--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, navashok wrote:
> > (snip>
> > > I think you should read it, you can easily obtain a copy, I was
> > > trying to spare you the details, because I don't want to get
> > > into another dog fight here.
> >
> > You won't get into a "dog fight" by simply reporting what's
> > in the book. You *are* likely to get into a dog fight if you
> > insist what's in the book must be the objective truth and
> > use it to attack Robin (again, in his absence, one of your
> > particularly dishonorable tendencies).
>
> I only hint what is in the book and report it. Where on
> earth do I insist it is true?
In your post to Steve, you reported the "Caitlin" incident
as if it were factual (although you backed off after I
pointed out that we didn't have Robin's side of the story).
> The book is there for all to read. It is your insinuations,
> pure fantasy by you, that is dishonest.
Oh, which "insinuations" were those, navashok?
> It can't be a taboo talking about this,
Of course not. Nowhere did I suggest it was. I was
addressing your silly contention that you'd get into
a "dog fight" if you mentioned any details.
> and I am not bringing it up from my site,
("Side," not "site.") Again, I didn't say you were.
> I am just reacting to what Steve said. Nor do I get after
> you, as you continuously insinuate. If you are honest you
> will have to acknowledge this.
If you are honest, you'll have to acknowledge that you
have been doing precisely this since I called you on
your psychiatric pseudo-diagnosis of Robin last December.
(And I don't "insinuate" this, I say it right up front.)
> And yes, I have no reason to believe that Bill Howell is not
> saying the truth.
You have no reason to believe he is telling the truth
either, other than your antipathy toward Robin.
> You may disagree, that's okay.
Much more importantly, does Robin disagree?
When he commented on the book, Robin was surprisingly
generous toward Howell; he didn't accuse him of lying.
He did say his own memory differed from Howell's in
several factual respects (he didn't say what they were).
But he also indicated he felt Howell's overall
presentation, albeit sincere, was significantly skewed.
I cited an amazing discussion between Ann and Robin in
which Robin gave his perspective on it all.
Of course, far be it from you to read that discussion
for balance.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/326991
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327053
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327243
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327546
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327566
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327058
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327442
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/327572
