Any legal basis to take Maxson down?
Doug Ellison
Now I'm not sure of US law on the issue - but I'm fairly sure that making
the claims that he does are way out of line..
" The Betrayal of Mission 51-L is a historical story that has never been
told before. Discover what caused the boosters to cross and destroy
Challenger. Challenger was no accident! "
Read that again - 'Challenger was no accident'
Thus he is claiming that infact, the death of the Challenger astronauts was
murder. To make such a statement must breach some sort of US law surely?
If I were wealthy, american, and had time on my hands, I'd LOVE to take this
scum to the courts and see him found guilty of whatever it is he could be
found guilty of. Even if it's just fraud ( I wonder how many churches,
libraries and other organisations have recieved his sci-fi novel at reduced
price, or the claim a softback book takes $31 to make )
It's clear that we wont be rid of this vermin until some ACTION is taken.
Killfilling, and educating other about killfilling just does not work.
Doug
Terrence Daniels
news:bhb2qt$vfovq$1...@ID-115030.news.uni-berlin.de...
> OK - moron maxon and his lying child have taken over the newsgroup again.
> Now I'm not sure of US law on the issue - but I'm fairly sure that making
> the claims that he does are way out of line.
Out of line, sure. But illegal? No. That's what the First Amendment is for.
He's protected and allowed to say (or write) what he wishes, and rightfully
so. As much as I think he's paranoid, bombastic, mentally ill in a broad
sense, and a bit of a jerk to boot, I would stand up for his right to write
his book and try to make his case. Just because he is completely incapable
of doing so doesn't mean he should be denied the chance in a public forum.
However, since he's just ranting and raving and not making any sense, and
this NG suffers for it, it is equally within other reader's rights to go
somewhere else private and work to keep him out.
> Read that again - 'Challenger was no accident'
>
> Thus he is claiming that infact, the death of the Challenger astronauts
was
> murder. To make such a statement must breach some sort of US law surely?
As much as he throws around the words "libel" and "slander" I think the only
people who could rightly open a case making those claims would be NASA
personnel, filing against him and his spawn. If you think about it...
Alleging deliberate leaks of hydrogen at the pad, covering up "evidence"
yadda yadda, is basically an open accusation of murder against people who
were just doing their jobs, whether they were working on the pad or
investigating the accident. If he had any concrete evidence that didn't come
from between his own ears that these things really happened, he might have a
case, but until then it is libel and slander. I doubt the families of the
astronauts would be too thrilled to read some of this stuff either. I think
if he was on national TV instead of slow-broiling in untreated madness,
alone in Iowa somewhere, he'd already be facing some serious legal flak.
> If I were wealthy, american, and had time on my hands, I'd LOVE to take
this
> scum to the courts and see him found guilty of whatever it is he could be
> found guilty of. Even if it's just fraud ( I wonder how many churches,
> libraries and other organisations have recieved his sci-fi novel at
reduced
> price, or the claim a softback book takes $31 to make )
Come on. He's not the only intellectually dishonest person with an axe to
grind and a book to sell. :)
> It's clear that we wont be rid of this vermin until some ACTION is taken.
> Killfilling, and educating other about killfilling just does not work.
The best action would probably be to make a sci.space.shuttle.moderated.
Take him down for what he should be taken down for - spreading "junk
science" and slandering just about everybody he's ever come into contact
with. Polluting a newsgroup is not a crime. If it was, I'd be in trouble...
Chuck Stewart
> OK - moron maxon and his lying child have taken over the newsgroup again.
> Now I'm not sure of US law on the issue - but I'm fairly sure that making
> the claims that he does are way out of line..
1) Out of line?
Yes.
2) Illegal?
Not in the sense you mean... it does break some laws governing
harassment, but nothing major-league felony.
3) Legally actionable?
Yes, by several parties. This is the mainstay of defense against
such charges: _civil actions_. And Maxson, for the statements in
his book, as wishy-washy and mealy-mouthed as they are, is liable
to lawsuits that could strip him of what little worldly goods he
possesses... if anyone took the trouble to file suit.
4) Will anyone take action?
No.
5) Their rationale for this?
It would be foolish to spend more money than could be possibly
earned back when no one believes JTM to begin with. Why spend time
and money on a netkook that no one believes?
You nust understand that in real life no one connects JTM's ravings
with the tragic, and accidental, destruction of Challenger. No
measurable fraction of the population is even aware of the
existence of JTM's blatherings.
Despite his continual efforts to flood the Google database with his
garbage people just come, look, and go away unconvinced. This is
empirically verified by the complete lack of JTM-related Challenger
stuff in the news.
His only support base is those who already believed that NASA is
capable of murder, deception, and hiding UFO's... the lunatic
fringe.
> Read that again - 'Challenger was no accident'
> Thus he is claiming that infact, the death of the Challenger astronauts was
> murder.
Er... I think I've mentioned that myself, in the past.
> To make such a statement must breach some sort of US law surely?
Nothing major.
It is actionable, however.
> Even if it's just fraud ( I wonder how many churches, libraries
> and other organisations have recieved his sci-fi novel at reduced
> price, or the claim a softback book takes $31 to make )
You live in a socialist country :)
Free speech gives one the right to publish what one believes and
free enterprise gives one the right to charge whatever one wishes
to charge for it. Whether one gets ridiculed for those beliefs
and/or gets one's ass sued off for it afterwords is another
matter altogether.
> It's clear that we wont be rid of this vermin until some ACTION is taken.
No... that doesn't obtain at all.
> Killfilling, and educating other about killfilling just does not work.
It works.
The problem is that JTM has found it very rewarding to goad people
into responding to his drivel... and they're NOT killfiling him.
True, the same could be said for Daniel, who is the only one of the
three not killfiled by me.
We shall see if and when he puts up his promised evidence.
Otherwise it is pretty much a dead issue, interesting only in some
technical aspects.
> Doug
--
Chuck Stewart
"Anime-style catgirls: Threat? Menace? Or just studying algebra?"
OM
<danie...@SPAMMERSSHOULDBEShotmail.com> wrote:
>The best action would probably be to make a sci.space.shuttle.moderated.
...No, you specifically make a group that excludes *only* Maxsons and
other trolls, and doesn't stifle any other postings. This is where
.moderated failed, in that it wasn't specific in this aspect. It
suffers from the same stigma that a lot of other moderated groups
suffer from: fear of posting as you normally would and having yourself
banned by a moderator who hasn't a clue and/or has a corncob stuck up
their butt.
...sci.space.hors, anyone?
OM
--
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society
- General George S. Patton, Jr
jeff findley
> It's clear that we wont be rid of this vermin until some ACTION is taken.
> Killfilling, and educating other about killfilling just does not work.
Sure it does. If he's in your killfile, you don't see his mess, just
the mess of the uninformed replying to him. Once you identify a
thread as being tainted by Maxson, kill the thread. Luckily, Maxon
seems to pollute relatively few interesting threads. The ones he does
pollute, I quickly lose interest and ignore.
Jeff
--
Remove "no" and "spam" from email address to reply.
If it says "This is not spam!", it's surely a lie.
Nicholas Fitzpatrick
OM <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research_facility.org> wrote:
>
>...No, you specifically make a group that excludes *only* Maxsons and
>other trolls, and doesn't stifle any other postings. This is where
>.moderated failed, in that it wasn't specific in this aspect. It
>suffers from the same stigma that a lot of other moderated groups
>suffer from: fear of posting as you normally would and having yourself
>banned by a moderator who hasn't a clue and/or has a corncob stuck up
>their butt.
OM for moderator!
Nick
Alan Erskine
news:bhb2qt$vfovq$1...@ID-115030.news.uni-berlin.de...
I disagree. Maxson mania has taken over the groups - responding to their
posts is the problem.
Killfile is the solution.
--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au
John Howard doesn't speak for this
Australian in the Amrosi death sentence -
Jail, not death.
HOST Comp JimS
The U.S. constitution gives broad protection to the
expression of opinions, even if they are unpopular
opinons.
If a person who was mentioned in the book felt he was
libeled (false accusations were made about him which
damaged his reputation), then he could sue. However
those kinds of lawsuits are difficult to win.
>Why spend time and money on a netkook
>that no one believes?
If few people actually believe what the author said,
then that could weaken any potential lawsuit, as the
person suing might have trouble proving that their
reputation was seriously damaged.
- James
JMBCV
>"Doug Ellison" <mai...@douglasellison.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:bhb2qt$vfovq$1...@ID-115030.news.uni-berlin.de...
>> OK - moron maxon and his lying child have taken over the newsgroup again.
>
>I disagree. Maxson mania has taken over the groups - responding to their
>posts is the problem.
>
>Killfile is the solution.
I disagree. Erskine mania has taken over the groups - responding to his
posts is the problem.
Killfile is the solution.
About Alan Erskine
alane...@optusnet.com.au
Alan Erskine is a well known Australian netkook, psychopath, and coward
who lives in Melbourne. He usually stalks and harasses the posters of the
sci.space groups, although he is known to make excursions into a wide range
of other groups for the purposes of trolling and stalking and harassing the
participants there. He is currently under investigation by the authorities
in Australia. If you fall victim to his frequent attacks and
stalking/harassment campaigns, like so many in the sci.space groups have,
notify ab...@optusnet.com.au . This psycho is dangerous.
Most sane participants have been forced to killfile him for his frequent
violent outbursts at posters and his unrelenting attacks. Some are taking
legal action against him.
Here are just a few of his victims. He has been stalking and harrasing
Scott and Betty Grissom relentlessly. Scott Grissom is the son of Gus
Grissom, the second American in space, who died in an Apollo 1 training
exercise fire, and Betty Grissom, 75, is his widow.
Alan has also been waging long-time stalking and harassment campaigns
against other well-known members of the space community, including Richard
Katz of NASA, John Maxson, and his sons Paul and Daniel Maxson.
He has been known to stalk his victims anonymously and via sock puppets,
showing what a coward he is. Furthermore, he likes to challenge people to
fights, telling them to come to Melbourne and look him up in the phone
book, while having admitted elsewhere that he is not listed in the phone
book. Coward!
Alan is an enemy of freedom of speech and hates remailers, which serve a
useful and necessary purpose. He has resorted to impersonating others and
even himself through remailers in an effort to discredit remailers and make
it look like others were attacking him through them. He regularly bombards
remailer operators with hysterical complaints and threats and floods their
mailboxes.
Alan is currently on one of his psychotic crusades, this time to get people
to killfile posts from remailers in order to prevent word of his misdeeds
from getting out. Alan is a Nazi, he wants to be able to say whatever he
wants about others but doesn't want anyone to mention him. He wants to
express himself freely but wants to shut others up and, not only that,
wants others to do as he says, read only the messages he approves of, etc.
He wants to police, rule, and control newsgroups and people like the
perfect little jackbooted Nazi he is.
Alan is not just content to harass his victims in the newsgroups, he
usually also stalks them via email. If you find yourself on the receiving
end of Alan's famous psychotic emails, contact ab...@optusnet.com.au
immediately, as well as the law enforcement agencies in Melbourne,
Australia. This psycho is very violent. Do not attempt to reason
with him yourself, many others have tried and he does not respond to
reason. Let the authorities deal with him.
Terrence Daniels
in message news:k4dijv82q3g7g64nk...@4ax.com...
> ...No, you specifically make a group that excludes *only* Maxsons and
> other trolls, and doesn't stifle any other postings. This is where
> .moderated failed, in that it wasn't specific in this aspect. It
> suffers from the same stigma that a lot of other moderated groups
> suffer from: fear of posting as you normally would and having yourself
> banned by a moderator who hasn't a clue and/or has a corncob stuck up
> their butt.
>
> ...sci.space.hors, anyone?
I didn't know that .moderated was like that. I had read that it was made
mainly in response to fresh, steaming Maxson being splattered everywhere, so
I figured it would be like here, without the bullshit-as-an-art-form
circular 51L postings (which I unfortunately took part in). How 'bout
sci.space.shuttle.noloonies?
Doug Ellison
"Terrence Daniels" <danie...@SPAMMERSSHOULDBEShotmail.com> wrote in
message news:8Xc_a.9250$M6.7...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
We're all damn loonies - so it'd be very very quiet in there :D
Doug
Kaido Kert
> "Doug Ellison" <mai...@douglasellison.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:bhb2qt$vfovq$1...@ID-115030.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > OK - moron maxon and his lying child have taken over the newsgroup
again.
> > Now I'm not sure of US law on the issue - but I'm fairly sure that
making
> > the claims that he does are way out of line.
>
> Out of line, sure. But illegal? No.
getting terribly annoyed over there too
-kert
OM
<kaido...@hotballmail.com> wrote:
>Do US rights protect him from an angry mob of pygmees too ? I heard they are
>getting terribly annoyed over there too
...Any chance we can send them to Iowa on a hunting trip?
Doug Ellison
"OM" <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research_facility.org> wrote
in message news:tujjjvsvscgkhcots...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 01:29:21 +0300, "Kaido Kert"
> <kaido...@hotballmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Do US rights protect him from an angry mob of pygmees too ? I heard they
are
> >getting terribly annoyed over there too
>
> ...Any chance we can send them to Iowa on a hunting trip?
>
>
> OM
>
target for field archery.
Doug
Chuck Stewart
> I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John could make an excellent
> target for field archery.
WARNING:
At this point the average clueless Maxson-At-Large gets hysterical
and starts telling your news provider,ISP, employer, CIA contact,
spouse, mistress/gigolo, dentist, pet wombat and 13 random people
off the street that you are threatening to kill him.
Yes, they can be _that_ clueless.
Charleston
>
> "OM" <om@our_I am the blessed_lady_Mary of_the_holy_whore ring.org> wrote:
> >
> > ...Any chance we can send them to Iowa on a hunting trip?
Texas yes, Iowa no, too cold there.
> >
> I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John could make an
excellent
> target for field archery.
That is stupid not funny. You are being stupid right?
--
Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC
Charleston
news:pan.2003.08.13....@gmx.co.uk...
> At this point the average clueless Maxson-At-Large gets hysterical
> and starts telling your news provider,ISP, employer, CIA contact,
> spouse, mistress/gigolo, dentist, pet wombat and 13 random people
> off the street that you are threatening to kill him.
Not to worry Doug is stupid I am sure he will miss "Iowa".
Doug Ellison
>
> > I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John could make an
excellent
> > target for field archery.
>
> WARNING:
>
> At this point the average clueless Maxson-At-Large gets hysterical
> and starts telling your news provider,
>ISP
Who I KNOW have him k'filed
>employer
Has seen JTM's posts and finds them funny also
>CIA contact,
Meh - MI5 might be more appropriate :P
:D
Doug
OM
>I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John could make an excellent
>target for field archery.
"...and now, it's time for another round of bogus legal threats from
usenet troll and unemployed hire-a-nazi Paul Maxson. But first, a word
from our sponsor, proz-lax, the laxative that really helps you get
your shit together!"
Paul Maxson
"Could?" Can't handle the facts forthcoming so "take Maxson down?"
Typical.
Paul Maxson
Paul Maxson
"OM" <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research_facility.org> wrote in message
Bzzt wrong, nice try though. No threats no complaints, just the facts that
apparently some can't handle here. Oh and you guys making yourself look childish
don't want to leave that part out. Can't debate/discuss so you resort back to the games.
Paul no complaints filed here Maxson
Doug Ellison
> "Could?" Can't handle the facts forthcoming so "take Maxson down?"
Facts? What facts?
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> "Doug Ellison"wrote:
>> I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John
>> could make an excellent target for field archery.
>
> That is stupid not funny. You are being stupid right?
The stupid part is that one side is allowed to make
complaints to whomever they choose, and it's okay, but if
the other side does so, it's not. The stupid part is that
when certain people make statements that sound vaguely
threatening, it's treated as a joke, but when certain others
make similar statements, it's treated as a genuine death
threat.
Everyone has a right to pay for access and post. No one has
a right to be heard if no one else wants to listen. People
are entitled to use their killfiles with abandon, but
pounding on someone because they're saying something that
one person--or even an entire group of people--does not want
to hear is horseshit.
It boggles my mind that a gang can gather and throw stones
and expect the target of those stones to stand still and
take it and not fight back.
rl
Reformed--but still ashamed--HOR
Alan Erskine
--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au
John Howard doesn't speak for this
Australian in the Amrosi death sentence -
Jail, not death.
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Ghy_a.99614$0v4.6...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Charleston
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > Charleston wrote:
> > > "Doug Ellison"wrote:
> >
> > >> I've recently taken Archery back up again - and John
> > >> could make an excellent target for field archery.
> > >
> > > That is stupid not funny. You are being stupid right?
> >
> > The stupid part is that one side is allowed to make
> > complaints to whomever they choose, and it's okay, but if
> > the other side does so, it's not. The stupid part is that
> > when certain people make statements that sound vaguely
> > threatening, it's treated as a joke, but when certain others
> > make similar statements, it's treated as a genuine death
> > threat.
Agreed. Although I find no humor in posts like Doug's, I often ignore them.
This particular one was over the top in it's stupidity. To suggest an
elderly man expressing his God given right to free speech would somehow make
a good target for "field archery" is stupid given the goals of organizations
involving "field archery".
http://www.archery-ifaa.com/ See the book of rules and hence the statement
that Doug's comment is stupid.
"PREAMBLE
This preamble shall never be amended or destroyed in the history of this
Association.
Within the framework of this Association shall be preserved forever the
theory and belief that all
humans are born equal irrespective of race, creed, colour or nationality and
that it is the full
intent of our God for all mankind to reside together in peace and unison
with complete freedom
and dignity for man.
It is the intent of this body to preserve and advance these principles by
joining together the
nations and continents of the universe through the preservation by usage of
mankind's most
ancient weapon, the bow and arrows, in games designed to challenge
individual skills while
creating a better understanding."...
> Threats are stupid on both sides.
If I have threatened anyone I am sorry. I don't recall threatening anyone.
> I've been reading usenet since the day it began. Seen a lot of kooks -
> never one so obviously lost in his delusions, never one so committed to
> taking over a group. Goodbye maxsons, every damn one of you.
Leave if you desire to do so, but you might find it interesting if you stay
around if only in lurk mode for a while longer.
OM
...The fact that he's an idiot, a troll, a dipshit, a psychotic, and a
worthless excuse for corporeal life, perhaps?
OM
<m...@prairienet.org> wrote:
>It's a damn shame though when a guy who can't convice ONE SINGLE PERSON
>in two and a half years that he knows what he is talking about can drive
>so many people away and everyone else is blamed for being unreasonable.
...I understand he converted scott grissom, but considering his mental
stability is just as questionable this may not count.
>Life sucks, so why not this newsgroup? Why hope for anything better?
...Because hoping that he dies a natural, painful and horrible death
in the next 24 hours helps sooth the wounds a bit.
Herb Schaltegger
"Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote:
> To suggest an
> elderly man expressing his God given right to free speech . . .(snipped!)
Glad to see you have as little understanding of Constitutional law as
you do metallurgy, flight dynamics, combustion physics, instrumentation,
telemetry, compressible fluid flow, control systems theory, and
aerodynamics.
--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
"Heisenberg might have been here."
~ Anonymous
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> "Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote:
>
>> To suggest an
>> elderly man expressing his God given right to free
>> speech . . .(snipped!)
>
> Glad to see you have as little understanding of
> Constitutional law as you do metallurgy, flight dynamics,
> combustion physics, instrumentation, telemetry,
> compressible fluid flow, control systems theory, and
> aerodynamics.
He's a microbiologist. Shuttle is a hobby that he spends as
much time on as a wife and children will allow--much like
many others here--and one he has spent a great deal of money
on. Even if he turns out to be totally wrong in his
conclusions, this is a newsgroup about the space shuttle,
and there may be something to learn from him.
And he knows what the Constitution says, he's just
expressing the fundamental human belief--go almost anywhere
in the world and take a poll, and most people believe it
even if they feel it is a right that has been taken from
them by force--that gave rise to that particular amendment
in connection with a statement that, had it been made by
him, would have been perceived and characterized as "another
Maxson threat," followed by a rant about "inbreds,"
"molesters," and so on.
You don't have to like him, you don't have to agree with
him, you can wish he would go away--and you can even make
him go away by use of a killfile--but context still counts.
At least I hope it does, even for a Maxson.
rl
Herb Schaltegger
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
rl, don't netkop me. If I have treated some badly WHO DID NOT DESERVE
IT, I wouldn't hesitate to apologize. Go back and google if you've
forgotten already. As for killfiles, I already have his father and
brother killfiled for obvious reasons (despite your infatuation with
Paul, both his history and his insults to me, personally, resulted in
his presence there). Daniel has also called me ignorant on several
occasions - in the context of those threads, however, I don't care what
he calls me if he would simply prove he has the data he claims he has.
That said, Daniel is doing nothing but being coy, dropping hints and
then setting up strawmen as diversions while he changes the subject.
I'm tired of it.
He can put up or shut up, as I will remind him to do as often as
necessary.
Alan Erskine
news:herbschaltegger-4B...@enews.newsguy.com...
> In article <bhg4j5$ddtp$1...@ID-181658.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > Herb Schaltegger wrote:
> rl, don't netkop me.
Oh, Rhonda, how the mighty have fallen.
And become a Maxsonite in the process.
Alan Erskine
--
Alan Erskine
alanerskine(at)optusnet.com.au
John Howard doesn't speak for this
Australian in the Amrosi death sentence -
Jail, not death.
"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:bhg4j5$ddtp$1...@ID-181658.news.uni-berlin.de...
OM
<m...@prairienet.org> wrote:
>Scott was just looking for company. It was never clear he was
>convinced, only that the enemy of my enemy.......
...Or in this case, "the enema of my enema...."
OM
<herbsch...@spamtrap.invalid> wrote:
>That said, Daniel is doing nothing but being coy, dropping hints and
>then setting up strawmen as diversions while he changes the subject.
>I'm tired of it.
...Aren't we all. Which is why, if you're not going to killfile the
little bastard, adopt the following General Order: if he either
refuses to directly supply proof and/or skirts around the issue and/or
changes the subject, his case is automatically, irrevokably
invalidated.
>He can put up or shut up, as I will remind him to do as often as
>necessary.
...I think the latter would be preferable in any case. The entire
group - the "who is this 'we'?' that the Paul bastard keeps asking -
is sick of the Maxsons. They all need to go away. Period.
Doug...
om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research_facility.org says...
>
> <snip>
>
> The entire group ... is sick of the Maxsons. They all need to go away.
> Period.
I don't think Daniel, for example, needs to go away, specifically. What
I think needs doing is we need to stop feeding this "debate" (and I use
that word loosely and advisedly) over Challenger. John, Paul and even
Daniel know very well the factual objections to JTM's theories, and I
think that they have every right to develop their theories and present
their actual evidence. But on their own time, and in their own forums.
What is bothering me is that this newsgroup has ceased to serve the
function of discussing general space shuttle news, history, minutae, etc.
It has become nothing more than a forum for JTM to spew, the rest of us
to react, and Daniel (and to a much lesser extent Paul) to express their
own versions of events, as well as try and mediate and keep both sides
honest.
All over an accident that happened more than 17 years ago and, for better
or worse, has been judged, accepted for its determined causes, and had
its lessons learned (perfectly or not) incorporated into the NASA culture
and process.
In other words, it's a dead horse and doesn't bear all this scrutiny and
attention. I know I'll get flamed for saying this, but the time for
lessons learned from Challenger is past. If you want to impact NASA and
its culture *now*, it's far better to concentrate on lessons to be
learned from the destruction of Columbia.
And yet, there are 30 or 40 posts about Challenger now to every single
post about Columbia, the CAIB report, and NASA's reactions to it.
This emphasis on Challenger instead of Columbia is just plain not useful,
it's driven by JTM's energy around Challenger and relative lack of energy
around Columbia, and to be honest it isn't what I want to either discuss
or read about. It's as simple as that.
In my own humble opinion, it's simply not *interesting* to rehash these
same claims and counter-claims over and over and over again. Whatever
the potential deficiencies of the Rogers Commission report, it stands as
the accepted (and highly probably correct) assessment of the causes of
the accident. If anyone doesn't agree, fine -- but to allow that
disagreement to obsess the entire newsgroup is just not useful.
Perhaps it is time for those of us not interested in this particular
debate to abandon the newsgroup to those who have absconded with it, and
let them have their "debate" while the rest of us pursue our actual
interests elsewhere. I'd bet that there are any number of other forums
in which we can discuss more recent shuttle news (like maybe the Columbia
disaster, which relates only *very* tangentially to the current
Challenger discussion) and leave all these people, on all sides, to their
prolonged and painful exercise in public masturbation.
--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup | dvan...@mn.rr.com
Terrence Daniels
news:MPG.19a5aa1ba...@news-server.mn.rr.com...
> Perhaps it is time for those of us not interested in this particular
> debate to abandon the newsgroup to those who have absconded with it, and
> let them have their "debate" while the rest of us pursue our actual
> interests elsewhere. I'd bet that there are any number of other forums
> in which we can discuss more recent shuttle news (like maybe the Columbia
> disaster, which relates only *very* tangentially to the current
> Challenger discussion) and leave all these people, on all sides, to their
> prolonged and painful exercise in public masturbation.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=starting+a+newsgroup
What I'm finding says it takes about a month to start a new group.
I understand that there used to be quite a few interesting people posting
here a couple of years ago; the discussions here now pale in comparison to
those I've found in Google news archives. I think maybe it's time for a new
newsgroup, and I'm more than willing to keep my F'ing Mouth Shut and try to
keep my own noise down if it'll help bring back the interesting posts. All
those interesting technical people who left could be invited back.
The Maxson situation is never going to improve. It's been a couple of years
already (six months of which I have been here for) and it's only gotten
worse. Granted, I haven't helped any, but I've decided to change. No amount
of communication, be it legitimate questioning or horrendous insults, will
ever convince him that he's anything other than totally right in all
respects. There's no arguing with him or his kinfolk. The best that can be
hoped for is to keep others from falling for his crap, and even that is best
accomplished by a warning post and a link or two for new readers.
I hate to have my questions drowned in noise, and I hate to learn about the
shuttle systems secondhand through posts refuting some inane bit of drivel
about a non-existent conspiracy. I'm willing to do something to end this, be
it helping make a new newsgroup, compiling a FAQ, or whatever.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> I hate to have my questions drowned in noise, and I hate
> to learn about the shuttle systems secondhand through
> posts refuting some inane bit of drivel about a
> non-existent conspiracy. I'm willing to do something to
> end this, be it helping make a new newsgroup, compiling a
> FAQ, or whatever.
sci.space.moderated
Jorge R. Frank
news:bSS_a.1130$f15.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
> http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=starting+a+newsgroup
>
> What I'm finding says it takes about a month to start a new group.
>
> I hate to have my questions drowned in noise, and I hate to learn
> about the shuttle systems secondhand through posts refuting some inane
> bit of drivel about a non-existent conspiracy. I'm willing to do
> something to end this, be it helping make a new newsgroup, compiling a
> FAQ, or whatever.
A new newsgroup would be a mistake. To keep the noise out, it would have
to be moderated. We already have several moderated groups in sci.space,
including one (sci.space.moderated) created *specifically* as a reaction to
the troll infestation. Yet few people post there.
Likewise, we already have a FAQ. Last I checked, it even had advice on
dealing with trolls. That's not the answer either.
One potential answer would be to make sci.space.moderated actually *work*,
by redirecting the "signal" there and letting the moderators handle the
"noise". (Note Newsgroups: and FollowUp-To:). Eventually, people will get
used to going directly to sci.space.moderated, bypassing the noise.
Question: What do the moderators think of this?
--
JRF
Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.
Charleston
<snip>
> I don't think Daniel, for example, needs to go away, specifically.
You are in the minority Doug.
> What I think needs doing is we need to stop feeding this "debate" (and I
use
> that word loosely and advisedly) over Challenger.
Ironically, I agree. I beleive it is time to play some cards. I am working
on my hand. I want this to end too. I want it to end with a public record
that has some answers that have some legs. It will take people like you
Doug to discuss those answers above the noise. I heve followed your posts
and you like history. Part of history is understanding what happened.
Please be patient as I assemble enough cards to answer the critics who have
asked for proof of this or that on Challenger.
> John, Paul and even
> Daniel know very well the factual objections to JTM's theories, and I
> think that they have every right to develop their theories and present
> their actual evidence. But on their own time, and in their own forums.
Part of understanding the Challenger Accident is understanding the
investigation of the accident. Once that dragon is slain we can move on or
not!
> What is bothering me is that this newsgroup has ceased to serve the
> function of discussing general space shuttle news, history, minutae, etc.
> It has become nothing more than a forum for JTM to spew, the rest of us
> to react, and Daniel (and to a much lesser extent Paul) to express their
> own versions of events, as well as try and mediate and keep both sides
> honest.
If you are given enough new facts perhaps you will have an interest in
learning even more. I know I do.
> All over an accident that happened more than 17 years ago and, for better
> or worse, has been judged, accepted for its determined causes, and had
> its lessons learned (perfectly or not) incorporated into the NASA culture
> and process.
Things may change.
> Perhaps it is time for those of us not interested in this particular
> debate to abandon the newsgroup to those who have absconded with it, and
> let them have their "debate" while the rest of us pursue our actual
> interests elsewhere. I'd bet that there are any number of other forums
> in which we can discuss more recent shuttle news (like maybe the Columbia
> disaster, which relates only *very* tangentially to the current
> Challenger discussion) and leave all these people, on all sides, to their
> prolonged and painful exercise in public masturbation.
Over the top perhaps but I do understand your frustraition. The intense
posting you see now is fear based IMO.
Stephen Stocker
Herb Schaltegger wrote:
> In article <98F_a.78906$zy.26775@fed1read06>,
> "Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote:
>
>> To suggest an
>> elderly man expressing his God given right to free speech . . .(snipped!)
>
> Glad to see you have as little understanding of Constitutional law as
> you do metallurgy, flight dynamics, combustion physics, instrumentation,
> telemetry, compressible fluid flow, control systems theory, and
> aerodynamics.
Steve
Greg D. Moore (Strider)
"Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote in message
news:mLV_a.891$cj1.617@fed1read06...
> "Doug..." <dvan...@mn.rr.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I don't think Daniel, for example, needs to go away, specifically.
>
> You are in the minority Doug.
>
> > What I think needs doing is we need to stop feeding this "debate" (and I
> use
> > that word loosely and advisedly) over Challenger.
>
> Ironically, I agree. I beleive it is time to play some cards. I am
working
> on my hand. I want this to end too.
Daniel, you see the problem is right there. You're treating this as
high-stakes poker.
It's not. It's supposed to be a nice rational discussion where facts are
laid out on the table in advance.
Stop being coy. Put up or shut up.
John Maxson
message news:7tY_a.199138$EQ5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> It's supposed to be a nice rational discussion where facts are
> laid out on the table in advance.
Well, when are you going to lay yours out?
> Put up or shut up.
Take your own advice.
--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)
Cameron Dorrough
"Jorge R. Frank" <jrf...@ibm-pc.borg> wrote in message
news:Xns93D7B803...@216.39.221.8...
>
> One potential answer would be to make sci.space.moderated actually *work*,
> by redirecting the "signal" there and letting the moderators handle the
> "noise". (Note Newsgroups: and FollowUp-To:). Eventually, people will get
> used to going directly to sci.space.moderated, bypassing the noise.
>
> Question: What do the moderators think of this?
Jorge, FWIW, I posted a reply to this email to the effect that one of the
problems with moderated groups is the time delay between posts being sent
and them actually being approved making a reasonable discussion somewhat
difficult. This is *not* any failing on the part of the moderators -more an
artifact of the way the system works.
As a case in point, I haven't seen the reply appear yet..
Cameron:-)
Charleston
> "Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote:
> Daniel, you see the problem is right there. You're treating this as
> high-stakes poker.
>
> It's not. It's supposed to be a nice rational discussion where facts are
> laid out on the table in advance.
LOL, A nice rational discussion about anything that contradicts the party
line? Spare me. The cards I have are scientific based information
logically evaluated IMO. Please excuse my use of any gambling terms. I
blame that on Las Vegas;-) I have tried to reference accessible documents
in my replies. More info is required that is accessible to all. It is hard
work Greg.
> Stop being coy. Put up or shut up.
I have made a commitment to provide new data so I am not being coy. I asked
for some time. Bear with me though, I am not going to sit idly by and watch
an attempted gang bang. If the group will take a deep breath I will have
new data sooner.
Charleston
> "Charleston" <Charl...@coxdotgoeshere.net> wrote:
>
> > To suggest an
> > elderly man expressing his God given right to free speech . .
.(snipped!)
>
> Glad to see you have as little understanding of Constitutional law as
> you do metallurgy, flight dynamics, combustion physics, instrumentation,
> telemetry, compressible fluid flow, control systems theory, and
> aerodynamics.
Good grief. You are a lawyer?
Click on the links and follow them to a **preamble related to archery**!!!
That would be related to my response about----archery!!!!
I have read the U.S. Constitution and its preamble FWIW.
Dale
wrote:
>Jorge, FWIW, I posted a reply to this email to the effect that one of the
>problems with moderated groups is the time delay between posts being sent
>and them actually being approved making a reasonable discussion somewhat
>difficult. This is *not* any failing on the part of the moderators -more an
>artifact of the way the system works.
>
>As a case in point, I haven't seen the reply appear yet..
It came through on my news server (whatever "Supernews" calls
itself these days) 30 minutes after Jorge's post.
Dale
ElleninLosAngeles
> One potential answer would be to make sci.space.moderated actually *work*
I was wondering about this last week. I hadn't seen the posts about it
because the board has been such a mess the last few wks I haven't
bothered to click on any of the topics.
Are you contacting the moderator(s) of sci.space.moderated directly?
It seems like no one responds to posts over there, people just put up
links to random space articles. Since it includes ALL space topics it
seems we would need a new moderated group.
I read up on this briefly (I went to Google Groups and clicked on the
tiny Groups Help link) and it sounds quite difficult to start a new
mod. group. It would help if someone with experience being a moderator
backs your new group idea, according to what I read. And most are
moderated by more than 1 person, so if the person goes on vacation,
falls ill, etc. people's posts aren't backlogged.
Anyways, I think it's a fab idea IF you can get the group promoted
well enough that everyone breaks the habit of posting here and moves
over.
My other idea is to start a website sim. to NasaWatch that is just
about the NASA shuttle program post-Columbia, which is what I'm
interested in. I would write a daily entry op-ed style or just
reviewing the latest news, and welcome anyone to mail me there own
op-ed piece with their latest grousings, etc. Plus links to news
articles (only interesting ones). Even this sort of site would take a
daily commitment of time and it still wouldn't offer the immediate
gratification of the Usenet bulletin board and the sense that you are
interacting with people in real time.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Aug 2003 23:35:45 GMT
rl
Greg D. Moore (Strider)
"John Maxson" <max...@iowatelecom.net> wrote in message
news:bhhlbr$ris$1...@ins22.netins.net...
> Greg D. Moore (Strider) <moo...@greenms.com> wrote in
> message news:7tY_a.199138$EQ5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> >
> > It's supposed to be a nice rational discussion where facts are
> > laid out on the table in advance.
>
> Well, when are you going to lay yours out?
I've made no claims. You're the one making the claims.
Alan Erskine
>
> "John Maxson" <max...@iowatelecom.net> wrote in message
> news:bhhlbr$ris$1...@ins22.netins.net...
> > Greg D. Moore (Strider) <moo...@greenms.com> wrote in
> > message news:7tY_a.199138$EQ5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > >
> > > It's supposed to be a nice rational discussion where facts are
> > > laid out on the table in advance.
> >
> > Well, when are you going to lay yours out?
>
> I've made no claims. You're the one making the claims.
>
>
> >
> > > Put up or shut up.
> >
> > Take your own advice.
You...are...wasting...your...time.
And you know it.
Paul Maxson
I think Richard Katz of Goddard runs that group so it shouldn't be biased?
I will have to check my 1.5 MB's of his behind the scene email manipulations
of people to act anti Maxson to be 100% positive though. I thought this caused
him a "bit of trouble" when NASA called me but reading these emails I guess not.
Yeah go there to S.S.M thanks!
PM
Stephen Stocker
For a few, that'd be a solution. For the Failed O-Ring Society or
Failed Humans Society or whatever, it'd ruin their whole reason for
being here. After all, how can a bully and its clones find
satisfaction without an officially-designated victim?
Steve
ElleninLosAngeles
Hi- I posted a response to this at 3 AM last night and I see it ended
up as its own topic....it's titled Re: moderated idea if you want to
read it. I'd copy and paste it in here but it just screws up the
paragraph formatting for some reason.
Ellen
Stephen Stocker
Gardner wrote:
> In article <vjq7r1p...@corp.supernews.com>,
> one person commonly offensive to the charter of the newsgroup - that
> there is something wrong with the many and not the one.
There's something *very* wrong with that one clique. You might be
surprised at the number of people who read here but never post, simply
because the first thing they see is the neighborhood bullies. They
feel that it isn't worth it. In a way, they have more sense than I do.
After all, imaginary power-trips aren't hard to find on the internet.
Conversely, there are people here who have disagreements and post them
in a decent manner. I think that's a positive thing. Sadly, their
posts are often almost buried among the garbage.
Why is it that some feel confident enough of their information to
honestly debate, while these noisemakers can't seem to come up with
anything other than boring epithets?
> It has a lot
> more to do with the one repeating the same series of actions/statements,
> while recyling a few bits of information over and over and over again.
>
> 1. Make claim that something happened.
>
> 2. Make claim to have proof that costs a lot of money that no one else
> has but refuse to ever make the proof available.
>
> 3. Call people names when they argue the point or can't see what they
> see no matter how hard they look.
>
> 4. Sit and spin until someone makes a small slip up, then claim they
> are stupid, work for lockeed, work for nasa or call them a few names.
>
> 5. Go back to 1.
>
> This cycle has been followed almost without change whether one person or
> ten is trying to "discuss" topic. You'll note that none of 1-5 has to
> do with the shuttle - it has to do with the need for some people to
> self-justify-by-conflict because they have no other means.
And referring to someone as a "bastard", "child molester" or whatever
has something to do with the shuttle? Or anything else, for that
matter?
> Kill files and web reviews with an occasional FAQ.
I think kill files are great. Except that those who claim to use them
keep claiming but also keep responding to those who've supposedly been
kill filed.
Steve
Chuck Stewart
> And referring to someone as a "bastard", "child molester" or whatever
> has something to do with the shuttle? Or anything else, for that
> matter?
So Everyone who calls JTM as they see him are automatically lumped
by you with OM?
JTM is an evasive troll... and nuch, much worse.
His sons have fluctuated wildly in their behavior but have recently
taken a turn for the worse.
Together, as a "Collective", they have indelibly left their
impressions on the group.
Just because a loudmouth, and OM is a loudmouth, constantly posts
irrelevant crap about the Maxsons does _not_ make them any less
responsible for their behavior here... which has been piss-poor by
any standard.
Nor should those who call them on that behavior be lumped in with
OM's idiocy.
> Steve
--
Chuck Stewart
"Anime-style catgirls: Threat? Menace? Or just studying algebra?"
Stephen Stocker
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 19:31:13 +0000, Stephen Stocker wrote:
>
>> And referring to someone as a "bastard", "child molester" or whatever
>> has something to do with the shuttle? Or anything else, for that
>> matter?
>
> So Everyone who calls JTM as they see him are automatically lumped
> by you with OM?
to the kind of thing I referred to above.
> JTM is an evasive troll... and nuch, much worse.
I know you don't agree with him Chuck, but I can't recall you abusing
him for the fun of it. I have no objection to what you've said, or
with the arguments several others have presented. (Jon and Roger come
to mind.)
I've always thought that kind of argument was a good thing. I've also
had a lot of fun and learned a lot that way.
> His sons have fluctuated wildly in their behavior but have recently
> taken a turn for the worse.
Again, you're stating what you believe, and I doubt that it's
offensive to anybody. For all I know, you may think I'm some troll who
popped in here to irritate people, and I can't say I'd be offended if
you said so.
> Together, as a "Collective", they have indelibly left their
> impressions on the group.
As do many.
> Just because a loudmouth, and OM is a loudmouth, constantly posts
> irrelevant crap about the Maxsons does _not_ make them any less
> responsible for their behavior here... which has been piss-poor by
> any standard.
I'm not trying to excuse anyone, although I honestly understand why it
might seem that way. My intentions are to differentiate between
annoyance and abuse. And believe me, I don't use the term abuse
lightly.
> Nor should those who call them on that behavior be lumped in with
> OM's idiocy.
Agreed, and if I gave the impression that I do, I apologize.
Steve
Chuck Stewart
> I know you don't agree with him Chuck, but I can't recall you abusing
> him for the fun of it. I have no objection to what you've said, or
> with the arguments several others have presented. (Jon and Roger come
> to mind.)
Yes, there is a diffeence between OM's mouthing off and other posts
that challenge JTM's assertions.
> I've always thought that kind of argument was a good thing. I've also
> had a lot of fun and learned a lot that way.
Okeydoke.
<snip>
> Again, you're stating what you believe, and I doubt that it's
> offensive to anybody. For all I know, you may think I'm some troll who
> popped in here to irritate people, and I can't say I'd be offended if
> you said so.
Ahah! The plot thickens... :)
Paul Maxson
Chuck,
You tell a good story, but that is all it is a story. A man named James Oberg
brought us here with a post calling my family kooks without any proof. His post
was accepted as fact (just as the 2 defamatory web pages are by Jon and Roger,
aka NASA/Lockheed) and when we came here in self defense we were attacked from the
begining up to and including having to file legitimaye police reports. I have never seen such
vigourous defense of something on Usenet in my life! Why? Don't like our theory plonk
and move on! Behind the scenes hate campains condoned here too?
I don't even need to mention your apparent defense of OM because logic prevails to the
lurker as Stephen said. Allot of people read here but don't post and they know the story.
Mr. Oberg claimed then retracted that even Stocker was a Maxson w/o research!
Bottom line is why did NASA call my house 3 times at 0600 and run a background on me
using my local authorities? Is this common for "Usenet trolls?" Anyway I must have passed the
background because they never knocked on my door and Katz (Goddard) quit harrasing me
publicly. Yet he still did privately it seems. Why bother? I get private emails that say my
posts are too logical. I think using logic, is that a bad thing here?
Just reread your post about 3 people conquering Usenet and you dismissing OM 's behavior
but rather than as a Maxson Hater read it logically. Your story just doesn't add up Chuck.
Upchuck :-) I think that is a good note to end on. I will add this though, if NASA or any other
Federal/State/County Agency lied and covered it up (I said if) I wouldn't care if it took
75 to 100 years I would want them to be held accountable and the only way that could
happen is getting to the bottom of the story. For those who have said "this has gone on too long."
If you lost a loved one and an Agency or company may have lied or covered it up how long would
you pursue it? Think about that logically please, that's all I ask. Or what if you worked there
when it happened (as my father did and Chuck Stewart didn't!) Would you just let it go if you
knew facts that other's didn't and wrote warning letters to the Senate level pre launch.
You will never know how you would act Chuck because you were not there!
PM
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Chuck,
>
> You tell a good story, but that is all it is a story. A man named James Oberg
> brought us here with a post calling my family kooks without any proof. His post
> was accepted as fact
Someone else posted the initial post about the JTM website --
http://tinyurl.com/k63q
It was posted to sci.space.history only, and not to sci.space.shuttle.
It was a fairly mild post, given the amount of attacks to the
professional character and integrity of many people that is contained in
the JTM website; and James did NOT call your family "kooks".
The 3 Maxson posters continually whine about not being treated well
here, yet they continually engage in name-calling and personal abuse
toward posters who disagree with their worldview.
Your post contained an example of this --
> Your story just doesn't add up Chuck.
>
> Upchuck :-)
.
John Maxson
news:3F3D6CA4...@attbi.com...
> "Paul Maxson" <pma...@surewest.net> wrote:
> >
> > A man named James Oberg brought us here with a post
> > calling my family kooks without any proof. His post
> > was accepted as fact
>
> Someone else posted the initial post about the JTM
> website -- http://tinyurl.com/k63q
Oberg's wife?
Scott M. Kozel
>
> Scott M. Kozel <koz...@attbi.com> wrote:
> > "Paul Maxson" <pma...@surewest.net> wrote:
> >
> > > A man named James Oberg brought us here with a post
> > > calling my family kooks without any proof. His post
> > > was accepted as fact
> >
> > Someone else posted the initial post about the JTM
> > website -- http://tinyurl.com/k63q
>
> Oberg's wife?
No, "someone else" as in the person who posted the reference to that
thread, on this newsgroup within the last week.
.
Paul Maxson
"Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:3F3D6CA4...@attbi.com...
If that is the best example of the worst "abuse" I have done then go back to start do not pass go
and do not collect 200 dollars Scott. I can google 200 pages towards me in 5 seconds
but I won't.
Been there, done that and everyone knows the story that is reading these posts.
The truth is coming out and it isn't pretty, just wait Scott, just wait like Daniel said.
What is your role is this anyway? Where do *you* work? What is _your_ background?
All 3 Maxson's have stated
our backgrounds and my mothers, sisters et al over and over and still get called "kooks",
bastards, child molesters etc etc. Your lines of attacks are running thin better try a new angle.
No one buys your crap about the 3 of us being inbred bastard child molesting "kooks" anymore
except the insider ring and even that is shrinking.
PM
Paul Maxson
That makes absolutely no sense Scott. My statement stands, Oberg posted here to the sci.*
community and we came in self defense after him posting about us her _not before_.
Thanks for the link refresher though it's like a road map of who is who in the ring lined up
like ducks.
PM
Scott M. Kozel
>
> "Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@attbi.com> wrote:
> > "John Maxson" <max...@iowatelecom.net> wrote:
> > > Scott M. Kozel <koz...@attbi.com> wrote:
> > > > "Paul Maxson" <pma...@surewest.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A man named James Oberg brought us here with a post
> > > > > calling my family kooks without any proof. His post
> > > > > was accepted as fact
> > > >
> > > > Someone else posted the initial post about the JTM
> > > > website -- http://tinyurl.com/k63q
> > >
> > > Oberg's wife?
> >
> > No, "someone else" as in the person who posted the reference to that
> > thread, on this newsgroup within the last week.
>
> That makes absolutely no sense Scott. My statement stands, Oberg posted here to the sci.*
> community and we came in self defense after him posting about us her _not before_.
People post about all kinds of things on Usenet, including criticism of
websites. No big deal.
I've read over 30 different Usenet newsgroups over the last 7 years, but
this is the first time I've ever seen a whole family unit get involved
on a daily basis of defending the website/theories of one of their
members.
I think that is rather obsessive on the part of y'all, including
overreacting.
.
Scott M. Kozel
>
> "Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > Someone else posted the initial post about the JTM website --
> > http://tinyurl.com/k63q
> >
> > It was posted to sci.space.history only, and not to sci.space.shuttle.
> > It was a fairly mild post, given the amount of attacks to the
> > professional character and integrity of many people that is contained in
> > the JTM website; and James did NOT call your family "kooks".
> >
> > The 3 Maxson posters continually whine about not being treated well
> > here, yet they continually engage in name-calling and personal abuse
> > toward posters who disagree with their worldview.
> >
> > Your post contained an example of this --
> >
> > > Your story just doesn't add up Chuck.
> > >
> > > Upchuck :-)
>
> If that is the best example of the worst "abuse" I have done then go back to start do not pass go
> and do not collect 200 dollars Scott. I can google 200 pages towards me in 5 seconds
> but I won't.
JTM continually engages in name-calling and personal abuse that is much
worse than that.
> Been there, done that and everyone knows the story that is reading these posts.
> The truth is coming out and it isn't pretty, just wait Scott, just wait like Daniel said.
If you're referring to the JTM "truth" about STS-51L, then I think that
you will be waiting until Hell freezes over.
> What is your role is this anyway? Where do *you* work? What is _your_ background?
I'm just a Usenet poster, and probably somewhat more of a critic of the
shuttle program than a supporter. I do not work (and never have) in the
aerospace industry, not directly nor indirectly. I am certainly NOT
part of any sci.space.* "club" if there is any such thing.
> All 3 Maxson's have stated
> our backgrounds and my mothers, sisters et al over and over and still get called "kooks",
> bastards, child molesters etc etc. Your lines of attacks are running thin better try a new angle.
>
> No one buys your crap about the 3 of us being inbred bastard child molesting "kooks" anymore
> except the insider ring and even that is shrinking.
"OM" is the only poster that I see using the "bastards, child molesters
etc" epithets toward Maxsons, and you cannot blame those attacks on
anyone else.
.
Rhonda Lea Kirk
> "OM" is the only poster that I see using the "bastards,
> child molesters etc" epithets toward Maxsons, and you
> cannot blame those attacks on anyone else.
You're wrong, Scott. OM is not the only one.
And there's an unpleasant trend I've noticed regarding this
specific issue. OM, of all people, is certainly equipped to
take a pounding, but he appears to be everyone's choice of
goat, and it's just one more example of what's wrong. It's
not a single person who is the bad guy here. Most of the
guys here (and that includes the female guys too) are good
guys and most of the guys here (repeat parenthetical) have a
lot of integrity as individuals. But once that group-think
thing gets going, it's not so clear-cut.
rl
Paul Maxson
"Scott M. Kozel" <koz...@attbi.com> wrote in message news:3F3D9352...@attbi.com...
Ok Mr. Kozel,
You keep dodging the question like those that claim we do. What is your background?
Answer the question everyone in the debate has been told to answer!
Let me say this just one time for the archive and I will not debate it or repeat it.
So pay attention and reread this if you have to.
Oberg brought the "kook" word and our follow up defense here and since then
we have fought everyone here in self defense. Get that yet?
I gave my entire families background and you are just a "Usenet Poster?"
I am going to put you to bed then filter you ok?
I grew up in the most hardened areas of California, Vallejo, Fairfield, Bay area etc.
At times I fought my way through gangs both to and from school. I got beat up quite a bit
in Vallejo just for being white. I learned Martial Arts and learned to fight back like
I am doing now, except I am using knowledge now not physical skills.
That is why when I came here I said "my lethal weapon is my mind."
I became very proficient (brown belt) and then my Instructor died
(.357 to the head in front of me.) He was my sisters husband and my best friend.
I got both parents signature to join the US Navy at the age 17 and took whatever they
had to get me off the streets (literally.) Turns out that the rate I chose no longer exists
thus a Fire Fighter I became. I went halfway around the world and fought a fire onboard
our ship where 6 of my mates died. By the age of 21 I had graduated from the school of
hard knocks (street smarts) and saw more death than most people see in a lifetime.
I got out and went into private security and had turned my life around. I grew up.
I gave back to my community (and still am) at the private, City, State and now Federal
level. I learned pride and integrity and dedicated my life to fighting back against the bad
guys that like to pick on people. I have been both at gunpoint and had people at gun point
and I trudge on, working in the community daily. So if you want to fight JTM's theory's when
he was there at launch and you were not go ahead. If you want to pick on my brother Daniel
who has raised 3 Christian children to adulthood and nag him because he hasn't got
your data ready feel free (you will lose both debates.)
If you want to argue about my integrity and morals and values you better move on to someone
else Mr. Usenet Poster because if you lived to be 300 you will NEVER have as much integrity
as I have. Good night and as they say, "plonk." Now I advise you *too* to "grow up."
Good night and goodbye,
PM
Scott M. Kozel
> >
> > > What is your role is this anyway? Where do *you* work? What is _your_
> > > background?
> >
> > I'm just a Usenet poster, and probably somewhat more of a critic of the
> > shuttle program than a supporter. I do not work (and never have) in the
> > aerospace industry, not directly nor indirectly. I am certainly NOT
> > part of any sci.space.* "club" if there is any such thing.
> >
>
>
> You keep dodging the question like those that claim we do. What is your background?
> Answer the question everyone in the debate has been told to answer!
My websites have a summary of my education and work experience on the
main page, and the topic of the websites and the massive amount of
information about that topic ought to give a clear idea of my
background.
> Oberg brought the "kook" word and our follow up defense here and since then
> we have fought everyone here in self defense.
That is rubbish and over-suspicion on your part. I've been called worse
than that at times, but I have not had to "fight everyone in self
defense". (Of course, a lot of other posters would think that they are
fighting you'all in self defense, so it is a matter of perspective).
Your incessant conspiracy postings, refusal to answer many direct
questions, obfuscation of various issues, and attacks on NASA and some
of its contractors, are what has made you controversial and the focus of
arguments. You are laying in the bed of your own making.
--
Scott M. Kozel Highway and Transportation History Websites
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D.C. http://www.roadstothefuture.com
Philadelphia and Delaware Valley http://www.pennways.com
OM
> That makes absolutely no sense Scott. My statement stands, Oberg posted here to the sci.*
> community and we came in self defense after him posting about us her _not before_.
...Doesn't change by one iota the fact that he was 100% dead on in his
assessment of your entire family's mental state. You all *are* a bunch
of kooks, nutcases, and psychotics.
Just fucking go away, Paul. And take your worthless relatives with
you...
OM
--
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb bastard die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society
- General George S. Patton, Jr