Well, that didn't take very long! An outraged "response" from Terry No-name, responding to nothing, obfuscating everything, followed by his unsubscription - followed by his banning, so he won't be back. Parthian post in the garbage where it belongs, with the previous one, good riddance.
I'm sorry to post this stuff, but I don't have any choice - standing back and letting the disinformation fly unchecked and the smokescreen build up as intended is not an option. If you want to blame someone for all this tedious junk blame the perpetrators, not the debunkers of it. Anyway, very predictably, Terry has now taken his gripes to the Biodiesel list, where Mark cross-posted all this stuff, among other places, to stir up some highly questionable support, then, that done, claiming that it was to embarrass me into not censoring her, LOL! But I've dealt with that already: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37931/ Deliberate misquotes of off-topic correspondence and so on. Nice little hate-war she's built up there. Anyway, this is what Terry No-name says there: >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 07:19:58 -0000 >Subject: [Biodiesel] False accusations from Biogod on Biofuel >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sorry folks. I had no intentions of bringing this here any further. >But I have been >falsely accused on Biofuel, and it is quite obvious that Keith will >reject a post and then >make false accusations regarding it. Followed by his messages, both of them. "Biogod", of course, is the sneering name Tillyfromparadise uses for me (he has another one for Todd, and yet another one for Steve Spence). You can go and have a look at it all, if you like, it's here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Biodiesel/message/8674 Falsely accused? Check it out - he's posted both messages there that quite rightly got canned here. (Censorship! Arghhh!) Even-handed, no obfuscation, indeed... I get slammed for "calling people names", twice, but in both his messages he's done that to me with impunity, and that's about the size of it. He denies what I'd said, that he'd twisted Gustl's message to accuse me and Journey to Forever of unethical behaviour that jeopardises the biofuels community, of holding an author's work "hostage", and of stirring up counter-productive "in-fighting". He says: "I did not accuse anyone of any of the three. Does the shoe fit, Keith??" But there it all is in his own message that he quotes right at the top, in which he says: - "Apparent motives are irrelavent, and taking another's work hostage is unethical." - "It would definitely penalize the biofuel community for the appleseed processor data to be pulled from JTF." (Which I've said I will do, for quality-control reasons, regardless of whatever Mark may choose to demand as she's in no position to demand anything - but she doesn't get criticised for demanding it be pulled, she gets defended instead.) - "In-fighting is most definitely counter-productive and a sad testimony for our community." And then he denies saying it. It's all like that. I wouldn't bother with it if I were you. It's all so transparent, this stuff - we're expected not to notice or something? I'd like to think that most of us here are a little brighter than that, even if Terry No-name isn't. Anyway, I'd say this is a clear response to the message he refused to respond to, an answer to the questions there that he evaded: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/37929/ Now we know, not that there was ever any doubt about it. "And BTW, I have never signed my posts "Terry No-name". Your use of that name is just another way in which you show disrespect and engage in derogatories." But "No-name" is only a translation of his email, "nonym" - it's the name he gives himself. But his using Tillman's sneering name for me? "yup, sure did. But only cuz it seems appropriate." It's all like that. Hogswill, we don't need it, we don't need him either. By the way, I do not know of any version of Netiquette that requires unvarying and automatic respect, even for hogswill. None of them bans flames either, though they call for caution - just as ordinary social conventions don't ban straight talking, but they always censure dissembly, obfuscation and deceit. Respect? Sure, if you merit it. Anyway, so what. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner >Hello Gustl > >Thankyou - balanced and wise as ever! Whatever would we do without >you. Miss you, that's for sure. > >Would you expect, or even imagine, that Terry No-name's response to >this would be to thank you and agree with you, and then to continue >to use your message to redefine "the issues" in accordance with his >previous twisted and partisan rendition, to accuse me and Journey to >Forever of unethical behaviour that jeopardises the biofuels >community, of holding an author's work "hostage", and of stirring up >counter-productive "in-fighting"? To once again interpret Netiquette >as "treating other members with respect and not be derogatory or >insulting", and, following his derogatory, insulting and unethical >little diatribe, then to sign off with a sneer borrowed directly from >"Tillyfromparadise", biodiesel psychopath extraordinaire, for whom >he's quite apparently acting as a proxy, as well as for Girl Mark? >This while ignoring my response to his previous message and all the >questions and issues raised there, despite general warnings about >such "hit-and-run" tactics (while also demanding to know where the >list rules are posted, though he ignores them anyway)? And also while >continuing to ignore the great deal of material now presented which >Girl Mark has still failed to address, despite many clear and obvious >inconsistencies, outright distortions, and questionable tactics? > >Because that's what's happened. Or what he's attempted anyway. > >This doesn't need any addressing in itself, it has no integrity >whatsoever, it's obviously partisan and that's all. This kind of >partisan approach is not interested in mere trivialities such as >facts and truth, only in supporting one "side" no matter what. It's >completely obvious where it comes from, it also confirms who Mark is >allying herself with, as if further confirmation were needed. It's >not only dishonest, it's divisive, and, if I let it, it would do the >biofuels community harm - far more so than my removing Mark's stuff >from Journey to Forever could do, or this alleged "in-fighting", the >purpose of which is to prevent damage, not cause it: it's a quality >control issue, and an ethical one, it started over spamming and abuse >of this list, and that hasn't been settled either. > >Previous, from me: > > >THANKYOU Bryan - the magic word "promote", at last, as opposed to > >"mention", "announce", "point at", "link to in their sig". > > > >I think I now have to say that anybody who fails to make this very > >clear and simple distinction, which was clearly and simply stated, > >and restated twice, and fudges the issue this way has to be > >questioned. The first person to do so was Mark. I debunked that by > >putting the two statements side-by-side, totally clear for all to > >see for the red herring it was. It's very improbable that anyone > >continuing to offer this red herring is just being lamebrained or > >heedless. It's a selective misreading, an attempt to obfuscate the > >issues at stake here. It's equally improbable that an unbiased and > >disinterested view would question this while failing to mention any > >of the real issues, and failing to question Mark's deliberate > >distortions. It has to be partisan, and there are several other > >indications that this is how this wrangle is now being conducted - > >let's bury it all beneath a storm of superficialities and deliberate > >misinterpretations and blind-eyeings. > > > >Well, that's a pity. Horribly reminiscent of the slimy tactics of > >Tilly and his home-made gang. As with Tilly, would anyone have to > >resort to such tactics unless they didn't have any genuine answers > >to the questions that have been asked and the evidence laid out to > >support them? > >So. > >For Terry No-name: > >Despite your calls for the "list rules" to be posted, you knowingly >ignore them, as the people you're supporting do and have done. If you >don't know that "hit-and-run" tactics are not acceptable here, then, >as indicated previously, you have no business commenting on this >issue at all, as it is mentioned several times in the material that >you must have read to gain any understanding of it. There you go, >Terry No-name, hoist with your own petard - damned if you do, and >damned if you don't. > >Your previous post was questioned, seriously, and you have ignored it >to pursue your partisan attack. Sorry, that doesn't fly. Before you >post anything else you have to deal with this: >http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/37929/1/ > >The ostrich technique so often employed by your friends and also by >you will also not fly, not as a whole and not within any response you >do make either. Your response will be even-handed and honest, you >will avoid obfuscation of any kind, you will deal with all points >raised, and you will stop blind-eyeing anything and everything in the >previous correspondence here on this issue that doesn't support your >"case", or that cannot be twisted and distorted into appearing to do >so. In other words you'll behave like a normal, honest human being - >which is all the Netiquette that you find so mysterious and >misinterpret so grossly amounts to anyway. > >Your current post will not be released, it is out of order, and is in >itself sufficient to see you evicted and banned as it is a deliberate >flouting of previously stated rules of behaviour of which you are >aware or most certainly should be. Any specious smokescreen you try >to whip up by yelling "Censorship!", here or elsewhere, will see you >dismissed - what's also now been mentioned several times is this: >"... all views are welcome, but all behaviour is not necessarily >welcome." Do not try to fudge the clear distinction between the two. > >You do not have the option not to respond to this. Your response (or >whatever it is) to Gustl was quick enough. Deal with this within 24 >hours. Get it right first time. Obfuscate, blind-eye it, chuck more >invective around, and you're gone. You can stay where you belong, and >that's not here. > >Keith Addison >Journey to Forever >KYOTO Pref., Japan >http://journeytoforever.org/ >Biofuel list owner > > > >Hallo Terry, > > > >This is a general comment and not directed at you or anyone in > >particular. > > > >There are 2 things I do not understand about this discussion. First, > >is it not enough that a list moderator explains a rule of the list and > >asks that it be adhered to? If a moderator told me that on this list > >we do such and such and do not allow such and such I would conform to > >the regs of the list whether I liked them or not. This only seems > >reasonable to me. If it offended me that much I would unsubscribe. As > >it is I think the moderators have good, solid reasoning behind the > >rules which guide the list. > > > >Second, I am wondering who it hurts if Keith pulls the appleseed > >processor data off JtF. I don't see it as particularly hurting either > >JtF in general or Keith in particular but the biofuel community > >instead. Whatever girl marks intentions it appears to be an instance > >of "It's my ball and you can't play with it." which only serves to > >limit what is available to the biofuel community. > > > >I guess I have a third thought and that is that there are enough > >people out there who have no concept of conservation or right use of > >resources and we really don't need in-fighting and division among > >those of us who have a conscience which is environmentally and > >socially aware. > > > >Happy Happy, > > > >Gustl > > > >Thursday, 26 August, 2004, 14:36:52, you wrote: > > > >ngc> I can understand that, perhaps, because of Mark's passion she > >got a bit overzealous in > >ngc> referencing the more dynamic forum for the information. A > >single site is definitely easier > >ngc> to maintain than multiple ones. Her private requests for a > >link to the single source were > >ngc> (IMO discourteously) ignored. > > > >ngc> I can also understand Keith wanting to prevent information > >resources from becoming > >ngc> diluted. JTF provides quite a wealth of information. > > > >ngc> I think you both want the same thing for our community. The > >easiest to find, most meaty, > >ngc> and up-to-date information possible. > > > >ngc> So if there is a more dynamic and up-to-date forum for a > >particular type of information, > >ngc> why, instead of dead-ending them with static and possibly > >out-dated info, would we not > >ngc> provide newcomers to our community that resource? Dilution, right? > > > >ngc> I did find only one biodiesel processor article (on JTF) with a > >link back to a home page. > >ngc> That is Dale Scroggins' processor. Is a link to a possibly > >stagnant homepage > >ngc> acceptable, but one to a vibrant community initiative unacceptable? > > > >ngc> I'm just trying to understand Keith's apparent lack of > >accomodation for a fellow activist. > >ngc> (And if your going to say, Keith, that it's just a matter of > >Netiquette I say hogwash. IMO > >ngc> Mark's references to her chosen homepage were not that far out > >of line; again IMO.) > > > >ngc> So Keith, are you laying claim to the article at >http://journeytoforever. > >ngc> org/biodiesel_processor8.html ? > > > >ngc> If not, then I think you should honor the author's wishes and > >either link it or remove it. > > > >ngc> If you are laying claim to it, well, whatever ... > > > >ngc> Terry > > > > > >ngc> --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Hello Ken > > >> > > >> >On Wednesday, August 25, 2004, at 02:02 PM, Keith Addison wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > It is not list infighting. The correct place for it is onlist, and > > >> > > that's where it will be. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> >Since it's onlist, would someone please tell me WHAT the > > >> >blah blahh it's all about? All the gory details, please, > > >> >or at least where in the archives I should look to get them. > > >> > > >> It was a Netiquette reminder, from me as list owner, not me as > > >> member, and it sparked an explosion. These two messages are what > > >> finally occasioned my call to order (there were many previous > > >> examples). > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37833/ > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37834/ > > >> > > >> This was my reply: > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37849/ > > >> > > >> Mark's two responses: > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37851/ > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37856/ > > >> > > >> My two responses to those: > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/37868/ > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/37866/ > > >> > > >> Mark's only response so far: > > >> > > >> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/37883/ > > >> > > >> >All of a sudden this dispute showed up and I'd like to know > > >> >all the background. Both of you are behaving uncharacteristically, > > >> > > >> I'm not so sure about that. > > >> > > >> >and now I'm wondering what sort of offense would be required > > >> >to bring this on.... > > >> > > >> Repeated spamming. > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> > > >> Keith > >-- > >Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. > >Mitglied-Team AMIGA > >ICQ: 22211253-Gustli > >******** > >The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, > >soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, > >without signposts. > >C. S. Lewis, "The Screwtape Letters" > >******** > >Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Stra§e liegen, > >da§ sie gerade deshalb von der gewšhnlichen Welt nicht > >gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. > >******** > >Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't > >hear the music. > >George Carlin > >******** > >The best portion of a good man's life - > >His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. > >William Wordsworth > > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Biofuels list archives: >http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. >To unsubscribe, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
