[UC] Community Court

[Glenn]

 Neighbors,

I had the opportunity to speak briefly with the coordinator of Community Court 
and the police liaison to the "agencies" with which they work. Please contact 
me off list if you want the address for the President Judge for Municipal Court 
and the Coordinator of Community Court.

They are aware of the news reports about the UCD. I was able to deliver, in 
this face to face way, a description of this unaccountable organization. 
Nevertheless, they are expecting a formal complaint from me and I urge others 
to consider similar complaints.  

Can you believe he said to me, "they're doing an investigation and suspended 
someone?"  I contained my laughter and thought those UCD people will even 
bullshit officers of Municipal court!

The Coordinator confirmed that the Penn students in the reports had nothing to 
do with the Community Court probationers with whom they worked beside. It 
appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within Penn's Office of 
Public Safety. He used the words "internal process"

This is in section 1 of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or 
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any 
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to 
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.



If this "internal process" is being handled by the Office of Public Safety, do 
non-students arrested by the fully empowered Penn Police have the right to 
request this instead of community court? We are all under the jurisdiction of 
the Penn Police whether folks generally are aware of that. I wonder if some 
people go to community court and receive a police record while others get 
unequal privileges through the "internal process?"

The Penn sites I've found describe the Penn police having a relationship with 
Community Court and nothing about this separate system. Folks, I think we need 
some serious disclosure from Maureen Rush about this program!

Sincerely,

Glenn

Fwd: [UC] The UCD answer

[pmuyehara]

  I don't understand the reasoning behind #5.  Non-profit means non-profit, 
not neutral.  Non-profits have missions to accomplish, agendas to support.  
They may provide health care, food for HIV+, rescue dogs, support education, 
assist crime victims, etc.  It is not unusual that public policy has an impact 
on their constituency and mission.  As a result, advocacy can become a part of 
the org's activities.
  Whenever there is advocacy, there is the possibility of opposition and 
public controversy.  This may or may not be anticipated in advance.  Of course, 
if opposition exists or is anticipated, the org may well need to consider what 
position to take and how to advance it.  What I can't fathom is why a non 
profit should in your rules be prohibited from taking a position or a side in a 
controversy.


 


 

-Original Message-
From: UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: University City List 
Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:26 am
Subject: Re: [UC] The UCD answer









Kyle Cassidy wrote: 

> I understand your position and I think very often UCD does stay out of 

> the fray. But in the particular case of Dock Street I believe it goes 

> back to your point of "whom is UCD beholden to" -- and as Sharrieff 

> pointed out, UCD is beholden to the people who pay it's bills -- at the 

> moment, that is not "all the people of west philly". They're still a 

> private entity until/unless the NID passes, in which case they'd be 

> answerable to our citycouncil person. In the meantime, the people who 

> are funding UCD have made it clear that getting businesses on Baltimore 

> avenue is a priorty and they have created a special pool of money to do 

> just that -- get businesses to open up along Baltimore Avenue. So with a 

> clear mandate from the people who are funding them, and popular support 

> among the people in the neighborhood (I recall someone from the zoning 

> board saying the amount of community support for that particular 

> business getting their variance was unprecidented in sheer size), they 

> went ahead and sided with Dock Street over the Hickman Temple day care 

> (which is my understanding, would have not been a public day care, but 

> rather one for the church only). If two neighbors were arguing over what 

> color their semi-detatched should be painted, I expect that UCD would 

> not get involved or if there were a rich debate about the borders of the 

> Catchman zone, I'd likewise expect them not to pick a side, but in this 

> instance, I think they acted properly in accordance with the wishes of 

> their funders. (Who include, to some small extent, me, since I've sent 

> them money and I'm happy with their position on Dock Street). 
 


thanks kyle. (and thanks for not resorting to ad hominem.) 
 

consider this: if a majority of folks in the hood were 
pro-Nutter, and these same folks also happened to be 
contributing money to ucd, that would not make it right for 
ucd to publicly endorse Nutter, to encourage voters to vote 
for Nutter. the choice for Nutter or not is a public choice, 
a public process among equal stakeholders. 
 

that's why in my example I took care to say 'public 
questions/disputes', why I said ucd should have been neutral 
once the zoning question became a public dispute among 
neighbors before the zoning board. 
 

so, how would you revise this: 
 

  - - - - - - - 
 

  idea #5: ucd should remain scrupulously neutral in public 

   questions/disputes/contests, not taking sides or 

   even appearing to take sides. 
 

  - - - - - - - 
 


.. 

UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN 

[aka laserbeam®] 

[aka ray] 

SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the 

list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see 

. 



 



AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

[UC] civic associations on UCD board?

[Glenn]

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Ray, each community association has a representative on the board of the 
>> UCD. 
>> There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both covering areas 
>> near your apartment. If you don't like what the UCD is doing, go to the 
>> community associations and ask them to exercise better oversight. 
>



Are you sure they each have one? Could we please get an updated list of our 
"community representatives" from these "oversight" organizations on the UCD 
Board? I had thought UCD dropped you, Melani? 

When I was revealing the serious problems with process at the FOCP, I explained 
some of the various methods that one individual could use to completely block 
anyone from participation with the organization. You are making an assertion 
that I know to be untrue. Anyone cannot go to the civic associations and be 
treated respectfully or get honest information. They'll take your money and go 
right back to bullying and excluding. 

Melani, I even posted on this public listserv a written example when one, Tony 
West, took $15 from me paid to him in order to join the "dog committee." After 
the FOCP took and cashed the check, I was informed that I would not be allowed 
to participate by Tony's assistant, Jonathon Snyder. 

I don't know if you've ever been bullied by a civic ass. group before, but it 
is an awful experience now that they've been anointed.  Folks could deal with 
their shenanigans when the civic ass groups were known as pathetic cranks.

These groups don't follow their rules when they don't want to and these groups 
do not represent neighborhoods. The groups are used through astroturfing to 
advance the personal agendas of their group's leaders, period. They don't even 
represent their own members as we again saw with the recent efforts to redesign 
Clark Park.



Melani, there is a stonewall in front of the vast majority of people in this 
community whom are affected by this UCD. I volunteered to join the NID steering 
committee when Lussenhop publicly said anyone could join. In addition to 
volunteering publicly on the spot, I sent an e-mail to one, Lewis Wendell, and 
I'm still waiting for his answer. How did you and Tommy get on that committee?

I sent a request to one, Eric Goldstein, in 2001 and made repeated requests to 
both UCD and an organization called the Friends of Clark Park to join the "park 
revitalization," as a leader of a major park stakeholder group. I know the 
pathetic UCD and the pathetic FOCP are busy but could they get back to me 
sometime in the next 6 years?

It's really hurtful to me to have you arrogantly proclaim, anyone can go to 
these good good civic ass. groups if you want the good good UCD to listen to 
you. Haven't you seen enough of the conduct of these civic associations to know 
what they are??

Maybe you can help me, Mel?

Could you tell Lewis that I'm the President of the Friends of Whores, Drug 
Addicts, Gang Members and Wankers, and I would like a seat on the UCD Board? 
Dues are free and we make up the vast majority of our neighbors. 

Some of our members think UCD is a shit organization, however; so I will have 
quite a challenge. Now that you're getting stonewalled, did UCD ever call you a 
whore?  Remmber, we'll take you if Lewis won't talk to you anymore!

Your friend and neighbor,

Glenn

RE: [UC] The UCD answer

[Kyle Cassidy]

>consider this: if a majority of folks in the hood were 
>pro-Nutter, and these same folks also happened to be 
>contributing money to ucd, that would not make it right for 
>ucd to publicly endorse Nutter, to encourage voters to vote 
>for Nutter. the choice for Nutter or not is a public choice, 
>a public process among equal stakeholders.

There's a big difference between the two examples. As we've all discovered 
recently, UCD is prohibited from political advocacy because of their 501c 
status. Were they "for profit" as is, the University City Review, for example, 
they could endorse Mr. Nutter 

>so, how would you revise this:

>   idea #5: ucd should remain scrupulously neutral in public
>questions/disputes/contests, not taking sides or
>even appearing to take sides.


"scrupulously neutral" is very dangerous and leads to complete inaction. Take 
my block for example. We planted 26 trees down the street last summer. Many of 
my neighbors came out and helped, we dug, we planted, we watered, UC Green 
bought the trees and UCD cleaned up the mess afterwards. You would think that 
something like this would be uncontroversial, however, there were neighbors who 
were violently opposed to it under the belief that trees along the block would 
improve the exterior appearance and cause their property values to go up. (And 
I'm told that this probably is the case, but I think we can use the shade.) To 
get my trees, UCD and UC Green had to take the "side" of some neighbors over 
others.

My revision would be:

 UCD should be committed to making the district a
 better place to live for the people who live
 in the district.

When they helped Dock Street get their zoning variance they were doing what I 
wanted and what I would expect a business advocacy group to do. I think that 
intersection will be better for the business being there. UCD's funders have 
designated a certain amount of UCDs budget to getting businesses to locate 
along the Baltimore Avenue corridor.  

In the future there will probably be MANY times that two businesses want the 
same parcel of land, there will be  property owners who don't want trees 
planted along their streets, there will be sidewalk-shovelers who don't want 
UCD to plow sidewalks. To wait for a universal consensus is to never move 
forward, there will always be at least two sides to every decision.

just my two cents.

kc
































































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Community Court

[Kyle Cassidy]

It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it necessarily 
had to come through the office of public safety. I'm curious as well, 
specifically because they don't go into it at all dancing around with the 
"minor infraction" thing. Which could have been cheating on a test, or it could 
have been sneaking beer into a dry dorm, or stealing a bagel from My Favorite 
Muffin. 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within Penn's Office 
of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go to community court and receive 
a police record while others get unequal privileges through the "internal 
process?"

[UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[committeeman7]

Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Jannie 
Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or a 
political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.

AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Glenn]

We don't know the answers; we know what has been reported..  There is no 
Penn information that I could find except that the Office of Public Safety 
works with community court.


We have reports of a minor infraction and we indeed have a report that the 
"Office of Public Safety" along with UCD apologized to the students.  We're 
all being stonewalled by UCD.  I have not yet confronted Penn officials 
about clarification and disclosure of the"internal process" as the Community 
Court officer called it.


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for handling 
academic infractions, they probably should indicate its existence publicly. 
This is what I couldn't understand.


Why would the Office of Public Safety be adjudicating these non criminal 
minor infractions which have been asserted on the list?  I haven't worked 
for Penn in over 7 years.  Does anyone know, are academic infractions sent 
to the Office of Public Safety under Maureen Rush?  When did the policy of 
"academic infractions" start leading to community service alongside thiefs, 
vandals, drug violaters, and prostitutes?


I'm not saying you're not correct about this Cassidy.  I'm saying we don't 
know.  This is an example of the problems that stonewalling causes and why 
it is not considered appropriate in the civilized world even if not encoded 
in IRS 501 c 3 laws.


Of course, we're in the University City District far from the civilized 
democracies of the world!


I'll let the list know what happens when I approach Penn officials.

Sincerely,
Glenn


- Original Message - 
From: "Kyle Cassidy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: [UC] Community Court



It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it necessarily 
had to come through the office of public safety. I'm curious as well, 
specifically because they don't go into it at all dancing around with the 
"minor infraction" thing. Which could have been cheating on a test, or it 
could have been sneaking beer into a dry dorm, or stealing a bagel from My 
Favorite Muffin.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within Penn's 
Office of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go to community court 
and receive a police record while others get unequal privileges through the 
"internal process?"







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date: 6/3/2007 
12:47 PM



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] UCD Board position, Thanks Mel

[Glenn]

It remains unclear if local activist, Melani Lamond, remains as the liaison 
between UCD and the public via the UC listserv. I've made a request to my good 
friend and neighbor, Melani, to assist me in obtaining a seat on the UCD board 
. I'm hoping to find out soon over lunch if the position has been approved or 
find out if Melani's been kicked out of UCD.

The Friends of Whores, Drug Addicts, Gang Members and Wankers is a new West 
Philadelphia community association. Our association is open to all criminals 
unwelcome in the University of Pennsylvania District and not represented or 
welcomed by the civic associations of the UCD culture.

We will submit articles of incorporation upon receiving the UCD Board seat and 
I will serve as the interim President and board representative. The FoWDGW will 
be unlike associations of the UCD culture. Our group will be dedicated to 
openness, honesty, integrity, inclusiveness, and accountability. We, the 
leaders, aren't full of shit when we say this, so we represent a fundamental 
revolution in the purpose of the civic association.

Dues are free and we will meet on July 4th in UCD Park at 43rd and Baltimore. 
Please call UCD at 215 243 0555 and ask Lewis to let us in! Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

Moyer Glenn

President of The Friends of Whores, Drug Addicts, Gang Members and Wankers 

Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Glenn]

Dear Committeman 7,

Will Maureen Rush be there to give disclosure concerning the involvement of the 
Office of Public Safety concerning these reports?  I would like to see all 
information about any internal process which transfers community service to 
UCD.  I would also like to learn about the process that occurs when the Penn 
Police transfer individuals to Community Court.

Thanks for your help and I look forward to the Thurday meeting. 

Sincerely,
Glenn Moyer
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:12 AM
  Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD 
investigation



  Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Jannie 
Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or a 
political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

  The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.

--
  AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.



--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 
PM

Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer]

[MLamond]

In a message dated 6/5/07 12:18:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Ray, each community association has a representative on the board of the 
> UCD.
> >   There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both covering 
> areas
> > near your apartment.   If you don't like what the UCD is doing, go to the
> > community associations and ask them to exercise better oversight.  
> 
> 
> 
> sorry, resorting to ad hominem here isn't helpful.
> 
No attack of any sort was intended here.   I was merely posting, as a point 
of information, an oversight mechanism in place for community involvement with 
the UCD board.   The community group for the area where I live, Cedar Park, 
has Dorothy Welch Berlind as our rep.   If I wanted to talk with someone about, 
or ask questions about, the UCD, I could call or email Dorothy.   Sorry if you 
saw my provision of information as an attack on you.   I believe that the 
list of board members and their community affiliations is on the UCD's web 
site.  
 There are also community people representing various local businesses.   I'm 
not one of them.




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101
2006 recipient of the Greater Philadelphia Association of Realtors awards:
- Diamond award for over $8 million in sales, and
ALL SIX of the West Philadelphia awards:
- Top Lister
- Top Seller
- Top Overall Combined Volume
- Top Listing Units by Area
- Top Selling Units by Area
- Top Overall Combined Units by Area



**
 See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Cheryl Shipman]

At 09:20 AM 6/5/2007 -0400, Glenn wrote:


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for 
handling academic infractions, they probably should indicate its 
existence publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


The Office of Public Safety doesn't handle academic or other Penn 
infractions.  This is done through the Office of Student 
Conduct.  See item #2 at

http://www.upenn.edu/osc/Charter.htm#label1o


Cheryl Shipman

(not speaking for Penn)



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer]

[Turner,Kathleen]

http://www.ucityphila.org/about/staff
 
Gee, that was s difficult.
 
 
It might be a bit out-of-date -- Tony Caneris has recently retired from
Drexel, but I would assume that his replacement will take his place on
the board.
 
Kathleen
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer]



In a message dated 6/5/07 12:18:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:




[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ray, each community association has a representative on the
board of the UCD.
>   There is one for Spruce Hill and one for Walnut Hill, both
covering areas
> near your apartment.   If you don't like what the UCD is
doing, go to the
> community associations and ask them to exercise better
oversight.  



sorry, resorting to ad hominem here isn't helpful.



No attack of any sort was intended here.  I was merely posting, as a
point of information, an oversight mechanism in place for community
involvement with the UCD board.  The community group for the area where
I live, Cedar Park, has Dorothy Welch Berlind as our rep.  If I wanted
to talk with someone about, or ask questions about, the UCD, I could
call or email Dorothy.  Sorry if you saw my provision of information as
an attack on you.  I believe that the list of board members and their
community affiliations is on the UCD's web site.  There are also
community people representing various local businesses.  I'm not one of
them.




Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101
2006 recipient of the Greater Philadelphia Association of Realtors
awards:
- Diamond award for over $8 million in sales, and
ALL SIX of the West Philadelphia awards:
- Top Lister
- Top Seller
- Top Overall Combined Volume
- Top Listing Units by Area
- Top Selling Units by Area
- Top Overall Combined Units by Area



**
See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 

Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party information

[Dave Axler]

Well, after reading through the material in Section 6104, here's what I 
conclude...


The information that must be made public is as follows:
1) The original application for exemption as a 501(c)(3) along with all 
supporting documents;
2) Any application and accompanying documents by a 501(c)(3) 
organization regarding a pension plan,

profit-sharing plan, or stock-bonus plan;
3) The annual information returns -- Form 990, if I remember right from 
my own experience -- filed with the IRS by 501(c)(3) organizations. 
This is essentially a summary of gross income, receipts, and 
disbursements, much like a for-profit organization's annual report ;
4) The reports from these organizations relating to the disclosure of 
expenditures and contributions;


#3 does include a requirement to supply specific info on transfers to 
other 501(c)(3) and 527 organizations (a 527 is, as all Swift Boat fans 
know, a type of political lobbying organization) that will allow the 
IRS to determine if the reporting group has been misallocating its 
funds or diverting them away from the filing group's exempt purpose by 
making such transfers.


However, there is nothing here that I see which supports Al Krigman's 
sweeping claim that "[A]s a tax-exempt organization, the organization's 
policies and modus operandi are legally and morally a matter of public 
record and public concern."


Of course, I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), so you can take 
this analysis with as many grains of salt as you feel necessary.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 8:15 am
Subject: Re: Common knowledge, was: [UC] IRS Treatment of third-party 
information



In a message dated 6/3/2007 11:33:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


I've  just reviewed this discussion from the point where Al made the
statement  quoted below. I don't see any posts in which he provided the
requested  citation. If that was done off-list, I hope that it will be
reposted for  the benefit of all.


I thought I sent it to the whole list, but maybe the reply went just to
Paul.

At any rate, at the risk of being redundant, here's what I wrote:

Sure. The cross-references and interpretations get
fairly hairy (which is why some high-priced attorneys are high-priced 
attorneys)

but the gist of it is in Section 6104 (Publicity of
information required from certain exempt organizations and certain 
trusts)

of the Internal Revenue Code -- aka TITLE 26, Subtitle
F, CHAPTER
61, Subchapter
B, Sec. 6104. It's there directly,
by reference, and through associated case law.

Al Krigman



AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free 
from AOL at AOL.com.


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] Board meeting question?

[Glenn]

Hi Melani,

Are general UCD Board meetings open to the public?  Are the minutes available 
to the public anywhere?  Do you know if any of the "community representatives" 
would be willing to deliver a progress report about the investigation so that 
we might post it on the list?  There is no email or civic association contact 
number on the web site.

I don't know any of them except Barry Grossbach. Didn't he drop off the list?  
Thinking about the way to contact these folks as you suggested, I remember a 
little trick the FOCP used when the first park redesign was attempted.  They 
set up a phone number that no one would ever answer, and then they reported 
that no one contacted them with questions or opinions.  It wasn't me, but a 
couple of women complained about calling and calling.  It was at one of those 
infamous presentations at which UCD doesn't want questions but our "wish list"

I feel bad for these neighborhood people because each day the Penn executives 
stonewall the community, these folks from the neighborhood  have to see us face 
to face.  This cover-up looks bad for them because they are listed as board 
members.

It could very well be that Penn officials never include them at the meetings 
that count.  If they tell us honestly what is happening, I believe, people 
would understand if they are being stonewalled too.

I reviewed the list of Board members as you suggested.  Please tell Lewis to 
have them just list the civic association name and get rid of that "community 
representative"  

The attempt to be deceptive or misleading is still a lie no matter how many PC 
names we have like marketing or spin.

Thanks in advance for any help,
Glenn

[UC] BID updates on the UCD website

[Matthew Snyder]

Good morning everyone,

There is a newer draft of the BID plan on the UCD website:

http://www.ucityphila.org/bid/downloads/2007_Proposed_BID_Draft.pdf

It expands on the previous skeletal document and contains more
specifics.  It's dated March 13, 2007, so I'm sorry if this is old
news to everyone, but I don't remember having seen mention of it on
the list.

Also of possible interest is the discussion forum for the BID proposal:

http://www.ucityphila.org/bid/talk.html

It was apparently launched on Feb 22, 2006, but so far has no discussion.

--Matthew

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Glenn]

Thanks Cheryl.

This makes a lot of sense.  I took a quick look through this information. 
Any number of infractions could be investigated by OSC.  Certainly the 
academic violations would go here.


An interesting comment that states both "community service" could be 
required or criminal charges could be filed.  I could not find anything to 
clarify but I would expect that an actual transfer of the case would need to 
be transferred to the Office of Public Safety and not just the punishment.


There is no indication that students would be transferred to the Office of 
Public Safety unless some criminal infraction occurred.  So in this case, I 
still can't understand why the Office of Public Safety was involved in the 
news reports?  If a criminal complaint was made to Penn Police, it still 
should have been Municipal Court and UCD apologizing to the students not 
Public Safety.


It makes sense that Office of Public Safety includes both law enforcement 
and security but not punishment for any OSC violations.  Just trying to 
think this through?


Thanks again,
Glenn


- Original Message - 
From: "Cheryl Shipman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:17 AM
Subject: Re: [UC] Community Court



At 09:20 AM 6/5/2007 -0400, Glenn wrote:


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for handling 
academic infractions, they probably should indicate its existence 
publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


The Office of Public Safety doesn't handle academic or other Penn 
infractions.  This is done through the Office of Student Conduct.  See 
item #2 at

http://www.upenn.edu/osc/Charter.htm#label1o


Cheryl Shipman

(not speaking for Penn)



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Community Court

[Bill Sanderson]

Glenn-In addition to criminal law, there is civil law, and contractual
agreements.  University disciplinary agreements are, as far as I know,
matters of contractual agreement between the institution and the student.  I
am certain that a student involved in such a process has alternatives-like
leaving. Why not check with the quoted students, or someone actually
knowledgeable about the process, before suggesting a constitutional crisis?

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 7:41 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Community Court

 

 Neighbors,

I had the opportunity to speak briefly with the coordinator of Community
Court and the police liaison to the "agencies" with which they work. Please
contact me off list if you want the address for the President Judge for
Municipal Court and the Coordinator of Community Court.

They are aware of the news reports about the UCD. I was able to deliver, in
this face to face way, a description of this unaccountable organization.
Nevertheless, they are expecting a formal complaint from me and I urge
others to consider similar complaints.  

Can you believe he said to me, "they're doing an investigation and suspended
someone?"  I contained my laughter and thought those UCD people will even
bullshit officers of Municipal court!

The Coordinator confirmed that the Penn students in the reports had nothing
to do with the Community Court probationers with whom they worked beside. It
appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within Penn's Office
of Public Safety. He used the words "internal process"

This is in section 1 of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny
to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

If this "internal process" is being handled by the Office of Public Safety,
do non-students arrested by the fully empowered Penn Police have the right
to request this instead of community court? We are all under the
jurisdiction of the Penn Police whether folks generally are aware of that. I
wonder if some people go to community court and receive a police record
while others get unequal privileges through the "internal process?"

The Penn sites I've found describe the Penn police having a relationship
with Community Court and nothing about this separate system. Folks, I think
we need some serious disclosure from Maureen Rush about this program!

Sincerely,

Glenn

RE: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Bill Sanderson]

This anonymous post is typical of the tactics of a few on this list.  It
pretends to be a simple objective announcement, while using loaded/slanted
descriptions of the events mentioned.

 

You (the poster) should be ashamed of yourself-grow up,  stop playing these
games.  

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:13 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation

 


Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or
a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please
inform your neighbors.

  _  

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from
AOL at   AOL.com.

Re: [UC] BID updates on the UCD website

[Glenn]

Thanks Mathew.

It's not old news to me.

This 2006 discussion list is very interesting too.  That closely coincides 
with the NID presentations at which UCD was totally shocked when the real 
community didn't swallow their garbage.


It looks like they designed it for the couple hundred UCD supporters and 
shelved it when it was obvious how strong the community opposition was at 
that time.


UCD waited 5 years when their park redesign plan was unpopular.  I suspect 
the discussion list will be selectively promoted when they are ready  to 
push this BID in city council.


Looks like that might be soon.  It's time to check their marketing site 
regularly.  Thanks for the heads up.


Glenn


- Original Message - 
From: "Matthew Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "UnivCity Listserv" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:59 AM
Subject: [UC] BID updates on the UCD website



Good morning everyone,

There is a newer draft of the BID plan on the UCD website:

http://www.ucityphila.org/bid/downloads/2007_Proposed_BID_Draft.pdf

It expands on the previous skeletal document and contains more
specifics.  It's dated March 13, 2007, so I'm sorry if this is old
news to everyone, but I don't remember having seen mention of it on
the list.

Also of possible interest is the discussion forum for the BID proposal:

http://www.ucityphila.org/bid/talk.html

It was apparently launched on Feb 22, 2006, but so far has no discussion.

--Matthew

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Community Court

[Kyle Cassidy]

Their email addresses pop right up on a google search  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Sanderson

> Why not check with the quoted students, or someone actually
knowledgeable about the process, before suggesting a constitutional
crisis?

 


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Could the post be from a local "Committeeman" maybe of District 7?
Personally, I prefer a full "signature" and disclosure of potential
conflicts of interest, but if this was written by a Committeeman, he may
think he provided sufficient ID and maybe he just forgot to sign.

This is one of the least "loaded" of the recent posts.
Better grammar could have made the Councilwoman's position more clear,
but than you'd probably call it even more loaded.

While I rarely have time to attend meetings, I am always happy to be
invited to community meetings and to have a sense of what might be
included on the Agenda.  And I am grateful to the writer and thank him
for the notice.

And so, I see your chide and raise it.
:-)

Meanwhile, thanks for your other recent posts, 
helpful regarding backup
funny regarding Lew Mellman's dog.

Best!
Liz


On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 11:20:36 -0400 "Bill Sanderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This anonymous post is typical of the tactics of a few on this list.  It
pretends to be a simple objective announcement, while using
loaded/slanted descriptions of the events mentioned.
 
You (the poster) should be ashamed of yourself—grow up,  stop playing
these games.  
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:13 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
 

Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair
or a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please
inform your neighbors.



AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.


Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

RE: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Bill Sanderson]

Most people in political positions seem to want their name out there at all
times, in my observation.

 

I'll concede that perhaps the purported "committeeman" might not want
Councilwoman Blackwell to be aware of who posted this message-perhaps all
the more reason to have simply stuck with the facts, and described the
agenda in a neutral fashion.

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Elizabeth F Campion
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 11:47 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation

 

 

Could the post be from a local "Committeeman" maybe of District 7?

Personally, I prefer a full "signature" and disclosure of potential
conflicts of interest, but if this was written by a Committeeman, he may
think he provided sufficient ID and maybe he just forgot to sign.

 

This is one of the least "loaded" of the recent posts.

Better grammar could have made the Councilwoman's position more clear, but
than you'd probably call it even more loaded.

 

While I rarely have time to attend meetings, I am always happy to be invited
to community meetings and to have a sense of what might be included on the
Agenda.  And I am grateful to the writer and thank him for the notice.

 

And so, I see your chide and raise it.

:-)

 

Meanwhile, thanks for your other recent posts, 

helpful regarding backup

funny regarding Lew Mellman's dog.

 

Best!

Liz

 

 

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 11:20:36 -0400 "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:

This anonymous post is typical of the tactics of a few on this list.  It
pretends to be a simple objective announcement, while using loaded/slanted
descriptions of the events mentioned.

 

You (the poster) should be ashamed of yourself-grow up,  stop playing these
games.  

 


  _  


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:13 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation

 


Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or
a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please
inform your neighbors.


  _  


AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from
AOL at   AOL.com.

 


Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Elizabeth F Campion]

Can the official - planned Agenda, in its current entirety, neutral or
otherwise, be posted to the list.
It might help possible contributors triage this meeting above others.
Lurkers please step up.


Bill, I still think you are stretching to assign emotion and (small a)
"agenda" to a post that was in my opinion a helpful reminder of a meeting
and otherwise harmless.

Best!
Liz


On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:28:42 -0400 "Bill Sanderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Most people in political positions seem to want their name out there at
all times, in my observation.
 
I’ll concede that perhaps the purported “committeeman” might not want
Councilwoman Blackwell to be aware of who posted this message—perhaps all
the more reason to have simply stuck with the facts, and described the
agenda in a neutral fashion.
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elizabeth F Campion
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 11:47 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
 
 
Could the post be from a local "Committeeman" maybe of District 7?
Personally, I prefer a full "signature" and disclosure of potential
conflicts of interest, but if this was written by a Committeeman, he may
think he provided sufficient ID and maybe he just forgot to sign.
 
This is one of the least "loaded" of the recent posts.
Better grammar could have made the Councilwoman's position more clear,
but than you'd probably call it even more loaded.
 
While I rarely have time to attend meetings, I am always happy to be
invited to community meetings and to have a sense of what might be
included on the Agenda.  And I am grateful to the writer and thank him
for the notice.
 
And so, I see your chide and raise it.
:-)
 
Meanwhile, thanks for your other recent posts, 
helpful regarding backup
funny regarding Lew Mellman's dog.
 
Best!
Liz
 
 
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 11:20:36 -0400 "Bill Sanderson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
This anonymous post is typical of the tactics of a few on this list.  It
pretends to be a simple objective announcement, while using
loaded/slanted descriptions of the events mentioned.
 
You (the poster) should be ashamed of yourself—grow up,  stop playing
these games.  
 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:13 AM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
 

Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair
or a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please
inform your neighbors.



AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at AOL.com.
 

Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com


Elizabeth Campion   Cell Phone: 215-880-2930
215-546-0550 Main, -546-9871 fax,  Desk + VM: 215-790-5653
PRUDENTIAL, FOX & ROACH REALTORS, LLC
Please read Consumer Notice & enjoy "HOME PILOT" tools at
 www.PruFoxRoach.com

Re: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Elizabeth F Campion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Bill, I still think you are stretching to assign emotion and (small a)
"agenda" to a post that was in my opinion a helpful reminder of a meeting
and otherwise harmless.



Stuff it, Liz. Anonymous letters are anonymous letters and only assholes
write anonymous letters. "Helpful reminder" my Aunt Fanny.

In the beginning Jeff created this list and in his wisdom saw fit not to
moderate it, sort of like the God of the Deists. That means we are a
self-regulating mechanism. We can't evict jerks, we can't ban flaming
trolls, and we can't have a divine moderator screen out the anonymous crap.
But we can, in overt and subtle ways, tell them to go shtup themselves.

Certainly the lowest form of pond scum, lower even than the trolls, are
those who refuse to sign their posts, and you, Liz, should know better and
excoriate them with the rest of us.


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html

FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Anthony West]

Spokespersons for the Community Relations Office of Penn (which runs First 
Thursday meetings), for the University City District, and for Councilwoman 
Blackwell's office all categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's 
investigation" will be prepared or presented at the upcoming First Thursday 
meeting.

The anonymous post below is false and should be presumed to have fraudulent and 
deceitful intent.

The major focus of the agenda, which has been mailed to all association 
organizers, is on health care issues, said Glenn Bryant, director of the 
Community Relations Office.

-- Tony West
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:12 AM
  Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD 
investigation



  Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Jannie 
Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or a 
political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

  The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.

--
  AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[John Ellingsworth]

What is the First Thursday meeting?  Is it open to the public?

Regards,

John Ellingsworth

Anthony West wrote:

Spokespersons for the Community Relations Office of Penn (which runs First Thursday 
meetings), for the University City District, and for Councilwoman Blackwell's office all 
categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's investigation" will be 
prepared or presented at the upcoming First Thursday meeting.

The anonymous post below is false and should be presumed to have fraudulent and 
deceitful intent.

The major focus of the agenda, which has been mailed to all association 
organizers, is on health care issues, said Glenn Bryant, director of the 
Community Relations Office.

-- Tony West
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:12 AM

  Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD 
investigation



  Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman Jannie 
Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or a 
political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

  The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.

--
  AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Anthony West wrote:
Spokespersons for the Community Relations Office of Penn (which runs 
First Thursday meetings), for the University City District, and for 
Councilwoman Blackwell's office all categorically deny that any "update 
on the UCD's investigation" will be prepared or presented at the 
upcoming First Thursday meeting.
 
The anonymous post below is false and should be presumed to 
have fraudulent and deceitful intent.
 
The major focus of the agenda, which has been mailed to all association 
organizers, is on health care issues, said Glenn Bryant, director of the 
Community Relations Office.




now look what you've done. you've gone and validated one of 
the intentions of committeeman7's post.




..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.










































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer]

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

sorry, resorting to ad hominem here isn't helpful.


No attack of any sort was intended here.



I believe you when you say it wasn't intended -- but that's 
why it may be hard to realize when it's being used. it's in 
the part you snipped (your assumptions about me, as the 
basis for your advice).


it's no big deal (I'm not upset or anything) but it's just 
not helpful. what's being discussed here is not how I can 
get in touch with an organization so that I can like ucd 
more, but rather how we can continue a direct conversation 
where you've asked us to accept ucd's role wrt dock street 
but not provided details about that role.




..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.



































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer]

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 6/5/2007 5:17:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

how we  can continue a direct conversation 
where you've asked us to accept ucd's  role wrt dock street 
but not provided details about that  role


While UCD is a not for profit corporation, such a corporate  structure does 
not preclude UCD from operating as a private  entity, unless you start shaking 
the Walls of Ivy On  Campus.
 
What would ever make you believe UCD is interested in your input?
 
While I may regularly quote Sun Tzu, apparently others read and practice  the 
ways of Chairman Mao.
 
Mao wrote:
 
"I do not agree with the view that to be moral, the  motive of one's actions 
has to be benefiting others. Morality does not have to  be defined in relation 
to others. … People like me want to … satisfy our hearts  to the full, and 
in doing so we automatically have the most valuable moral  codes. Of course 
there are people and objects in the world, but they are all  there only for me."
 
And, you all were wondering about the man John Fenton and  the well being of 
his family?
 
UCD the intersection of selfserving Humanities and Niche Real Estate  
Development.
 
Ciao,
 
Craig



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Anthony West]

Ah, Ray.

So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, then, 
you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else would you 
know the intentions of the con artist?


-- Tony West


Anthony West wrote:
Spokespersons for the Community Relations Office of Penn (which runs 
First Thursday meetings), for the University City District, and for 
Councilwoman Blackwell's office all categorically deny that any "update 
on the UCD's investigation" will be prepared or presented at the upcoming 
First Thursday meeting.
 The anonymous post below is false and should be presumed to have 
fraudulent and deceitful intent.
 The major focus of the agenda, which has been mailed to all association 
organizers, is on health care issues, said Glenn Bryant, director of the 
Community Relations Office.





Ray wrote:
now look what you've done. you've gone and validated one of the intentions 
of committeeman7's post.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] The UCD answer

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Glenn wrote:
Ray, I'm not sure the term strawman fallacy is well understood.  This 
strategy is so often used and rarely challenged on the listserv.  I want 
to share the explanation of the term.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation 
of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a 
straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then 
attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a 
successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading 
people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's 
actual argument has not been refuted.


By the way, your list to date is right on target.  We just need an 
organization that is actually interested in community engagement, 
transparency, and accountability.



thanks for the definitions. in spite of all the distractions 
I'm not losing sight of what I think is our best idea yet 
(yes, hatched collaboratively, right here, onlist!): a 
public forum that could work, inclusively and transparently, 
to improve ucd -- a public forum just like the ones that're 
improving clark park and 40th street right now.



onward...


btw, any news in this week's ucity review about the 
fenton/malcolm x park incident?




..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] The UCD answer

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Kyle Cassidy wrote:


just my two cents.



thanks, kyle. a lot of issues raised in what you've written, 
but I think the heart of it is right here, in this pair of 
thoughts:



   > To get my trees, UCD and UC Green had
   > to take the "side" of some neighbors over others.

  and

   > My revision would be:
   > UCD should be committed to making the district a better
   > place to live for the people who live in the district.


in a nutshell, the above contradiction is what I think is 
problematic with ucd, with our relationship with ucd. I 
think it's what we could all work on, together, to resolve. 
but first we have to be more aware of it.



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.





































































































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] Penn's Office of Community Relations First Thursday Community was Re: FRAUD

[Craigsolve]

In a message dated 6/5/2007 4:50:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

What is the First Thursday meeting?  Is  it open to the public?
Yes,  all members of the community are invited to attend and submit 
discussion points  by contacting Valerie Johnson at 215 -898-3565.
 

>From the 2006-2007 Year-End Report of the Committee on Campus and Community  
Life April 30, 2007 "development of a comprehensive plan  to promote Penn’s 
initiatives in West Philadelphia, including  the use of the First Thursday 
meeting as the main vehicle for community  input and feedback" 
_http://www.upenn.edu/almanac/volumes/v53/n34/uc-qsl.html_ 
(http://www.upenn.edu/almanac/volumes/v53/n34/uc-qsl.html) 
 
Penn's Office of Community Relations First  Thursday Community Meeting 
May 3, 2007 - 8:00am   
Walnut West Library -40th & Walnut  Street  
75-80 Attendees 
The purpose of First Thursday meetings is  to provide a regular opportunity 
for community and University leaders to  exchange information, allow for early 
issue identification and problem solving,  and to look for new and shared 
opportunities of engagement.  
*   Glenn Bryan reported that the University City  Review is now 
publishing the summary of the First Thursday meetings in its  publication.  A 
summary 
of  the meeting is also being posted to the Office of City and Community 
Relations  website each month and this website has been recently updated.  
There 
will be a First Thursday meeting  on June 7th and it will include updates from 
neighborhood  associations.  It will be the last  First Thursday meeting of the 
academic year.  It will include a presentation by  Penn’s School of Nursing’
s “Healthy in Philadelphia” as well as a health  seminar. 
*   Neighborhood and community updates were provided  by the Friends of 
Malcolm X Park, Cedar Park, West Philadelphia Cultural  Alliance, Friends of 
Walnut West Library, West Philadelphia YMCA, Great  Expectations, and from many 
other neighborhood organizations. 
*   Glenn Bryan introduced Jennifer Pizzo and John  Puckett, 
representatives from Penn's Graduate School of Education.   They presented 
information on 
Penn’s  partnering work with the Henry Lea, Wilson Alexander, and Penn 
Alexander  Schools as well as Penn’s involvement with improving conditions at 
West  
Philadelphia High School. John Puckett spoke at length about the current  
problems at the school and efforts to plan for a new school. In other news,  
long 
time associate dean at the Graduate School of Education, Nancy Streim,  has 
accepted a new position at Teacher’s College in NYC. 
*   Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell mentioned that her  office had voting 
brochures to hand out as well as plans to continue  distributing recycling bins 
at several upcoming West Philadelphia community  events. Recycling 
participation is now at 36% and 400 bins have been  distributed.  The upcoming 
Drexel  
Health Fair on May 12th was announced and Councilwoman Blackwell  also noted 
the recent opening of the LIFE facility at 4508 Chestnut  Streets.  
Councilwoman 
Blackwell  reported that she had recently met with the Interim School 
Superintendent Tom  Brady. There is a school hearing coming up on May 23rd and 
she  
invited the community to provide input at this hearing. She also mentioned  
that Children’s Hospital is sponsoring an Asthma program. 
*   Deborah Khan from Citizens Bank discussed the  Citizens/Penn 
Partnership Fund and its community grant program.  It supports small, non 
profit  
organizations in the neighborhood with such projects as façade improvements,  
safety, lighting, and new sidewalk construction. 
*   Beth Ann Johnson from the Friends of the  Walnut West Library talked 
about the success of the library in terms of its  usage by patrons and about 
the teen programming, chess and film clubs, and its  children’s librarian. 
Walnut West Library is #10 in circulation in the Free  Library’s system. An 
audience member inquired about progress on securing  lighting for the 40th 
street 
side of the library.   
*   Chris Dezzi from Elwyn Institute gave a history  of the organization 
and its work in the West Philadelphia community since the  early 1970s.  Many 
Elwyn staff  members were introduced and they gave brief descriptions of their 
particular  offices’ services.  
*   Penn's Public Safety Captain Joe Fischer  provided information about 
Penn Move-Out starting Thursday, May 3 until  Sunday, May 6. Recent carjacking 
incident involving Penn police at  40th & Spruce Street. 
*   University City District provided  updates on upcoming programs.
_http://www.upenn.edu/ogcpa/FirstThursdays/Minutes_May07.doc_ 
(http://www.upenn.edu/ogcpa/FirstThursdays/Minutes_May07.doc)   
All  members of the community are invited to attend and submit discussion 
points by  contacting Valerie Johnson at 215 -898-3565.
 
The University reaching out to the community and cordinating  the flow of 
beneficial 

RE: [UC] The UCD answer

[Kyle Cassidy]

The whole of the community's never going to completely agree on anything as we 
saw with the dog park, and the liquor store move, so I think that ANY group is 
going to have to take a side on something -- if I announced that all soup 
kitchens in west philadelphia should not to serve meals with meat in them 
because I'm a vegetarian, I wouldn't Catholic Outreach to not take a stance or 
pick a side. I'd expect them to weigh the issue and do what benefits their 
constituents.

Can you think of _any_ community group that exemplifies the neutrality you'd 
like?



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN


>in a nutshell, the above contradiction is what I think is 
>problematic with ucd, with our relationship with ucd. I 
>think it's what we could all work on, together, to resolve. 
>but first we have to be more aware of it.






































































































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] The UCD answer

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Kyle Cassidy wrote:

The whole of the community's never going to completely
agree on anything as we saw with the dog park, and the
liquor store move, so I think that ANY group is going to
have to take a side on something -- if I announced that
all soup kitchens in west philadelphia should not to
serve meals with meat in them because I'm a vegetarian, I
wouldn't Catholic Outreach to not take a stance or pick a
side. I'd expect them to weigh the issue and do what
benefits their constituents.

Can you think of _any_ community group that exemplifies
the neutrality you'd like?



well, for starters, a group could begin with the premise 
that addressing trees and property values have equal value, 
equal validity. for example, on your block the choice was 
'trees or no trees'; it was never 'trees or help with 
property values'. if it had been the latter, imagine the 
possible alternative outcomes. imagine what's possible when 
we really stick to your words: 'making it a better place to 
live for the people who live here'...


I'm not saying that 'picking a side' is in itself wrong, but 
surely you can see how 'picking a side' can become wrong 
when you don't consider how the sides are defined to begin 
with.


gotta run-- I can see we have a lot of ground to cover...

 :-)



..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.





































__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Bill Sanderson]

Glenn--'fess up!

(hint--search headers below on "glenn"

This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.

Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of the
exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse particularly, but I
think the facts should be allowed to speak for themselves.  Last post for me
on this one, I think.
---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DDRqb011103;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com [205.188.144.208])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DCbhq011096
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com [205.188.105.72])
by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
 boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
(205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]


---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CUOOb010765;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55CUOm8010764;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
(elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CTZKX010758
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [72.244.65.194] (helo=glennsdesktop)
by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1HvYAJ-cD-Dp; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Subject: [UC] civic associations on UCD board?
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:28:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_NextPart_000_0D85_01C7A74B.826FA890"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
X-ELNK-Trace:
dfea89efbd9b1897d1c072fd49543470239a348a220c2609b20d0b52e9a179b9b358d9e1c23f
7340350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 72.244.65.194
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=6.0
tests=HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 12:37:13.0912 (UTC)
FILETIME=[3E700B80:01C7A76E]



You are receiving this beca

[UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Bill Sanderson]

(retry)

Glenn--'fess up!

(hint--search headers below on "glenn"

This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.

Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of the
exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse particularly, but I
think the facts should be allowed to speak for themselves.  Last post for me
on this one, I think.
---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DDRqb011103;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com [205.188.144.208])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DCbhq011096
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com [205.188.105.72])
by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
 boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
(205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]


---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CUOOb010765;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55CUOm8010764;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
(elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CTZKX010758
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [72.244.65.194] (helo=glennsdesktop)
by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1HvYAJ-cD-Dp; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Subject: [UC] civic associations on UCD board?
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:28:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_NextPart_000_0D85_01C7A74B.826FA890"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
X-ELNK-Trace:
dfea89efbd9b1897d1c072fd49543470239a348a220c2609b20d0b52e9a179b9b358d9e1c23f
7340350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 72.244.65.194
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=6.0
tests=HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 12:37:13.0912 (UTC)
FILETIME=[3E700B80:01C7A76E]



You are receiving 

RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Turner,Kathleen]

Bill Sanderson = scary genius . . . and my hero!
 
Kathleen



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Bill Sanderson
Sent: Tue 6/5/2007 6:04 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post



(retry)

Glenn--'fess up!

(hint--search headers below on "glenn"

This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.

Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of the
exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse particularly, but I
think the facts should be allowed to speak for themselves.  Last post for me
on this one, I think.
---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DDRqb011103;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com [205.188.144.208])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DCbhq011096
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
 for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com [205.188.105.72])
by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
(205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]


---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
 Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CUOOb010765;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55CUOm8010764;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
(elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CTZKX010758
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [72.244.65.194] (helo=glennsdesktop)
by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1HvYAJ-cD-Dp; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Subject: [UC] civic associations on UCD board?
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:28:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_NextPart_000_0D85_01C7A74B.826FA890"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
X-ELNK-Trace:
dfea89efbd9b1897d1c072fd49543470239a348a220c2609b20d0b52e9a179b9b358d9e1c23f
7340350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 72.244.65.194
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=6.0
tests=HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Glenn

[UC] Lurker Introductions

[Ross Bender]

It is the practice on some email listserves for new subscribers to briefly
introduce themselves. FWIW it seems like a healthy practice to me, and would
possibly be helpful in nurturing the quality of discourse on this list.
Obviously this list has a very small ratio of participants to lurkers, and
that may be an inevitable pattern for listserves. However, I for one would
be curious to know the identity of all you lurkers who are listening in,
what you hope to gain from reading this list, what you like or dislike etc.

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post (trimmed for the non tech savvy)

[Kyle Cassidy]

The relevant headers for the non tech savvy -- both came from the same 
computer, named "glenn's desktop" oops. Now we get to have a new dialogue about 
transparency and honest communication:

 
Email 1:
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Email 2:
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[MLamond]

In a message dated 6/5/07 6:00:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


> Glenn--'fess up!
> 
> (hint--search headers below on "glenn"
> 
> This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
> Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.
> 
> 
> 
For those who didn't search the two "strings," both the [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
email and the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email say they come from:

glennsdesktop

Very interesting, Bill.   







Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19104
cell phone 215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800, ext. 113
office fax 215-222-1101
2006 recipient of the Greater Philadelphia Association of Realtors awards:
- Diamond award for over $8 million in sales, and
ALL SIX of the West Philadelphia awards:
- Top Lister
- Top Seller
- Top Overall Combined Volume
- Top Listing Units by Area
- Top Selling Units by Area
- Top Overall Combined Units by Area



**
 See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Elliot M. Stern]

Sorry, Glenn, I posted information about University of Pennsylvania  
disciplinary procedures from a University of Pennsylvania website  
some time in May. Did you delete it without reading?


Elliot

On 05 Jun  2007, at 9:20 AM, Glenn wrote:

We don't know the answers; we know what has been reported..  There  
is no Penn information that I could find except that the Office of  
Public Safety works with community court.


We have reports of a minor infraction and we indeed have a report  
that the "Office of Public Safety" along with UCD apologized to the  
students.  We're all being stonewalled by UCD.  I have not yet  
confronted Penn officials about clarification and disclosure of  
the"internal process" as the Community Court officer called it.


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for  
handling academic infractions, they probably should indicate its  
existence publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


Why would the Office of Public Safety be adjudicating these non  
criminal minor infractions which have been asserted on the list?  I  
haven't worked for Penn in over 7 years.  Does anyone know, are  
academic infractions sent to the Office of Public Safety under  
Maureen Rush?  When did the policy of "academic infractions" start  
leading to community service alongside thiefs, vandals, drug  
violaters, and prostitutes?


I'm not saying you're not correct about this Cassidy.  I'm saying  
we don't know.  This is an example of the problems that  
stonewalling causes and why it is not considered appropriate in the  
civilized world even if not encoded in IRS 501 c 3 laws.


Of course, we're in the University City District far from the  
civilized democracies of the world!


I'll let the list know what happens when I approach Penn officials.

Sincerely,
Glenn


- Original Message - From: "Kyle Cassidy"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: [UC] Community Court



It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it  
necessarily had to come through the office of public safety. I'm  
curious as well, specifically because they don't go into it at all  
dancing around with the "minor infraction" thing. Which could have  
been cheating on a test, or it could have been sneaking beer into a  
dry dorm, or stealing a bagel from My Favorite Muffin.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within  
Penn's Office of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go to  
community court and receive a police record while others get  
unequal privileges through the "internal process?"




-- 
--



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date:  
6/3/2007 12:47 PM



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Elliot M. Stern]

Glenn,

Again, I would ask you thoroughly to check out http://www.upenn.edu/ 
osc/outline.htm. Evidently you've ignored my May posting about this.


Elliot

On 05 Jun  2007, at 9:20 AM, Glenn wrote:

We don't know the answers; we know what has been reported..  There  
is no Penn information that I could find except that the Office of  
Public Safety works with community court.


We have reports of a minor infraction and we indeed have a report  
that the "Office of Public Safety" along with UCD apologized to the  
students.  We're all being stonewalled by UCD.  I have not yet  
confronted Penn officials about clarification and disclosure of  
the"internal process" as the Community Court officer called it.


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for  
handling academic infractions, they probably should indicate its  
existence publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


Why would the Office of Public Safety be adjudicating these non  
criminal minor infractions which have been asserted on the list?  I  
haven't worked for Penn in over 7 years.  Does anyone know, are  
academic infractions sent to the Office of Public Safety under  
Maureen Rush?  When did the policy of "academic infractions" start  
leading to community service alongside thiefs, vandals, drug  
violaters, and prostitutes?


I'm not saying you're not correct about this Cassidy.  I'm saying  
we don't know.  This is an example of the problems that  
stonewalling causes and why it is not considered appropriate in the  
civilized world even if not encoded in IRS 501 c 3 laws.


Of course, we're in the University City District far from the  
civilized democracies of the world!


I'll let the list know what happens when I approach Penn officials.

Sincerely,
Glenn


- Original Message - From: "Kyle Cassidy"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: [UC] Community Court



It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it  
necessarily had to come through the office of public safety. I'm  
curious as well, specifically because they don't go into it at all  
dancing around with the "minor infraction" thing. Which could have  
been cheating on a test, or it could have been sneaking beer into a  
dry dorm, or stealing a bagel from My Favorite Muffin.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within  
Penn's Office of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go to  
community court and receive a police record while others get  
unequal privileges through the "internal process?"




-- 
--



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date:  
6/3/2007 12:47 PM



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Glenn]

OK, listserv jackasses!

If you are accusing me of making this anonymous post, enough is enough.  I 
did not make any anonymous post.


I replied to committeeman7 a half hour after the original, you jerks.  I 
have a computer housemate that sets up my computer needs.  I wouldn't know 
how to do the trickery that I'm being accused of.  I'm going to have this 
looked at and if I catch anyone trying to slander me, I will take any and 
all legal action.


Now you're taking your idiocy to the level of accusing me of the types of 
trickery, your gangs do.  The vote for andy toy comes to mind as an attempt 
to pretend that someone with opposing views made the anonymous post


Stop this now!

Enough,
Glenn Moyer


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post



Glenn--'fess up!

(hint--search headers below on "glenn"

This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.

Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of the
exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse particularly, but 
I
think the facts should be allowed to speak for themselves.  Last post for 
me

on this one, I think.
---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DDRqb011103;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com [205.188.144.208])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55DCbhq011096
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com 
[205.188.105.72])

by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
investigation
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
(205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-URL: 
X-Etiquette: 
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]


---
X-Message-Status: n:0
X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Message-Info:
LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CUOOb010765;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55CUOm8010764;
Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
(elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62])
by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
l55CTZKX010758
for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [72.244.65.194] (helo=glennsdesktop)
by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34)
id 1HvYAJ-cD-Dp; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 08:29:35 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Subject: [UC] civic associations on UCD board?
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:28:35 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="=_NextPart_000_0D85_01C7A74B.826FA890"

RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Mike V.]

I'm no lawyer, but I am fairly certain that truth is an affirmative
defense against slander.

- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:25 PM
To: Bill Sanderson; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; kyle cassidy; Turner,Kathleen
Subject: Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


OK, listserv jackasses!

If you are accusing me of making this anonymous post, enough is enough.
I 
did not make any anonymous post.

I replied to committeeman7 a half hour after the original, you jerks.  I

have a computer housemate that sets up my computer needs.  I wouldn't
know 
how to do the trickery that I'm being accused of.  I'm going to have
this 
looked at and if I catch anyone trying to slander me, I will take any
and 
all legal action.

Now you're taking your idiocy to the level of accusing me of the types
of 
trickery, your gangs do.  The vote for andy toy comes to mind as an
attempt 
to pretend that someone with opposing views made the anonymous post

Stop this now!

Enough,
Glenn Moyer


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


> Glenn--'fess up!
>
> (hint--search headers below on "glenn"
>
> This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from

> Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.
>
> Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of 
> the exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse 
> particularly, but I think the facts should be allowed to speak for 
> themselves.  Last post for me
> on this one, I think.
> ---
> X-Message-Status: n:0
> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Message-Info:
> LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
> bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DDRqb011103;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com
[205.188.144.208])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DCbhq011096
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> (EDT)
> Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com 
> [205.188.105.72])
> by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
> MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
> Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
> investigation
> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> In-Reply-To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-MB-Message-Type: User
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.c
om"
> X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
> Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
> (205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34
-0400
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
> X-Spam-Flag: NO
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
> tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-URL: 
> X-Etiquette: 
> Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
> FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]
>
>
> --
> -
> X-Message-Status: n:0
> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Message-Info:
> LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by 
> bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); 
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 
> ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l55CUOOb010765;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55CUOm8010764;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 08:30:24 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
> (elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.8

[UC] Phila. Inquirer: Arguments

[Wilma de Soto]

It's a good read.

I have been on both sides of this malady; however the SAME arguments keep
cropping up on this listserv. Personally, I feel there is a reason these
issues are never resolved.

There are valid arguments on each side although I see one side in more
denial than the other.

Perhaps we ALL should have a look at it.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20070604_Disease_of_always_being_righ
t.html

Regards,

Wilma



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Glenn]

Dude, if you usually have an attitude like this I probably did delete it.

What is your point?  You haven't added to or clarified anything in the 
discussion.   I haven't been the one suggesting that this was an OSC matter. 
If you understood all the issues, why haven't you chimed in before when the 
others were confused?  Why didn't you tell folks that a "cow in the library" 
would be handled by OSC and not Public Safety?


 So how does the OSC  information clarify the original issue?  It shows 
that the "cow in the library" argument was a red herring and I thanked 
Cheryl for providing the information at a relevant time.  I would have said 
OSC had I remembered the name while I kept getting the assertions that it 
was probably a non criminal matter.   The point remains about the 
involvement of the Office of Public Safety as an issue whether there was 
also an OSC investigation or not in the individual cases of the students..


I'm sorry I missed your post if I hurt your feelings and thank you for the 
information.


Glenn


- Original Message - 
From: "Elliot M. Stern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Community Court



Glenn,

Again, I would ask you thoroughly to check out http://www.upenn.edu/ 
osc/outline.htm. Evidently you've ignored my May posting about this.


Elliot

On 05 Jun  2007, at 9:20 AM, Glenn wrote:

We don't know the answers; we know what has been reported..  There  is no 
Penn information that I could find except that the Office of  Public 
Safety works with community court.


We have reports of a minor infraction and we indeed have a report  that 
the "Office of Public Safety" along with UCD apologized to the  students. 
We're all being stonewalled by UCD.  I have not yet  confronted Penn 
officials about clarification and disclosure of  the"internal process" as 
the Community Court officer called it.


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for  handling 
academic infractions, they probably should indicate its  existence 
publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


Why would the Office of Public Safety be adjudicating these non  criminal 
minor infractions which have been asserted on the list?  I  haven't 
worked for Penn in over 7 years.  Does anyone know, are  academic 
infractions sent to the Office of Public Safety under  Maureen Rush? 
When did the policy of "academic infractions" start  leading to community 
service alongside thiefs, vandals, drug  violaters, and prostitutes?


I'm not saying you're not correct about this Cassidy.  I'm saying  we 
don't know.  This is an example of the problems that  stonewalling causes 
and why it is not considered appropriate in the  civilized world even if 
not encoded in IRS 501 c 3 laws.


Of course, we're in the University City District far from the  civilized 
democracies of the world!


I'll let the list know what happens when I approach Penn officials.

Sincerely,
Glenn


- Original Message - From: "Kyle Cassidy" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: [UC] Community Court



It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it 
necessarily had to come through the office of public safety. I'm  curious 
as well, specifically because they don't go into it at all  dancing 
around with the "minor infraction" thing. Which could have  been cheating 
on a test, or it could have been sneaking beer into a  dry dorm, or 
stealing a bagel from My Favorite Muffin.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within  Penn's 
Office of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go to  community 
court and receive a police record while others get  unequal privileges 
through the "internal process?"




-- 
--



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date:  6/3/2007 
12:47 PM



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Mike V.]

Though honesty compels me to point out that the "References" field in
the mystery email does not necessarily indicate that Glenn sent the
email.  It's not a commonly used header anymore, actually, and it just
means that someone wrote that email in response to something that Glenn
wrote.  That is to say, a message-id from [EMAIL PROTECTED] does
indicate that it comes from glennscomputer, while a reference to
glennscomputer does not do so.

- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:25 PM
To: Bill Sanderson; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; kyle cassidy; Turner,Kathleen
Subject: Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


OK, listserv jackasses!

If you are accusing me of making this anonymous post, enough is enough.
I 
did not make any anonymous post.

I replied to committeeman7 a half hour after the original, you jerks.  I

have a computer housemate that sets up my computer needs.  I wouldn't
know 
how to do the trickery that I'm being accused of.  I'm going to have
this 
looked at and if I catch anyone trying to slander me, I will take any
and 
all legal action.

Now you're taking your idiocy to the level of accusing me of the types
of 
trickery, your gangs do.  The vote for andy toy comes to mind as an
attempt 
to pretend that someone with opposing views made the anonymous post

Stop this now!

Enough,
Glenn Moyer


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


> Glenn--'fess up!
>
> (hint--search headers below on "glenn"
>
> This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from

> Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.
>
> Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of 
> the exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse 
> particularly, but I think the facts should be allowed to speak for 
> themselves.  Last post for me
> on this one, I think.
> ---
> X-Message-Status: n:0
> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Message-Info:
> LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
> bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DDRqb011103;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com
[205.188.144.208])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DCbhq011096
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> (EDT)
> Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com 
> [205.188.105.72])
> by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
> MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
> Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
> investigation
> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> In-Reply-To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-MB-Message-Type: User
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.c
om"
> X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
> Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
> (205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34
-0400
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
> X-Spam-Flag: NO
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
> tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-URL: 
> X-Etiquette: 
> Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
> FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]
>
>
> --
> -
> X-Message-Status: n:0
> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Message-Info:
> LsUYwwHHNt2+XzgMwtEePpVL1cLYqdxRcqYtf3Rd7pBrEuvgfbOlu7F01uu+8hdV
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by 
> bay0-mc6-f18.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); 
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 05:37:13 -0700
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 
> ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) w

[UC] Question for tech people

[Glenn]

Folks, I'm being accused of making an anonymous post on the list.  I know that 
I am hated by a few who would go to extraordinary lengths to attack my 
character.  

Do any of you understand the internet information that Sanderson and Cassidy 
posted?  Does the original post actually look like it came from my same 
computer?  Or is someone who wanted to prove this "glennsdestop" stuff  able to 
call some unidentified computer "glennsdesktop" for the purpose of making it 
look like I made the anonymous post?

This is like the votefor andy toy affair.  First the strange post and then 
accusations that it must have come from the curmudgeons.  It was obvious to me 
that someone was trying something a little deeper than simply making that Toy 
anonymous post. 

 This is some serious stuff going on folks.  I absolutely did not post that 
committee7 post and I was sitting at my computer the whole morning.  Thanks for 
your help!

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Matthew Snyder]

On 6/5/07, Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

That is to say, a message-id from [EMAIL PROTECTED] does
indicate that it comes from glennscomputer, while a reference to
glennscomputer does not do so.


Jeez, what a ridiculous thread.

Neither of those headers indicates anything as both are trivially
forged by anyone wishing to send a fake message.

I'm not saying that Glenn did or didn't send the original message, but
there's no real evidence that he did, so this weird "gotcha" gloating
is a bit... unbecoming, if you ask me.

Regards,
Matthew

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] the anonymous post

[Glenn]

Folks, my housemate explained.

Look at the whole bang path.  My e-mails from my computer always come from 
earthlink.  The header name simply means that someone named a computer 
"glennsdesktop."  The poster can easily look up that that header is the name of 
my computer.  The Sanderson post, as V points out, in no way proves that my 
computer was involved!!!

Someone deliberately made this post and wanted to point at me.  Does anyone 
remember who first pointed out the fraud?  Does anyone remember who pointed out 
the fraud over the Toy affair?  I don't think it was Sanderson. 

Sanderson is just a jerk to proclaim this non evidence as proof.  If he is the 
genius that Kathleen thinks he is, shouldn't Sanderson have known that he had 
no proof of my guilt!!!

This anonymous posting and then FRAUD bullshit is the work of a seriously 
deranged asshole

Glenn

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Glenn--'fess up!

(hint--search headers below on "glenn"

This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from
Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.





For those who didn't search the two "strings," both the [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
email and the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email say they come from:


glennsdesktop

Very interesting, Bill.   





I don't think all these headers mean that glenn was the 
author of the committeeman7 post. I think y'all need to 
learn more about headers.


also, I just checked and found that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is 
subscribed to the list.




..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.













































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Anthony West wrote:


Ah, Ray.

So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, 
then, you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else 
would you know the intentions of the con artist?



haha I didn't think I'd have to spell it out because I 
thought it was clear to any reader that one of the 
intentions of the committeeman7's post was to show us just 
how well ucd was handling its communication with the 
community about the fenton/malcolm x park incident. ie, NOT.


which you then made crystal clear with your 'spokespersons 
... categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's 
investigation" will be prepared or presented at the upcoming 
First Thursday meeting.'


I'm wondering now if [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
are the same genius.


ps, welcome to the internets.



:-)
..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Glenn]

- Original Message - 
From: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)




Ah, Ray.

So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, then, 
you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else would you 
know the intentions of the con artist?


-- Tony West




Yo Tony dude.  The gang has pinned the fraudulent post on me!  You can stop 
trying to implicate Ray.


How did the investigation of the Andy Toy affair turn out?

I've got to hand it to you, dude!  You were the first dude to point out the 
fraudulent Toy post and the first one to point out this fraud too.  Do you 
know, Sanderson?  While you were investigating Ray in this fraud, Sanderson 
caught me!!


The two of you are some brilliant fucking detectives!!  It's good that 
even though your style is like the con posts, you are so much smarter than 
the con artists.


Really pissed,

Glenn Moyer who never makes anonymous or fraudulent posts







Anthony West wrote:
Spokespersons for the Community Relations Office of Penn (which runs 
First Thursday meetings), for the University City District, and for 
Councilwoman Blackwell's office all categorically deny that any "update 
on the UCD's investigation" will be prepared or presented at the 
upcoming First Thursday meeting.
 The anonymous post below is false and should be presumed to have 
fraudulent and deceitful intent.
 The major focus of the agenda, which has been mailed to all association 
organizers, is on health care issues, said Glenn Bryant, director of the 
Community Relations Office.





Ray wrote:
now look what you've done. you've gone and validated one of the 
intentions of committeeman7's post.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] QED Ad Hominem for you and me

[pmuyehara]

 I don't know about you, but again this seems to me to be Exhibit T to show 
that some people are not opposed to ad hominem attacks, they just object if 
they are the target.? 

Paul



Sanderson is just a jerk to proclaim this non 
evidence as proof.? If he is the genius that Kathleen thinks he is, 
shouldn't Sanderson have known that he had no proof of my guilt!!!


?


This anonymous posting and then FRAUD bullshit is 
the work of a seriously deranged asshole


 


 





AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

Re: [UC] the anonymous post

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




This anonymous posting and then FRAUD bullshit is the work of a seriously
deranged asshole



Yup. No question about it.




--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Offlist - Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Anthony West wrote:

It is very clear on this listserve who these people are.
Ray has admitted being connected to this forger. And
Glenn has a long-established MO of faking stuff on the
internet to further one of his favorite scenarios:
storming someone else's public meeting and disrupting it
with angry, delusional speeches. It's all taken place
many times before.





CRYING.


..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.






















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

[UC] Halt! Who goes there?

[pmuyehara]

Dear Committeeman7:
?? OK, you've been called out at least twice.? Who are you?? 
?? 

Paul U


AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

[UC] Defenses

[pmuyehara]

 OK, I am and disagree.? I think of affirmative defenses as not disputing the 
truth of the allegations, but saying, essentially, so what??? Truth is an 
absolute defense to slander, rather than an affirmative defense, because it 
means the statement was not incorrect, and accurate statements by definition 
are not slanderous.? May I suggest we change the term to UC defense?

Paul Esq.
That'll be 10 cents please.


 


 

-Original Message-
From: Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Glenn' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 'Bill Sanderson' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
UnivCity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'kyle cassidy' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 'Turner,Kathleen' 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 8:35 pm
Subject: RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post










I'm no lawyer, but I am fairly certain that truth is an affirmative
defense against slander.

- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:25 PM
To: Bill Sanderson; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; kyle cassidy; Turner,Kathleen
Subject: Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


OK, listserv jackasses!

If you are accusing me of making this anonymous post, enough is enough.
I 
did not make any anonymous post.

I replied to committeeman7 a half hour after the original, you jerks.  I

have a computer housemate that sets up my computer needs.  I wouldn't
know 
how to do the trickery that I'm being accused of.  I'm going to have
this 
looked at and if I catch anyone trying to slander me, I will take any
and 
all legal action.

Now you're taking your idiocy to the level of accusing me of the types
of 
trickery, your gangs do.  The vote for andy toy comes to mind as an
attempt 
to pretend that someone with opposing views made the anonymous post

Stop this now!

Enough,
Glenn Moyer


- Original Message - 
From: "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:58 PM
Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


> Glenn--'fess up!
>
> (hint--search headers below on "glenn"
>
> This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from

> Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.
>
> Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of 
> the exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse 
> particularly, but I think the facts should be allowed to speak for 
> themselves.  Last post for me
> on this one, I think.
> ---
> X-Message-Status: n:0
> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Message-Info:
> LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by
> bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700
> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DDRqb011103;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;
> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com
[205.188.144.208])
> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id
> l55DCbhq011096
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)
> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> (EDT)
> Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com 
> [205.188.105.72])
> by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id
> MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
> Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD
> investigation
> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400
> In-Reply-To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-MB-Message-Type: User
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>
boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.c
om"
> X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618
> Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com
> (205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34
-0400
> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-AOL-IP: 205.188.105.72
> X-Spam-Flag: NO
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.1 required=6.0
> tests=FORGED_AOL_TAGS,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,NO_REAL_NAME
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-URL: 
> X-Etiquette: 
> Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jun 2007 13:19:32.0861 (UTC)
> FILETIME=[27C4EAD0:01C7A774]
>
>
> 

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



also, I just checked and found that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
subscribed to the list.




Of course, doofus. Otherwise he/she/it couldn't send mail to the list.
What's your point? There are a whole lot of dubious characters subscribed to
the list, like frintstance:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Who knows if these are real people or just whimsical handles somebody made
up when they were bored? There are 369 addresses subscribed to this list and
I'd be willing to wager that up to a third of them are dead, another third
are dogs pretending to be people, and maybe one-tenth are actual real-life
subscribers.

That's why it would be nice to see some introductions from the lurkers.



--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html

Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike V.]

I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any
evidence directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any
evidence that shows that someone tried to frame him. Bill just
misinterpreted the email header info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't
in.
 
It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people of
this listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's
meeting, though, isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think
I've managed to track them down to within a few blocks, but certainly to
Philly -- so I wonder what motive they might have to promulgate false
information like that -- assuming, of course, that Tony West was right
and no such information is forthcoming.
 
- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:09 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Question for tech people


Folks, I'm being accused of making an anonymous post on the list.  I
know that I am hated by a few who would go to extraordinary lengths to
attack my character.  
 
Do any of you understand the internet information that Sanderson and
Cassidy posted?  Does the original post actually look like it came from
my same computer?  Or is someone who wanted to prove this "glennsdestop"
stuff  able to call some unidentified computer "glennsdesktop" for the
purpose of making it look like I made the anonymous post?
 
This is like the votefor andy toy affair.  First the strange post and
then accusations that it must have come from the curmudgeons.  It was
obvious to me that someone was trying something a little deeper than
simply making that Toy anonymous post. 
 
 This is some serious stuff going on folks.  I absolutely did not post
that committee7 post and I was sitting at my computer the whole morning.
Thanks for your help!
 
Sincerely,
 
Glenn Moyer

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN]

Ross Bender wrote:


UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

also, I just checked and found that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
subscribed to the list.



Of course, doofus. Otherwise he/she/it couldn't send mail to the list.
What's your point?




it was an fyi. the point is that it adds to the picture, all 
the extra steps that glenn would have to go through in order 
to post as someone else.



don't be mad at me!


..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.


























































































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

RE: [UC] Defenses

[Mike V.]

I bow to your superior knowledge.
 
- Mike V.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:04 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Defenses


OK, I am and disagree.  I think of affirmative defenses as not disputing
the truth of the allegations, but saying, essentially, so what?   Truth
is an absolute defense to slander, rather than an affirmative defense,
because it means the statement was not incorrect, and accurate
statements by definition are not slanderous.  May I suggest we change
the term to UC defense?

Paul Esq.
That'll be 10 cents please.



-Original Message-
From: Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'Glenn' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 'Bill Sanderson'
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'kyle cassidy' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
'Turner,Kathleen' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 8:35 pm
Subject: RE: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post


I'm no lawyer, but I am fairly certain that truth is an affirmative


defense against slander.





- Mike V.





-Original Message-


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


[ 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn


Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:25 PM


To: Bill Sanderson; UnivCity@list.purple.com


Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; kyle cassidy; Turner,Kathleen


Subject: Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post








OK, listserv jackasses!





If you are accusing me of making this anonymous post, enough is enough.


I 


did not make any anonymous post.





I replied to committeeman7 a half hour after the original, you jerks.  I





have a computer housemate that sets up my computer needs.  I wouldn't


know 


how to do the trickery that I'm being accused of.  I'm going to have


this 


looked at and if I catch anyone trying to slander me, I will take any


and 


all legal action.





Now you're taking your idiocy to the level of accusing me of the types


of 


trickery, your gangs do.  The vote for andy toy comes to mind as an


attempt 


to pretend that someone with opposing views made the anonymous post





Stop this now!





Enough,


Glenn Moyer








- Original Message - 


From: "Bill Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


To: 


Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 5:58 PM


Subject: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post








> Glenn--'fess up!


>


> (hint--search headers below on "glenn"


>


> This header is from the First Thursday post, the following one is from





> Glenn's post immediately preceding that one, just chosen at random.


>


> Useful information about the First Thursday meetings has come out of 


> the exchange, and I don't really want to beat on this horse 


> particularly, but I think the facts should be allowed to speak for 


> themselves.  Last post for me


> on this one, I think.


> ---


> X-Message-Status: n:0


> X-SID-PRA: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


> X-Message-Info:


> LsUYwwHHNt0EvDSQaC7PnWSgXEVp0kU89hXR3O6FJABZ3K456psnOX6DBn4XVqFH


> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu ([153.104.63.227]) by


> bay0-mc10-f5.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668);


> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 06:19:32 -0700


> Received: from ftp.ece.villanova.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])


> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id


> l55DDRqb011103;


> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)


> Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])


> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l55DDRXa011102;


> Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:27 -0400 (EDT)


> X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


> Received: from imo-d22.mx.aol.com (imo-d22.mx.aol.com


[205.188.144.208])


> by ftp.ece.villanova.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id


> l55DCbhq011096


> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:13:22 -0400 (EDT)


> Received: from [EMAIL PROTECTED]


> by imo-d22.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id b.bcd.b76943b (52374)


> for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400


> (EDT)


> Received: from webmail-db07 (webmail-db07.webmail.aol.com 


> [205.188.105.72])


> by ciaaol-m02.mx.aol.com (v115.11) with ESMTP id


> MAILCIAAOLM028-cc964665614228e; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400


> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> < 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> To: UnivCity@list.purple.com


> Subject: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD


> investigation


> Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34 -0400


> In-Reply-To:


< 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI


> MIME-Version: 1.0


> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


> X-MB-Message-Type: User


> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;


>


boundary="MB_8C9758A50B17A04_1B0C_72E4_webmail-db07.sysops.aol.c


om"


> X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 27618


> Received: from 71.242.179.214 by webmail-db07.sysops.aol.com


> (205.188.105.72) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:12:34


-0400


> Message-Id: <

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Anthony West]

Ray,

I think your original admission of complicity was plainer, if less discreet. 
We'll let it stand.


First Thursday is not a forum at which any agency or association has ever 
discussed any dirty linen, internal problems or PR troubles. If 
committeeman7 had ever been to one (and textual evidence suggests he had), 
he would be well aware of that. It is as inappropriate a venue for such 
discussions as the ER at HUP would be, for example.


The only clear intention of the poster was to mislead a large number of 
unsuspecting UC-list readers to a room, early in the morning, where they 
would be told the "update" they were expecting to get was not, in fact, to 
be gotten. A marvelous propaganda tool for those who see "secret meetings" 
and "stonewalls" everywhere, eh?


You're right; this is the second, very cleverly worded fake post planted on 
UC-list in the past few months, both intended to get UCD into trouble. It 
seems likely they are at least connected. I have heard other rumors about 
committeeman7, but I prefer to stay away from them as I do from the whole 
Fentongate thing, because neither are my job to figure out. Let those who 
pay the bill, order the work.


I've never seen anything like this before. But surely there can be nothing 
new under the sun. Does any other reader recall hearing about this sort of 
net abuse elsewhere?


-- Tony West

- Original Message - 
From: "UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)




Anthony West wrote:


Ah, Ray.

So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, 
then, you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else 
would you know the intentions of the con artist?



haha I didn't think I'd have to spell it out because I thought it was 
clear to any reader that one of the intentions of the committeeman7's post 
was to show us just how well ucd was handling its communication with the 
community about the fenton/malcolm x park incident. ie, NOT.


which you then made crystal clear with your 'spokespersons ... 
categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's investigation" will be 
prepared or presented at the upcoming First Thursday meeting.'


I'm wondering now if [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] are the same 
genius.


ps, welcome to the internets.



:-)
..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Freda Egnal]

Claudia Christian is NOT a dubious character!  (a lovely person, yes)

Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 

On 6/5/07, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
also, I just checked and found that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
subscribed to the list.
 

Of course, doofus. Otherwise he/she/it couldn't send mail to the list. What's 
your point? There are a whole lot of dubious characters subscribed to the list, 
like frintstance: 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Who knows if these are real people or just whimsical handles somebody made up 
when they were bored? There are 369 addresses subscribed to this list and I'd 
be willing to wager that up to a third of them are dead, another third are dogs 
pretending to be people, and maybe one-tenth are actual real-life subscribers. 

That's why it would be nice to see some introductions from the lurkers.



-- 
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org/mqrtoc.html 

   
-
Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV. 

Re: [UC] the anonymous post

[Greg Smith]

The anonymous post didn't come from Mr. Moyer.  The person replied to a 
message, deleted the reply text, and renamed the post.  Likely because they 
forgot the email address to post to the list - as many folk often do.  Many 
emails that went out today have @glennsdesktop in the string of references .  
That part was probably accidental.

More importantly, the list has always had a troll or two and you guys should 
come up with a way of dealing with them. 


Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:   Folks, my housemate explained.
  
 Look at the whole bang path.  My e-mails from  my computer always come from 
earthlink.  The header name simply means that  someone named a computer 
"glennsdesktop."  The poster can easily look up  that that header is the name 
of my computer.  The  Sanderson post, as V points out, in no way proves that my 
 computer was involved!!!
  
 Someone deliberately made this post and wanted to  point at me.  Does anyone 
remember who first pointed out the fraud?   Does anyone remember who pointed 
out the fraud over the Toy affair?  I  don't think it was Sanderson. 
  
 Sanderson is just a jerk to proclaim this non  evidence as proof.  If he is 
the genius that Kathleen thinks he is,  shouldn't Sanderson have known that he 
had no proof of my guilt!!!
  
 This anonymous posting and then FRAUD bullshit is  the work of a seriously 
deranged asshole
  
 Glenn
  
  


 
-
Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and 
always stay connected to friends.

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Ross Bender wrote:

> UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> also, I just checked and found that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is
>> subscribed to the list.
>
>
> Of course, doofus. Otherwise he/she/it couldn't send mail to the list.
> What's your point?



it was an fyi. the point is that it adds to the picture, all
the extra steps that glenn would have to go through in order
to post as someone else.


don't be mad at me!




Nonsense, Ray. It doesn't add an iota to the "picture" -- it would take
anybody about 2 seconds to create a false address and subscribe it to the
list. You should know better than that. Why are you deliberately
obfuscating? What do you have to hide?


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Freda Egnal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Claudia Christian is NOT a dubious character!  (a lovely person, yes)



Then why in the Sam Hill doesn't she introduce herself? Another lurker
sitting on the list, listening in, hoping to find grist for her satanic
mills.


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any
evidence directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any evidence
that shows that someone tried to frame him. Bill just misinterpreted the
email header info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't in.

It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people of
this listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's meeting,
though, isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think I've managed to
track them down to within a few blocks, but certainly to Philly -- so I
wonder what motive they might have to promulgate false information like that
-- assuming, of course, that Tony West was right and no such information is
forthcoming.



If in fact you can "track them down to within a few blocks" I certainly hope
you will share that information with the list. This shit's gotta stop.
--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: [UC] the anonymous post

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


The anonymous post didn't come from Mr. Moyer.  The person replied to a
message, deleted the reply text, and renamed the post.  Likely because they
forgot the email address to post to the list - as many folk often do.  Many
emails that went out today have @glennsdesktop in the string of references
.  That part was probably accidental.

More importantly, the list has always had a troll or two and you guys
should come up with a way of dealing with them.


**


Any ideas, Mr. Helpful?? Aren't you the one that Melani said is always
polite, well-mannered and kind to children?


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer

[pmuyehara]

 I think a better quote from Mao would be "no investigation, no right to speak."



 


 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 5:42 pm
Subject: Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was:  Re: [UC] The UCD answer]
















In a message dated 6/5/2007 5:17:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


how we 
  can continue a direct conversation 
where you've asked us to accept ucd's 
  role wrt dock street 
but not provided details about that 
role






While UCD is a not for profit corporation, such a corporate 
structure does not preclude UCD from operating as a private 
entity, unless you start shaking the Walls of Ivy On 
Campus.


 


What would ever make you believe UCD is interested in your input?


 


While I may regularly quote Sun Tzu, apparently others read and practice 
the ways of Chairman Mao.


 


Mao wrote:


 


"I do not agree with the view that to be moral, the 
motive of one's actions has to be benefiting others. Morality does not have to 
be defined in relation to others. … People like me want to … satisfy our hearts 
to the full, and in doing so we automatically have the most valuable moral 
codes. Of course there are people and objects in the world, but they are all 
there only for me."


 


And, you all were wondering about the man John Fenton and 
the well being of his family?


 


UCD the intersection of selfserving Humanities and Niche Real Estate 
Development.


 


Ciao,


 


Craig






See what's free at AOL.com. 

 



AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.

RE: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Kyle Cassidy]

looks like i owe glenn an apology. thanks for catching that mike. and sorry 
glenn.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Mike V.
Sent: Tue 6/5/2007 10:10 PM
To: 'Glenn'; UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people
 
I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any evidence 
directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any evidence that shows 
that someone tried to frame him. Bill just misinterpreted the email header 
info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't in.
 
It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people of this 
listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's meeting, though, 
isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think I've managed to track them 
down to within a few blocks, but certainly to Philly -- so I wonder what motive 
they might have to promulgate false information like that -- assuming, of 
course, that Tony West was right and no such information is forthcoming.
 
- Mike V.

[UC] Re: Community reps on the UCD board - not with Mao

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 6/5/2007 10:52:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I think  a better quote from Mao would be "no investigation, no right to  
speak."



And not rolling on the floor laughing, but dead? like 100 million  of the 
Great Leader's deceased victims?
 
Ciao,
 
Craig



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD answer

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


 I think a better quote from Mao would be "no investigation, no right to
speak."



Very interesting.  This one went into my kill-file, but now that you bring
it up, why is this guy on aol.com quoting Chairman Mao and copying it to
Lewis Wendell?

-Original Message-

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: univcity@list.purple.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 5:42 pm
Subject: Re: Community reps on the UCD board [was: Re: [UC] The UCD
answer]

  In a message dated 6/5/2007 5:17:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

how we can continue a direct conversation
where you've asked us to accept ucd's role wrt dock street
but not provided details about that role

 While UCD is a not for profit corporation, such a corporate
structure does not preclude UCD from operating as a private entity, unless
you *start shaking the Walls of Ivy On Campus*.

What would ever make you believe UCD is interested in your input?

While I may regularly quote Sun Tzu, apparently others read and practice
the ways of Chairman Mao.

Mao wrote:

"I do not agree with the view that to be moral, the motive of one's
actions has to be benefiting others. Morality does not have to be defined in
relation to others. … People like me want to … satisfy our hearts to the
full, and in doing so we automatically have the most valuable moral codes.
Of course there are people and objects in the world, but they are all there
only for me."

And, you all were wondering about *the man John Fenton* and *the well
being of his family?*

UCD the intersection of selfserving Humanities and Niche Real Estate
Development.

Ciao,

Craig



--
See what's free at AOL.com .

 --
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at *AOL.com* .





--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: [UC] QED Ad Hominem for you and me

[Glenn]

No.  These exchanges show that there is a list gang I refer to ass the listserv 
jackals.

Mr Sanderson made a very strong assertion with bullshit evidence that I was 
dishonest and engaged in this UCD culture type of shit.  Then he arrogantly 
stated after his witch hunt that would be his last post on the matter.  Then 
some of the usual assholes chimed in about my guilt and my bad bad character.

Then another asshole chinmed in...  So pumyhera, you think that I had no right 
to challenge what that jerk insinuated about me?

The real Glenn
  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:54 PM
  Subject: [UC] QED Ad Hominem for you and me


  I don't know about you, but again this seems to me to be Exhibit T to show 
that some people are not opposed to ad hominem attacks, they just object if 
they are the target.  

  Paul

Sanderson is just a jerk to proclaim this non evidence as proof.  If he is 
the genius that Kathleen thinks he is, shouldn't Sanderson have known that he 
had no proof of my guilt!!!

This anonymous posting and then FRAUD bullshit is the work of a seriously 
deranged asshole





--
  AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from 
AOL at AOL.com.



--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 
PM

[UC] Re: Debunking the hysteria - by dealing in facts

[Craigsolve]

 
In a message dated 6/5/2007 11:03:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

looks like i owe glenn an apology. thanks for catching that mike. and  sorry 
glenn.



Assuming Glenn has wired the $10K retainer to Dick Sprague's office this  may 
lessen your damages settlement from that of Sanderson and Lamond; hers being  
the most embarrassing because she included her employer's name and her 
personal  real estate advertisement.
 
When you put the smackdown on someone it ceases to be funny when you really  
damage them. Even in sports you make your opponents hear footsteps, but you  
don't try and to make a cripples out of them.
 
 
 
In a message dated 6/5/2007 6:25:04 P.M. Eastern  Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

For those who didn't search the two  "strings," both the 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] email and the [EMAIL PROTECTED] email say they come  from:

glennsdesktop

Very  interesting, Bill.

Melani Lamond, Associate Broker
Urban & Bye, Realtor
3529 Lancaster  Ave.
Philadelphia, PA  19104
cell phone  215-356-7266
office phone 215-222-4800,  ext. 113
office fax  215-222-1101
2006 recipient of the Greater Philadelphia Association of Realtors  awards:



- Diamond award for over $8 million in sales,  and
ALL SIX of the West Philadelphia  awards:
- Top Lister
- Top Seller
- Top Overall Combined Volume
- Top Listing Units by  Area
- Top Selling Units by Area
- Top Overall Combined Units by  Area 
I hurts Melani, doesn't it?
 
Ciao,
 
Craig



** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike VanHelder]

Thing is, Ross, the tools I was using to track the email aren't 100%
effective, and decrease in reliability the more I try to narrow down the
search.  I'm certain it's Philly.  I'm about 90% certain it's southwest
Philly -- but it gets a lot less exact from there.  If you put a gun to my
head, I'd guess that it was somewhere to the west and south of Bartram Park,
and if you put a gun to my cat's head I'd tell you to start your search
pattern at +39° 55' 48.72" lat, -75° 12' 57.60" lon, spiraling outward and
kicking in doors.  But those are just educated guesses, as I haven't done
anything but the most cursory digging.

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 6/5/07, Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any
> evidence directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any evidence
> that shows that someone tried to frame him. Bill just misinterpreted the
> email header info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't in.
>
> It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people of
> this listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's meeting,
> though, isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think I've managed to
> track them down to within a few blocks, but certainly to Philly -- so I
> wonder what motive they might have to promulgate false information like that
> -- assuming, of course, that Tony West was right and no such information is
> forthcoming.
>

If in fact you can "track them down to within a few blocks" I certainly
hope you will share that information with the list. This shit's gotta stop.
--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike VanHelder]

And that's assuming that our committeeman wasn't clever enough to try to
obfuscate his or her trail.

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Thing is, Ross, the tools I was using to track the email aren't 100%
effective, and decrease in reliability the more I try to narrow down the
search.  I'm certain it's Philly.  I'm about 90% certain it's southwest
Philly -- but it gets a lot less exact from there.  If you put a gun to my
head, I'd guess that it was somewhere to the west and south of Bartram Park,
and if you put a gun to my cat's head I'd tell you to start your search
pattern at +39° 55' 48.72" lat, -75° 12' 57.60" lon, spiraling outward and
kicking in doors.  But those are just educated guesses, as I haven't done
anything but the most cursory digging.

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/5/07, Mike V. <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >
> >  I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any
> > evidence directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any evidence
> > that shows that someone tried to frame him. Bill just misinterpreted the
> > email header info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't in.
> >
> > It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people
> > of this listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's meeting,
> > though, isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think I've managed to
> > track them down to within a few blocks, but certainly to Philly -- so I
> > wonder what motive they might have to promulgate false information like that
> > -- assuming, of course, that Tony West was right and no such information is
> > forthcoming.
> >
>
> If in fact you can "track them down to within a few blocks" I certainly
> hope you will share that information with the list. This shit's gotta stop.
> --
> Ross Bender
> http://rossbender.org

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Glenn]

Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman 
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or 
a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.


The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.



Above is the post from committeman 7.

Do we know anyone on this list who likes to make false claims about others? 
Anyone who does so in an arrogant style similar to the fraudulent post?


Look below please.




- Original Message - 
From: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)




Ray,

I think your original admission of complicity was plainer, if less 
discreet. We'll let it stand.


First Thursday is not a forum at which any agency or association has ever 
discussed any dirty linen, internal problems or PR troubles. If 
committeeman7 had ever been to one (and textual evidence suggests he had), 
he would be well aware of that. It is as inappropriate a venue for such 
discussions as the ER at HUP would be, for example.


The only clear intention of the poster was to mislead a large number of 
unsuspecting UC-list readers to a room, early in the morning, where they 
would be told the "update" they were expecting to get was not, in fact, to 
be gotten. A marvelous propaganda tool for those who see "secret meetings" 
and "stonewalls" everywhere, eh?


You're right; this is the second, very cleverly worded fake post planted 
on UC-list in the past few months, both intended to get UCD into trouble. 
It seems likely they are at least connected. I have heard other rumors 
about committeeman7, but I prefer to stay away from them as I do from the 
whole Fentongate thing, because neither are my job to figure out. Let 
those who pay the bill, order the work.


I've never seen anything like this before. But surely there can be nothing 
new under the sun. Does any other reader recall hearing about this sort of 
net abuse elsewhere?


-- Tony West

- Original Message - 
From: "UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have 
an update on the UCD investigation)




Anthony West wrote:


Ah, Ray.

So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, 
then, you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else 
would you know the intentions of the con artist?



haha I didn't think I'd have to spell it out because I thought it was 
clear to any reader that one of the intentions of the committeeman7's 
post was to show us just how well ucd was handling its communication with 
the community about the fenton/malcolm x park incident. ie, NOT.


which you then made crystal clear with your 'spokespersons ... 
categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's investigation" will be 
prepared or presented at the upcoming First Thursday meeting.'


I'm wondering now if [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] are the same 
genius.


ps, welcome to the internets.



:-)
..
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
[aka laserbeam®]
[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
















































You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM






You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Thing is, Ross, the tools I was using to track the email aren't 100%
effective, and decrease in reliability the more I try to narrow down the
search.  I'm certain it's Philly.  I'm about 90% certain it's southwest
Philly -- but it gets a lot less exact from there.  If you put a gun to my
head, I'd guess that it was somewhere to the west and south of Bartram Park,
and if you put a gun to my cat's head I'd tell you to start your search
pattern at +39° 55' 48.72" lat, -75° 12' 57.60" lon, spiraling outward and
kicking in doors.  But those are just educated guesses, as I haven't done
anything but the most cursory digging.

Can't be *southwest* Philly, dude -- this is the University City email

list, remember?

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike VanHelder]

Yes, and sometimes I send my emails from behind a desk in Old City.  What's
your point?

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thing is, Ross, the tools I was using to track the email aren't 100%
> effective, and decrease in reliability the more I try to narrow down the
> search.  I'm certain it's Philly.  I'm about 90% certain it's southwest
> Philly -- but it gets a lot less exact from there.  If you put a gun to my
> head, I'd guess that it was somewhere to the west and south of Bartram Park,
> and if you put a gun to my cat's head I'd tell you to start your search
> pattern at +39° 55' 48.72" lat, -75° 12' 57.60" lon, spiraling outward
> and kicking in doors.  But those are just educated guesses, as I haven't
> done anything but the most cursory digging.
>
> Can't be *southwest* Philly, dude -- this is the University City email
list, remember?

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Glenn]

MessageI hate to have to do this, but..  Thank you Mr. V.

Glenn
  - Original Message - 
  From: Mike V. 
  To: 'Glenn' ; UnivCity@list.purple.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:10 PM
  Subject: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people


  I hate to be the one to have to defend Glenn, but I can't find any evidence 
directly linking him to the anonymous email, or even any evidence that shows 
that someone tried to frame him. Bill just misinterpreted the email header 
info.  Calm down, Glenn.  The fix isn't in.

  It certainly is odd that "committeeman7" tried to mislead the people of this 
listserv about what was going to be discussed at Thursday's meeting, though, 
isn't it?  Committeeman7 is someone local -- I think I've managed to track them 
down to within a few blocks, but certainly to Philly -- so I wonder what motive 
they might have to promulgate false information like that -- assuming, of 
course, that Tony West was right and no such information is forthcoming.

  - Mike V.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glenn
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:09 PM
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Subject: [UC] Question for tech people


Folks, I'm being accused of making an anonymous post on the list.  I know 
that I am hated by a few who would go to extraordinary lengths to attack my 
character.  

Do any of you understand the internet information that Sanderson and 
Cassidy posted?  Does the original post actually look like it came from my same 
computer?  Or is someone who wanted to prove this "glennsdestop" stuff  able to 
call some unidentified computer "glennsdesktop" for the purpose of making it 
look like I made the anonymous post?

This is like the votefor andy toy affair.  First the strange post and then 
accusations that it must have come from the curmudgeons.  It was obvious to me 
that someone was trying something a little deeper than simply making that Toy 
anonymous post. 

 This is some serious stuff going on folks.  I absolutely did not post that 
committee7 post and I was sitting at my computer the whole morning.  Thanks for 
your help!

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer


--


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 
PM

Re: [UC] Headers from the original First Thursday post (trimmed for the non tech savvy)

[Brian Siano]

Kyle Cassidy wrote:

The relevant headers for the non tech savvy -- both came from the same 
computer, named "glenn's desktop" oops. Now we get to have a new 
dialogue about transparency and honest communication:


 
Email 1:

X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



Email 2:
X-Envelope-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



Uh, people, no: this _isn't_ evidence that Glenn's been spamming us. The 
"References:" line in the email header from "Committeeman" merely means 
that Committeeman was replying to one of Glenn's messages.







You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Anthony West]

Really, Glenn? I wouldn't describe committeeman7's style as "arrogant" in 
any way. Quite the contrary, it's plain and light. Very cleverly written, I 
think. It sounds natural and everyday. An artful trick.


It actually doesn't sound like the way either Ray or you or I write, even 
when none of us are being arrogant. Which, without doubt, all three of us 
may be accused of justly at times.


I'm more concerned about the fact committeeman7 published a malicious, 
injurious lie on UC-list than whether he was arrogant or humble as he did 
so.


-- Tony West


- Original Message - 
From: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "University City List" 


Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)



Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman 
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair 
or a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.


The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.



Above is the post from committeman 7.

Do we know anyone on this list who likes to make false claims about 
others? Anyone who does so in an arrogant style similar to the fraudulent 
post?




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Yes, and sometimes I send my emails from behind a desk in Old City.
What's your point?



Oh, I see what you mean. Come to think of it, I've sent emails to this list
from Honolulu. But I'm intrigued by your methodology. Hope you have time to
pursue it.  Would it be possible that the sender is  broadcasting from a
laptop in a Humvee somewhere in Southwest Philly?


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike VanHelder]

Sure.  Or they've got a line tap.  Or they're using a proxy.  But the
simplest explanation is most likely the truth, right?

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, and sometimes I send my emails from behind a desk in Old City.
> What's your point?


Oh, I see what you mean. Come to think of it, I've sent emails to this
list from Honolulu. But I'm intrigued by your methodology. Hope you have
time to  pursue it.  Would it be possible that the sender is  broadcasting
from a laptop in a Humvee somewhere in Southwest Philly?


--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

RE: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an update on the UCD investigation)

[Kyle Cassidy]

doesn't take long for the recently vindicated to start pointing fingers without 
evidence does it?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
Sent: Tue 6/5/2007 11:24 PM
To: Anthony West; University City List
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)
 
Come to the First Thursday meeting at the Walnut Street Library, 40th and 
Walnut Street for an update on the UCD's investigation into Councilwoman 
Jannie Blackwell's claim that she asked UCD for help at a community fair or 
a political rally for Tom Knox. This should be interesting.

The meeting starts at 8:00am and a light breakfast will be served. Please 
inform your neighbors.


Above is the post from committeman 7.

Do we know anyone on this list who likes to make false claims about others? 
Anyone who does so in an arrogant style similar to the fraudulent post?

Look below please.




- Original Message - 
From: "Anthony West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have an 
update on the UCD investigation)


> Ray,
>
> I think your original admission of complicity was plainer, if less 
> discreet. We'll let it stand.
>
> First Thursday is not a forum at which any agency or association has ever 
> discussed any dirty linen, internal problems or PR troubles. If 
> committeeman7 had ever been to one (and textual evidence suggests he had), 
> he would be well aware of that. It is as inappropriate a venue for such 
> discussions as the ER at HUP would be, for example.
>
> The only clear intention of the poster was to mislead a large number of 
> unsuspecting UC-list readers to a room, early in the morning, where they 
> would be told the "update" they were expecting to get was not, in fact, to 
> be gotten. A marvelous propaganda tool for those who see "secret meetings" 
> and "stonewalls" everywhere, eh?
>
> You're right; this is the second, very cleverly worded fake post planted 
> on UC-list in the past few months, both intended to get UCD into trouble. 
> It seems likely they are at least connected. I have heard other rumors 
> about committeeman7, but I prefer to stay away from them as I do from the 
> whole Fentongate thing, because neither are my job to figure out. Let 
> those who pay the bill, order the work.
>
> I've never seen anything like this before. But surely there can be nothing 
> new under the sun. Does any other reader recall hearing about this sort of 
> net abuse elsewhere?
>
> -- Tony West
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "University City List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 9:51 PM
> Subject: Re: FRAUDULENT POST (Was: [UC] First Thursday Meeting will have 
> an update on the UCD investigation)
>
>
>> Anthony West wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, Ray.
>>>
>>> So you know the intentions of committeeman7's post. We must take it, 
>>> then, you are involved at least to some degree in this fraud; how else 
>>> would you know the intentions of the con artist?
>>
>>
>> haha I didn't think I'd have to spell it out because I thought it was 
>> clear to any reader that one of the intentions of the committeeman7's 
>> post was to show us just how well ucd was handling its communication with 
>> the community about the fenton/malcolm x park incident. ie, NOT.
>>
>> which you then made crystal clear with your 'spokespersons ... 
>> categorically deny that any "update on the UCD's investigation" will be 
>> prepared or presented at the upcoming First Thursday meeting.'
>>
>> I'm wondering now if [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] are the same 
>> genius.
>>
>> ps, welcome to the internets.
>>
>>
>>
>> :-)
>> ..
>> UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
>> [aka laserbeam®]
>> [aka ray]
>> SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
>> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
>> .
>>
>>
>
>
> 
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
> .
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
> 269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM
>
> 


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Sure.  Or they've got a line tap.  Or they're using a proxy.  But the
simplest explanation is most likely the truth, right?

Right. And the message itself was clumsy enough that it doesn't seem that

much sophistication was involved -- how hard is it to prank an AOL account
these days? Or to home in on one, for that matter. Hope you nail the
miscreant.

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Mike VanHelder]

Honestly, digging any deeper would be a big fat sack of work, and I don't
have the time or motivation.  If anyone's interested, they can
cross-reference the header info in this post with the other header info in
the list and see if they come up with anything -- that would be my next
step, were I to take a next step -- but I just don't want to put in the
effort.

- Mike V.

On 6/5/07, Ross Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sure.  Or they've got a line tap.  Or they're using a proxy.  But the
> simplest explanation is most likely the truth, right?
>
> Right. And the message itself was clumsy enough that it doesn't seem
that much sophistication was involved -- how hard is it to prank an AOL
account these days? Or to home in on one, for that matter. Hope you nail the
miscreant.

--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

[UC] why do posts get all jumbled at times

[Anthony West]

Maybe you or somebody else can explain to me and other laymen why it is that 
sometimes, purple will seem to sit on big chunks of emails for a while --  
then drop them in my inbox, but sliced and diced, so that responses to posts 
arrive before the originals did?


This doesn't happen to me often, but it just did again during about an 
hour's worth of heated UC-list exchanges posted around 10-11 pm this 
evening. The result, especially given the topic and the posters, was a 
little like reading a William Burroughs novel: exciting but disorienting at 
the same time. Like the time my wife thre up in the Teacup Twirl ride at the 
amusement park.


I don't expect to remember the explanation, but I'd still love to read a 
techie's explanation of how this happens.


-- Tony West


ps, welcome to the internets.

[aka ray]
SERIAL LIAR. CALL FOR RATES.




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Ross Bender]

On 6/5/07, Mike VanHelder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Honestly, digging any deeper would be a big fat sack of work, and I don't
have the time or motivation.  If anyone's interested, they can
cross-reference the header info in this post with the other header info in
the list and see if they come up with anything -- that would be my next
step, were I to take a next step -- but I just don't want to put in the
effort.

Probably not worth it. But thanks. BTW I just checked www.aol.com and it

would take about 2 seconds to create a fraudulent account. Of course it's
against AOL policy, but what the heck:


  1. YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES.

  You may use AOL.COM for lawful purposes only. You may not submit or
  transmit through AOL.COM any material, or otherwise engage in any
  conduct that:
  1. violates or infringes the rights of others including, without
 limitation, patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright,
publicity or other
 proprietary rights;
 2. is unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory,
 libelous, deceptive, fraudulent, invasive of another's privacy,
tortious, or
 contains explicit or graphic descriptions, or accounts of, sexual acts;
 3. victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual
 or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual
 orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability;
 4. impersonates any person, business or entity, including AOL
 and its employees and agents;
 5. contains viruses or any other computer code, files or
 programs that interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of
any computer
 software or hardware or telecommunications equipment, or otherwise permit
 the unauthorized use of a computer or computer network;
 6. encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense,
 or that gives rise to civil liability;
 7. violates these Terms of Use, guidelines or any policy posted
 on AOL.COM, or
 8. interferes with the use of AOL.COM by others.

  You may not use AOL.COM in any manner that could damage, disable,
  overburden, or impair our servers or networks, or interfere with any other
  party's use and enjoyment of AOL.COM. You may not attempt to gain
  unauthorized access to any services, user accounts, computer systems or
  networks, through hacking, password mining or any other means. We may take
  any legal and technical remedies to prevent the violation of this provision
  and to enforce these Terms of Use.
  2. NO SPAM.

  You may not use AOL.COM or any of our communication tools to transmit,
  directly or indirectly, any unsolicited bulk communications (including
  e-mails and instant messages). You may not harvest information about our
  users for the purpose of sending, or to facilitate the sending, of
  unsolicited bulk communications. You may not induce or allow others to use
  AOL.COM to violate the terms of this section. We may terminate your
  access or use of AOL.COM immediately and take any other legal action
  if you, or anyone using your access to AOL.COM, violates these
  provisions. We may take any technical remedies to prevent unsolicited bulk
  communications from entering, utilizing, or remaining with in our computer
  or communications networks.



--
Ross Bender
http://rossbender.org

Re: Debunking the hysteria RE: [UC] Question for tech people

[Anthony West]

Interesting, Ross. Hmm, the average culprit likes to cut corners somewhere. 
Wouldn't it be a tad easier for him to do this if he had a preexisting AOL 
account? In particular, the AOL account he was customarily using to ring up 
UC-list on?

If so, then the universe of UC-list AOL subscribers would be the first place 
you'd look for the perp. You can't ship them all off to Guantánamo just for 
that, but it might help narrow the field a little.

-- Tony West
  - Original Message - 
  From: Ross Bender 

  Probably not worth it. But thanks. BTW I just checked www.aol.com and it 
would take about 2 seconds to create a fraudulent account. Of course it's 
against AOL policy, but what the heck: 

Re: [UC] Community Court

[Elliot M. Stern]

The point is that Penn does have a publicly posted disciplinary  
policy that states the possibility of discipline taking the form of  
community service;


Elliot

On 05 Jun  2007, at 8:46 PM, Glenn wrote:

Dude, if you usually have an attitude like this I probably did  
delete it.


What is your point?  You haven't added to or clarified anything in  
the discussion.   I haven't been the one suggesting that this was  
an OSC matter. If you understood all the issues, why haven't you  
chimed in before when the others were confused?  Why didn't you  
tell folks that a "cow in the library" would be handled by OSC and  
not Public Safety?


 So how does the OSC  information clarify the original issue?  It  
shows that the "cow in the library" argument was a red herring and  
I thanked Cheryl for providing the information at a relevant time.   
I would have said OSC had I remembered the name while I kept  
getting the assertions that it was probably a non criminal  
matter.   The point remains about the involvement of the Office of  
Public Safety as an issue whether there was also an OSC  
investigation or not in the individual cases of the students..


I'm sorry I missed your post if I hurt your feelings and thank you  
for the information.


Glenn


- Original Message - From: "Elliot M. Stern"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "University City List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] Community Court



Glenn,

Again, I would ask you thoroughly to check out http:// 
www.upenn.edu/ osc/outline.htm. Evidently you've ignored my May  
posting about this.


Elliot

On 05 Jun  2007, at 9:20 AM, Glenn wrote:

We don't know the answers; we know what has been reported..   
There  is no Penn information that I could find except that the  
Office of  Public Safety works with community court.


We have reports of a minor infraction and we indeed have a  
report  that the "Office of Public Safety" along with UCD  
apologized to the  students. We're all being stonewalled by UCD.   
I have not yet  confronted Penn officials about clarification and  
disclosure of  the"internal process" as the Community Court  
officer called it.


If the Penn Office of Public Safety has an internal process for   
handling academic infractions, they probably should indicate its   
existence publicly. This is what I couldn't understand.


Why would the Office of Public Safety be adjudicating these non   
criminal minor infractions which have been asserted on the list?   
I  haven't worked for Penn in over 7 years.  Does anyone know,  
are  academic infractions sent to the Office of Public Safety  
under  Maureen Rush? When did the policy of "academic  
infractions" start  leading to community service alongside  
thiefs, vandals, drug  violaters, and prostitutes?


I'm not saying you're not correct about this Cassidy.  I'm  
saying  we don't know.  This is an example of the problems that   
stonewalling causes and why it is not considered appropriate in  
the  civilized world even if not encoded in IRS 501 c 3 laws.


Of course, we're in the University City District far from the   
civilized democracies of the world!


I'll let the list know what happens when I approach Penn officials.

Sincerely,
Glenn


- Original Message - From: "Kyle Cassidy"  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: [UC] Community Court



It could also have been an academic infraction, I don't think it  
necessarily had to come through the office of public safety. I'm   
curious as well, specifically because they don't go into it at  
all  dancing around with the "minor infraction" thing. Which  
could have  been cheating on a test, or it could have been  
sneaking beer into a  dry dorm, or stealing a bagel from My  
Favorite Muffin.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Glenn
It appears we do indeed have a separate system operating within   
Penn's Office of Public Safety. ... I wonder if some people go  
to  community court and receive a police record while others get   
unequal privileges through the "internal process?"




 
-- --



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.7/830 - Release Date:   
6/3/2007 12:47 PM



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information,  
see

.



You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
.


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database:  
269.8.9/832 - Release Date: 6/4/2007 6:43 PM







You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the