me that you're ready to admit that you were
>>wrong. Is this what you meant?
>
>No. What I mean is that when I was wrong about Joe Straczynski's
>relationship with America On Line, Joe Straczynski made sure his
>message pointing out I was wrong was posted on this newsgroup.
Oh, so he posted it directly? Or did someone forward it here? By
the structure of your sentence it looks as if you're saying that
someone forwarded it here. What makes you think jms instructed the
person to forward it? Could it have possibly been done by the
individual's own accord? (1)
>So,
>even though Joe Straczynski isn't directly participating on this
>newsgroup any more, he made sure he pointed out my mis-statement.
Yes, because he is still involved with other babylon5 newsgroups, and
your mis-statement made its way over there. And he dealt with it
there. And it was forwarded here by someone.
>
>You will notice that he has made no such effort regarding my statements
>about his actions in the Cynthia Barnes affair. And if you will read
>the actual set of posts that took place, you will understand why.
(2)
>You
>will discover that Joe Straczynski's actions in this incident are as
>bad, or worse, as anything he has accused Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton Holland
>of doing to him.
>>
>>Besides, wanting jms to ask you for your apology was the wrong move,
>>and it's inconsistent with what you've done so far. See, he doesn't
>>care whether or not you apologize, but I can understand your desire to
>>want him to acknowledge you directly again. That would have been a
>>big payoff for you, but I don't see it happening.
>
>What I was pointing out is, that if Joe Straczynski is due an apology,
>then Joe Straczynski as the injured party should ask for that apology.
In my experience, if someone has injured me in some way, and they realize
they have done wrong, they will apologize to me. And I'll do the same if
I make a mistake or hurt someone. In my culture, there's no need to go
looking for an apology. If it is due you, it will be given to you.
Does it give you one last feeling of dominance over your opponent when
they come to you and ask or demand an apology? Why do you do it?
>Persons such as yourself who have only secondary, distorted information
>and mistaken impressions about what took place are in no position to
>demand an apology from me.
If I have any distorted information or mistaken impressions, it's
because you haven't provided any evidence. (1) (2) And I wasn't
demanding an apology from you. It's of no benefit whatsoever to me if
you were to apologize to the people you have wronged. I was just
pointing out a move you might not have seen.
>
>But Joe Straczynski never asked for an apology from me, because that
>would have meant that he would have had to apologize to me when he
>attacked me in error, and had his attack chihuahuas attack me.
When did he attack you in error? (2)
>And Joe Straczynski never exibited that much class and grace in his
>flame wars.
That may be, but it could be argued that flame wars are inherently
non-graceful. This is why I don't consider myself to be involved in
a flamewar. In fact, aside from your underlying tone, both you and I
seem to have kept our discussion away from all the low-level
attacks which some people must default to, due to the lack of other
means of coherent expression.
>
>
>>
>>Here's what you should have done. You should have apologized to JMS
>>anyway, in a big open way. Then you'd be the bigger man. "Oh, that
>>salty old JMS would never apologize for anything he did wrong, but
>>look, everyone, I admit when I bite the big one!" 100 points for you.
>
>I'll tell you what. You take the effort to read the series of messages
>that were exchanged in the Cynthia Barnes affair. Then you can discuss
>the situation from a position of knowledge, rather than a position of
>ignorance. You'll be in a much better position to tell me what I
>should have done.
(2) See, it's up to you to provide the evidence. If it worked any other
way, I could accuse you of any number of things, and unless you could
prove that you weren't guilty, you'd be stigmatized for life. Here's
an example.
"Prove conclusively that there is not a monkey tapdancing on your
monitor. I say there is. If anyone would take the time to examine the
evidence, they would conclude that there is, indeed, a monkey tapdancing
on your monitor."
How I would be judged by others after making such a statement would be
based solely on whether or not I could provide any evidence to back up
my statement.
>
>>
>>But I've jinxed you, since if you did it now, you'd have just followed
>>the advice of one of us sheep. Man, that's pretty low, following a
>>sheep.
>>
>>Baa.
>>Even so, I think most of us would be in agreement that if you avoided
>>these situations where you would have to apologize in the first place,
>>we'd all be happier.
>
>Again, read the Cynthia Barnes messages. Then you can make assertions
>about my need for apologies to Joe Straczynski.
Oh, I never said you needed to. I just said that it would have probably
been a better move for you.
>Speak from an informed postion instead of an ignorant position.
Irony comes in all shapes and sizes, doesn't it, folks? I think I found
a good candidate for macro#3.
Ken Smith
>ful...@ix.netcom.com(Theron Fuller )
>>And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
>>discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
>>blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
>>encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
Actually, Jay probably hasn't read Theron's libel because he's been in
Jay's killfile for weeks now. I must admit I would also avoid discussing
any such claim as a matter beneath my dignity to warrant a reply. And
Jay certainly isn't the only person advocating that people just ignore
Theron and friends. Once again, Theron has chosen someone to form the
focus of his attempts to troll, and once again people are responding
(even if Jay himself isn't).
>Point us all to some evidence of Jay's credibility problem, and we'll all
>gladly read it.
I doubt you'll get what you're asking for here. And I think I'd want
independent verification of anything Theron posts before considering it
to be "evidence."
>It is not our role to find this evidence so that we can believe what you're
>saying, and if you're unwilling to provide us with it, then you must not
>really care very much about your argument.
He doesn't. This is another combination flame/troll.
>Ok, is there anyone who recalls anything about Jay having a credibility
>problem regarding some video tapes? Besides Theron, of course.
I believe Robert Holland started posting to this effect, again without
supporting evidence. However, Mr. Holland also has taken to making
accusations with little basis in the past. I wouldn't take his word as
evidence either. If the supposedly aggrieved party posted, perhaps
then. I suspect that if this incident did occur, it was a
misunderstanding blown out of proportion.
I would add to the posts by others: Theron Fuller, Ford Thaxton and
Deborah Fuller have been specifically named by JMS as critical reasons
for his departure from this group. The post you're responding to, from
the fragment you quote, is pretty typical of the type of flaming troll
these three and one Robert Holland occasionally come up with.
Personally, like Jay, I've killfiled all four, but people keep responding
to them. Try to avoid it unless it is for one of those rare occasions
when they are saying something interesting and insightful. Their
personal attacks and carping just don't merit any traffic.
--
Regards, Ken Smith (416) 323-5187 ======================= smi...@gov.on.ca
Environmental Engineering Services Section || "Argue for your limitations
Science & Technology Branch || and sure enough, they're
Ontario Ministry of Environment & Energy || yours." R. Bach
Jeff Wilson
(Stuff Deleted)
>
>I repeat--Jay Denebeim has integrity problems on this newsgroup that
>are as serious in nature, or more serious, than any of the
>integrity/credibility problems he attacks Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
>for. He refuses to address those integrity issues while continuing his
>attacks on me and others. Seems like someone who asserts that he
>speaks for everyone on a newsgroup should deal with his/her own
>credibility/integrity problems before prescribing what should be done
>to otheres.
>
No one speaks for everybody. You get a group of people together to discuss
an issue and there will always be people who don't agree. Like the commercial,
"4 out 5 five denists agree", it can be approximated that dentists, as a whole,
like the product. The resistance of one does not discredit that claim.
>As for criticizing the work of others while not producing anything, I
>look forward to your substantive contributions to the understanding and
>enjoyment of the series.
>
You miss the point. My "substantive contributions to the understanding and
enjoyment of the series" does not constitute producing anything. I'm
referring specifically who write, direct, film, etc. the show. You know
what they say about opinions...everyone's got one. Not everyone can make
a quality show.
>>
>>I can't understand why these people can't comprehend the difference
>>between constructive criticism and personal attacks (unless, of
>>course, it's directed at them). They also can't seem to understand
>>that Bab5 to us is a TV show, but to JMS it's a life. Naturally, he
>>takes criticism of the show a little more personally than anyone else.
>>Also, the criticisms about JMS and his "sticking it" to the fans for
>>money. OF COURSE HE WANTS MONEY! Doesn't everyone? Bab5 is how he
>>makes a living! If no one pays for it, the show will not be
>broadcast. If it's only "just a show", why do these
>>individuals spend SO much time critiquing it? If you don't like
>>it...leave. It's that simple. We certainly do not need your advice or
>>opinions in order to decide for ourselves if we like the show.
>
>But I've never attacked Joe Straczynski for making money off the
>Babylon 5 series. I've repeated over and over and over to each new
>"Fuller Flamer" that comes along that I've never criticized Joe
>Straczynski for participating in the free enterprise system. That's
>one distinction between constructive criticism and personal attacks.
I notice you didn't refute the statement about personal attacks. Is this
an agreement? My memory may not be that great, but I specifically
remember your rants about JMS moving only to AOL and Compuserve and
pointing out that you must pay for these services. You made all kinds
of inuendos about his profiting form this. If someone can repost the
comments and prove me wrong, I'll retract the statement and apologize.
>>
>>Glad to get that off my chest...
>
>But you still didn't address the issue of Jay Denebeim's credibility
>problems. Why won't he clear up the accusatons that he took video
>tapes from someone and refuses to return them? And if you're going to
>make a real good case for constructive criticism, then criticize me for
>something I really did. I take those criticisms rather well.
Maybe he has the tapes, maybe not. How does that related to his opinions
of the show? All it tells me is that if he did take them, I wouldn't lone
any tapes to him. That tells me nothing about his cognitive abilities.
Michael J. King Sr.
>But you still didn't address the issue of Jay Denebeim's credibility
>problems. Why won't he clear up the accusatons that he took video
>tapes from someone and refuses to return them? And if you're going to
>make a real good case for constructive criticism, then criticize me for
>something I really did. I take those criticisms rather well.
I had to respond Theron much as I have tried to ignore you. You take one
unsubstantiated statement from an individual who posted once and then went
away as gospel! The net is great for this hit and run style and you above all
should know better. Jay owes me no explanations as he has dealt with me
honorably in all his actions towards yours truly. I use to 'help' people by
duping a copy here and there until I was falsely accused of a similar
deception. The person threatened to smear my name "all over the net" and make
my being on RASTB5 a living hell if I didn't deliver. I was pissed at first,
then I laughed and then I just felt really disappointed that someone would
take an offer of kindness and try to get a year of B5 by coercion. Well I E'd
him back and told him to take his best shot. I've been waiting for six months
and haven't heard word one and yes I am relieved because even though I was
innocent of any shennanigans, some people would think badly of me as we know
where there is smoke there must be fire. My point is this IMO Jay owes us
nothing about a situation that is none of our buisness Theron and should have
remained at the bottom of the pile from whence it came.Just my thoughts and
YMMV. Later.Mike#139
Peter Seebach
Theron Fuller <ful...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>I repeat--Jay Denebeim has integrity problems on this newsgroup that
>are as serious in nature, or more serious, than any of the
>integrity/credibility problems he attacks Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
>for.
I have seen no evidence, now or at any other time, indicating a problem with
Jay's integrity. As you say, why should we believe it without an impartial
source, i.e., someone who doesn't dislike Jay or mind his presence or behavior
here, who is willing to confirm the accusations? Or even someone who likes
him...
As of yet, I have seen you say things about JMS which have since turned out to
be untrue. Whether they were lies, accidents, or malicious and directed
speculation is of no moment; you have been wrong. I have not yet seen jay be
provably or visibly wrong about anything he did not clearly label as
speculation. Given that, I will assume he is honest until I see otherwise.
>He refuses to address those integrity issues while continuing his
>attacks on me and others. Seems like someone who asserts that he
>speaks for everyone on a newsgroup should deal with his/her own
>credibility/integrity problems before prescribing what should be done
>to otheres.
I don't see Jay asserting that he speaks for anyone but himself. Meanwhile,
you continue to express "our" moral outrage at whatever it is that he didn't
actually do... Hmm.
>As for criticizing the work of others while not producing anything, I
>look forward to your substantive contributions to the understanding and
>enjoyment of the series.
Okay, be glad to...
I have revealed a major and significant plot point (not a spoiler; just good
old fashioned brilliant analysis.) See my other post in this group.
Yours, now?
>But you still didn't address the issue of Jay Denebeim's credibility
>problems. Why won't he clear up the accusatons that he took video
>tapes from someone and refuses to return them? And if you're going to
>make a real good case for constructive criticism, then criticize me for
>something I really did. I take those criticisms rather well.
Because that someone has not chosen to accuse him. I mean, gee, whenever
someone rips me off, the first thing I do is find someone who is widely
distrusted and hated (whether or not this is deserved; I don't know, and don't
care), and tell him, so *he* can post about it.
Happens all the time.
You still haven't responded to my earlier point about the migrant workers.
-s
--
Peter Seebach - se...@solon.com - Copyright 1995 Peter Seebach.
C/Unix proto-wizard -- C/Unix questions? Send mail for help. No, really!
Fund my computing hobby - send money! -- se...@intran.xerox.com
The *other* C FAQ - ftp taniemarie.solon.com /pub/c/afq - Not A Flying Toy
Theron Fuller
<gryp...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>Perhaps, to save on bandwidth, I will begin to turn some of my more
>common statements and questions into simple macros. "Do you have
>any evidence?" will be denoted as (1), and "Show us your evidence,
>and we'll gladly look it over." will be (2).
>
Straczynski "Cynthia Barnes" posts, then you'll understand what I've
been trying to say.
Until then, you and others who haven't read those posts but feel
qualified to comment on them, you fit in the "Sheep" category.
Robert Holland
>ful...@ix.netcom.com(Theron Fuller )
>>And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
>>discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
>>blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
>>encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
>gladly read it.
>
>saying, and if you're unwilling to provide us with it, then you must not
>really care very much about your argument.
>
>problem regarding some video tapes? Besides Theron, of course.
Posted twice this summer or early fall is a thread titled "I am mad at
Jay Denebeim", or something very similar. It was an unsolicited post from
a person who made a deal with Jay. Denebeim reneged on his end of the bargain
and refused to answer emails or to deal directly with this person. Finally,
the person tried using public peer pressure in a newsgroup frequented by Jay
to try to get satisfaction.
I have asked Jay to clear the air on this, but he chooses to stonewall.
You now have enough information to search the archives for confirmation.
I would start in September 1995, then try August.
--RH
Teresa Lhotka
Now, what say we go to another thread, and talk about B5?
Theron, you come along too. You don't have to be positive,
but try to be reasonable. I know you can do it...I've seen
you.
--
Kemaris
kem...@winternet.com
"The most important invention in the history of the human
race is the written contract. It makes it possible for
individual parties to list all the different ways they
distrust each other".
--Soloman Short
Robert W. Igo
(2)
Oh, and "baaa"
[********************** Bob Igo (gryp...@cmu.edu) **********************]
"Wanna go on the ella-lator." --Baby Plucky Duck
[************** http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~gryphon **************]
Christine Raasch
: You now have enough information to search the archives for confirmation.
: I would start in September 1995, then try August.
Sorry to contribute to this thread again, but, um, "the archives"?
Is this newsgroup being *archived*? (Besides JMS's posts, I mean.)
- Chris
--
Christine C. Raasch <*> Neuromuscular Biomechanist <*> Bikerbabe
<*> Stanford University <*> VA Palo Alto Rehab R&D Ctr <*> 86 CB700S <*>
"Make your ear attentive to wisdom and incline your heart to understanding"
Robert W. Igo
>I have asked Jay to clear the air on this, but he chooses to stonewall.
>
>I would start in September 1995, then try August.
which date back to August & September?
Thanks.
Tom McLean
> In <1995Dec18...@orion.alaska.edu> as...@orion.alaska.edu writes:
> (Stuff Deleted)
> > Excuse me? What actions are those? Sure, if JMS had posted a
> >false email message, that would indeed have shown a low level of
> >ethics on his part. But the facts indicate that he did no such thing.
> Therefore, you were either mistaken, or lied. Now, I won't presume to
> >say which, but either way, you owe JMS an apology. But do you
> >apologize? No. You simply change the subject and try to draw attention
> >away from the fact that you made a false accusation. Well, I certainly
> >won't be taking any of your accusations seriously again.
> I'll type this real slow for those who move their lips as they read my
> posts. >Really< examine what Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland have posted
> (not what you >think< they've posted, or not what some net clown like
> Jay Denebeim keeps insisting we've posted). Now compare its substance
> and impact in terms of "harrassment" and "stalking" to what Joe
> Straczynski has posted during his flame wars and unprovoked rants
> against Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland.
Looked into it. It was harrassment on your part. Thanks for
making it official.
> I assert you will find that Joe Straczynski's actions in the Cynthia
> Barnes affair to be as questionable, and if you're really objective,
> even more questionable as anything Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland have
> ever done to Joe Straczynski.
Looked into it. Didn't see anything that even comes close to what
you did.
> Furthermore, if you're honest with yourself, you'll find his various
> flames and unprovoked rants against Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland to be
> as wild and as reprehensible as anything Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
> have ever aimed at Joe Straczyski.
Looked into it. Took me a while to stop laughing.
> As for apologies, even some of the Net clowns on this newsgroup have
> pointed out to Joe Straczynski that he has flamed me in error on
> occasion. And the Great Man has >never< apologized to me for his
> flames, or the subsequent manure dumped on me by his Sheep in response
> to the mistaken flame.
Why would anyone continually dive into a pool of manure?
Why do you do it? Do you like the smell? You're a man who enjoys
jumping in front of buses. Sooner or later, one of them is going to hit
you, and if you do it enough, you'll find yourself getting hit over and
over and over... Such behavior qualifies you for psychological counceling.
> When I mis-spoke about Joe Straczynski's relationship with America on
> Line, I admitted my mistake, and if Joe Straczysnki wants an apology
> for my statements in this regard, all he has to do is ask.
He shouldn't have to ask, and he won't, because he most likely
knows that what you want more than anything is for him to interact with
you. You're like Smithers on the Simpsons in his relationship with Mister
Burns, only you're the opposite in that you try to get the object of your
obsession to notice you by electronically hitting him over and over and
over... JMS probably doesn't want to feed your sickness.
> If Joe Straczysnki feels I'v substantively misrepresented his actions
> in the Cynthia Barnes affair, same situation.
I doubt he even feels like bothering with you. You're not that
important. I believe this must be what drives you crazy, and what drives
your sickness.
-Tom
<Life's only certainty is death> Thus began the morbid years.
Email address: tmc...@chat.carleton.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Julian P. Graham
ful...@ix.netcom.com(Theron "Theron Fuller " writes:
[snip]
> I repeat--Jay Denebeim has integrity problems on this newsgroup that
> are as serious in nature, or more serious, than any of the
> integrity/credibility problems he attacks Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland
> for. He refuses to address those integrity issues while continuing his
> attacks on me and others. Seems like someone who asserts that he
> speaks for everyone on a newsgroup should deal with his/her own
> credibility/integrity problems before prescribing what should be done
> to otheres.
[snip]
You know, this is all sounding *very* familiar, Theron. You appear
to be attacking Jay because he refuses to discuss his personal business
with the group. Didn't you attack JMS for exactly the same thing? I
seem to remember phrases like "JMS does not take this group into his
confidence" being used. What is your problem with this? JMS' personal
business is *no concern* of yours, or the group. Jay Denebeim's
personal business is *no concern* of yours, or the group. Get the idea?
Regards
--
** Julian P. Graham **************************************************
* Warrington, England. "Nothing's the same anymore." *
* Commander Sinclair, Babylon 5 *
** jpgr...@starfury.demon.co.uk *************************************
tmbr...@iquest.com
> blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
> encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
>
>>>>
concerning the scoreboard, my Email is skewing up again (r left
out intentionally).
here's the latest score as of 12 21 95,
Fuller, T Newsgroup
0 12
Fuller, D Newsgroup
3 4
Thaxton, F Newsgroup
0 0
Fuller, t, of course still skirts issues by avaoiding
Fuller, d, hit three good points during the "stop flaming" thing
Tax hasn't been posting lately
BTW, Newsgroup represents multiple POSTERS on the
newsgroup, not the newsgroup itself.
I will be taking a bit off from 12 24 to 12 29, so the count will
not be done during that time.
The monthly results will be emaild as soon as the server is
up, or as close after 1-2-95 as possible
As always, I will keep it off the group after my Email
problem clears up
TMB
tmbr...@iquest.com
tmbr...@iquest.com
Yes it is a listing of the results, the points will be emailed only
and
I have been told that email sent to me was bouncing, it's
supposed to be fixed, but I can't pull any down. Server
says they'll stay there untill the problem is solved, so
continue to send, I will get them.
sooner of later
TMB
Roscoe
this newsgroup, a glorious message was sent to me by E-Mail, pontificating
to me how privileged I was to be apart of the great RASTB-5 newsgroup which
boasted the presence of the revered JMS and all his disciples! I truly
prayed and thanked the almighty Vorlon for my good fortune. And now,
every time I read the crap from this wasteland, I barf. Congratulations
people, you have lowered the human culture a few more notches on the
evolutionary scale.
be...@cais2.cais.com
: rhol...@wco.com (Robert Holland) writes:
: : You now have enough information to search the archives for confirmation.
: : I would start in September 1995, then try August.
: Sorry to contribute to this thread again, but, um, "the archives"?
: Is this newsgroup being *archived*? (Besides JMS's posts, I mean.)
First let me start out by saying that I DO NOT believe these allegations
against Jay. I've dealt with Jay concerning tapes and he was honorable
in every sense of the word. That being said.
Some bright person thought it would be really kewl to start an archive of
everything that anybody had ever posted (at least for the past year) on
USENET. It is called DejaNews. I don't have the URL handy. At any rate
when you get there you can access any post by author, date, newsgroup,
and a couple of other categories that I can't remember right off hand.
HTH
--
Beth
"GNUtopia, it may not be the best, but it's free, and it's better
than neutopia."
- Helen Rhine
V'Karin
: In <4b81k0$4...@deepthot.cary.nc.us> dene...@deepthot.cary.nc.us (Jay
: Denebeim) writes:
: (Stuff Deleted)
: >I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he won't do this. The sort of
: >behavior you outlined in your post is Theron's stock in trade. That's
: >how he works, he makes false, inflamatory, disgusting, accusations,
: >hopefully ones that cannot be proven, but if caught, he'll ignore the
: >evidence and take the argument on an irrelevant tangent.
: >
: >As we've been saying, the only way to deal with him is to ignore him.
: >You won't be able to get him removed from the system he's posting on,
: >your flames and insults won't hurt him, heck he thrives on them.
: >
: >Just ignore him, if you've got a killfile, use it, otherwise just
: >don't reply to him or if you can't keep from replying if you read him,
: >skip over his messages.
: >
: >Until everyone does this, he won't go away.
: >
: And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
: discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
: blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
: encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
From what I have seen so far, Jay has, maybe, one think accused of
him by you, where as you have many an accusations in your court. So
becuase one person will not or can not, or has had enough discussion
of it, you are excempt of all accusations. Thats like bottling all
criminals together and treating speeders the same as mass murders.
John P. Pietrzak
TheW...@Endor.com <be...@cais2.cais.com> wrote:
>
>Some bright person thought it would be really kewl to start an archive of
>everything that anybody had ever posted (at least for the past year) on
>USENET. It is called DejaNews. I don't have the URL handy. At any rate
>when you get there you can access any post by author, date, newsgroup,
>and a couple of other categories that I can't remember right off hand.
I don't have the URL around either (I'm away from my lab), but I was
having trouble finding more than about a month and a half of B5 on the
DejaNews system. Perhaps it's limited because it has just started up
recently?
John
V'Karin
: In <8194743...@unix20.andrew.cmu.edu> "Robert W. Igo"
: <gryp...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
: >
: >Perhaps, to save on bandwidth, I will begin to turn some of my more
: >common statements and questions into simple macros. "Do you have
: >any evidence?" will be denoted as (1), and "Show us your evidence,
: >and we'll gladly look it over." will be (2).
: To save my own bandwith, if you'll just read the series of Joe
: Straczynski "Cynthia Barnes" posts, then you'll understand what I've
: been trying to say.
Then please, send this thread to me, and I will read them.
: Until then, you and others who haven't read those posts but feel
V'Karin
: My how the mighty have fallen! Just a few weeks, ago when I wandered into
I agree. Why linger on this subject. JMS is GONE. End of story.
The only relevence this now has with B5 is the Group its running in, thats
it. Lets talk about what this group was created for, B5.
Strueb
(John P. Pietrzak) writes:
>
>I don't have the URL around either (I'm away from my lab), but I was
>having trouble finding more than about a month and a half of B5 on the
>DejaNews system. Perhaps it's limited because it has just started up
>recently?
>
>
>John
>
>
Hmm, I'll have to check here on AOL and see what they show...
Take acre and keep the faith!
Wes
[you need tiny hooks to catch microfiche]
William Crawford
wrote:
>>I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he won't do this. The sort of
>>behavior you outlined in your post is Theron's stock in trade. That's
>>how he works, he makes false, inflamatory, disgusting, accusations,
>>hopefully ones that cannot be proven, but if caught, he'll ignore the
>>evidence and take the argument on an irrelevant tangent.
.
.
>And I'll bet dollars to donuts that Jay Denebeim keeps avoiding
>discussing his "video tape" credibility problem while simultaneously
>blasting Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton/Holland at every opportunity >and<
>encouraging everyone else to "just ignore them."
It have observed similiar behaviour from certain others on
this newsgroup. If you have an issue, be it with Jay, JMS, or anyone
else involved with this newsgroup, why not describe it, and back it
up? I've seen you make references to Mr. Denebeim's credibility
problem, but the two words "video tape" are the only additional
information you've provided.
But as I said, I've seen this type of thing before.
Will
/-------------------------------------------------------------
William Crawford - Crawford Computer Consulting
wcra...@express.tiac.net
William Crawford
wrote:
>>Same situation? If you're ready to apologize about the Cynthia Barnes
>>incident, this implies to me that you're ready to admit that you were
>>wrong. Is this what you meant?
>
>No. What I mean is that when I was wrong about Joe Straczynski's
>relationship with America On Line, Joe Straczynski made sure his
>message pointing out I was wrong was posted on this newsgroup. So,
>even though Joe Straczynski isn't directly participating on this
>newsgroup any more, he made sure he pointed out my mis-statement.
If you've been wrong about one thing (and, while I elected not
to participate in the debate, I was disgusted), I suppose it's
possible you've been wrong about others.
Just because someone isn't present on the newsgroup does NOT
mean that you can make whatever insinuations you want about them. He's
entitled to point out your "misstatements" especially when they are as
accusatory and glaring (in more than one way) as the whole AOL debacle
was.
>You will notice that he has made no such effort regarding my statements
>about his actions in the Cynthia Barnes affair. And if you will read
>the actual set of posts that took place, you will understand why. You
>will discover that Joe Straczynski's actions in this incident are as
>bad, or worse, as anything he has accused Fuller/Fuller/Thaxton Holland
>of doing to him.
So? The issue that is at stake is the AOL debacle. By using
the same slightly twisted logic (he didn't confront you, ergo, he's a
guilty party) one could say that everything you've ever been accused
of and not commented on has been true.
My memory of the Barnes "affair" isn't especially good - it
did take place some time ago. But as I recall, Straczynski's actions
were perfectly in line. As usual, he was not the instigator.
>>Besides, wanting jms to ask you for your apology was the wrong move,
>>and it's inconsistent with what you've done so far. See, he doesn't
>>care whether or not you apologize, but I can understand your desire to
>>want him to acknowledge you directly again. That would have been a
>>big payoff for you, but I don't see it happening.
>
>What I was pointing out is, that if Joe Straczynski is due an apology,
>then Joe Straczynski as the injured party should ask for that apology.
>Persons such as yourself who have only secondary, distorted information
>and mistaken impressions about what took place are in no position to
>demand an apology from me.
I can't believe this.
As many of us learned in preschool, an apology should not be
sought. If it is, it's probably not worth getting. You, Theron, were
the one who made a baseless, _nasty_ accusation, which was, as usual,
completely ungrounded in anything which might resemble fact, or an
informed source. JMS didn't. You are the one in the wrong - and if
you're want to behave in a decent manner about it, you are the one who
should aplogize. Nobody's forcing you. But my opinion of you isn't
going up because you're waiting for him to ask.
>But Joe Straczynski never asked for an apology from me, because that
>would have meant that he would have had to apologize to me when he
>attacked me in error, and had his attack chihuahuas attack me. And Joe
>Straczynski never exibited that much class and grace in his flame wars.
That's hardly true. The thing about JMS is that I have seen
him admit that he was wrong, that he's made mistakes, that things
haven't worked out. If it's coming, it comes. Otherwise, no.
And he's exhibited far more class than you ever have - he's
never STARTED a flame war. And I've never heard him refer to fellow
posters as small, hairless, yapping dogs.
>>Here's what you should have done. You should have apologized to JMS
>>anyway, in a big open way. Then you'd be the bigger man. "Oh, that
>>salty old JMS would never apologize for anything he did wrong, but
>>look, everyone, I admit when I bite the big one!" 100 points for you.
>
>I'll tell you what. You take the effort to read the series of messages
>that were exchanged in the Cynthia Barnes affair. Then you can discuss
>the situation from a position of knowledge, rather than a position of
>ignorance. You'll be in a much better position to tell me what I
>should have done.
Care to repost the damn things? It's not relevant, of course,
but it's very easy for you to point to messages which are long
unavailable as proof that you're in the right. I've only got a PPP
account and a 2gb drive - I can't archive rastb5 just so you can refer
back to an old debate.
William Crawford
wrote:
>In <8194743...@unix20.andrew.cmu.edu> "Robert W. Igo"
><gryp...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>
>>Perhaps, to save on bandwidth, I will begin to turn some of my more
>>common statements and questions into simple macros. "Do you have
>>any evidence?" will be denoted as (1), and "Show us your evidence,
>>and we'll gladly look it over." will be (2).
>>
>To save my own bandwith, if you'll just read the series of Joe
>Straczynski "Cynthia Barnes" posts, then you'll understand what I've
>been trying to say.
>
>Until then, you and others who haven't read those posts but feel
>qualified to comment on them, you fit in the "Sheep" category.
And unless you make those posts available, we can hardly
review. It's like saying that people aren't versed in theology because
they haven't gone over the dead sea scrolls.
be...@cais2.cais.com
: In article <4bjak2$s...@zippy.cais.net>,
: TheW...@Endor.com <be...@cais2.cais.com> wrote:
: >
: >Some bright person thought it would be really kewl to start an archive of
: >everything that anybody had ever posted (at least for the past year) on
: >and a couple of other categories that I can't remember right off hand.
: I don't have the URL around either (I'm away from my lab), but I was
: having trouble finding more than about a month and a half of B5 on the
: DejaNews system. Perhaps it's limited because it has just started up
: recently?
Try searching by author. I think that the amount of traffic generated
by a newsgroup (especially this newsgroup) in a year might be too much
for the program to handle.
Gary Farber
: : I don't have the URL around either (I'm away from my lab), but I was
: : having trouble finding more than about a month and a half of B5 on the
: : DejaNews system. Perhaps it's limited because it has just started up
: : recently?
: Try searching by author. I think that the amount of traffic generated
: by a newsgroup (especially this newsgroup) in a year might be too much
: for the program to handle.
I'm told that they'll go back further if you ask the nicely.
Also try:
http://www.altavista.digital.com .
http://www.nlightn.com
--
-- Gary Farber gfa...@panix.com
Copyright 1995 Brooklyn, NY, USA