Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    René, I object to 1) your allowing a discussion begun on Lambengolmor to be imported onto Elfling, which I understand is a violation of Netiquette, and would
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 1, 2005
    View Source
    René,

    I object to 1) your allowing a discussion begun on Lambengolmor to be
    imported onto Elfling, which I understand is a violation of
    Netiquette, and would be even if Pat and I COULD respond to Helge's
    charges. (I note that Helge is free to respond to whatever topics Pat
    or I bring up on Lambenglomor on the Lamb. list, since unlike David
    Salo and the rest of you fine Elfling folks we don't silence people
    who happen to disagree with us.) And I object to 2) the fact that you
    allow Helge to continue to make snide remarks and characterizations
    of what I and Pat have said elsewhere, in a forum in which we are
    prohibited by you and David Salo from correcting his lies and
    rhetorical sleight of hands.

    I further object to 3) your allowing Helge to insinuate that there is
    no difference in kind between Pat's laying out all the evidence
    pertaining to a set of apparently homophonous forms and _suggesting_
    that a later may have replaced an earlier form; and Helge's
    _asserting_ that one form "certainly obsoletes" another while
    _suppressing_ the evidence _against_ that assertion. And contrary to
    what Helge says, that _does_ constitute the formation of a canon of
    forms, whether anyone has previously called it that or not. Just as a
    lie is a lie before it is ever called a lie, and even if it is never
    called a lie.

    Shame on you.

    Carl F. Hostetter
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    ... Why? Truth is truth no matter who responds in defense of it. And those of us who care about truth -- which pronoun alas you continue to make exclusive in
    Message 2 of 4 , Oct 2, 2005
    View Source
    On Oct 2, 2005, at 12:53 AM, René Vega wrote:

    > I found it odd that you were the one to object to Helge's (or
    > anyone else's) critique of something Pat wrote. ... That you would
    > respond for him is peculiar - taking on his pain?

    Why? Truth is truth no matter who responds in defense of it. And
    those of us who care about truth -- which pronoun alas you continue
    to make exclusive in this context -- can and should defend it
    wherever we see it coming under attack, regardless of to whom that
    attack is nominally directed.

    _I_ find it odd that you continue to address people and personalities
    in all this -- you know, the very _opposite_ of what a true moderator
    is supposed to do -- instead of addressing any of the points I have
    raised in my posts highlighting the unfairness of your/Elfling's
    "moderation".

    > Do recall I chose to let your posts through albeit briefly. And,
    > please recall it was you who closed that window ahead of time by
    > sending a number improper posts to elfling.

    And yet again YOU conveniently and immoderately fail to "recall" to
    _what_ those posts were a response, and WHO let those provocations on
    the list in the first place. AGAIN, you are seeing this only in terms
    of WHO is involved, not of WHAT is being said; AGAIN you exercise and
    display _essential_ unfairness in your "moderation" by ignoring and
    clearing provocations and then reacting to and censoring RESPONSES to
    those provocations, and by failing to address in ANY manner the FACTs
    of those provocations and the responses to them, but focus only on
    people and personalities.

    Thus, for example, ONCE AGAIN you have not made ANY response to the
    three points I listed in my post, preferring instead to ignore them
    in favor of your own focus on ME, on sniffing about what you find
    "odd", and various other _ad hominem_ attacks, instead of on what I
    actually _objected_ to and _why_.

    > Carl, you amaze me by your ability to destroy any attempt at
    > normalization, and I am amazed that you would trash me considering
    > I was quite willing to help that process along.

    Clearly, you are NOT willing to help, since you continue to approve
    Helge's provocations while ignoring any points of fact or objection
    raised in response to them. How on earth you think that constitutes
    "help" of any process but perpetuation is beyond me.

    > At this point I consider you nothing but a trouble maker; I give up
    > on you.

    Right back at you (see above and below); except that I won't stop
    highlighting your bias and illogic, or stop defending the truth
    against assault by you, Helge, David Salo, etc.

    > BTW, since I am receiving complaints from Helge on the matter of
    > his moderation, I take that as a sign of balanced moderation.

    Ah, so complaints about being moderated from an agent provocateur
    whose posts you nonetheless clear for the list, are just the same in
    kind as specific objections to violations of netiquette that YOU
    permitted to be made, and to censorship of response to charges about
    other people that YOU clear to a list that you are party to
    preventing participation in? (Objections to which I note you have
    made not ONE response to?) And from this you take away only
    encouragement in your job performance. Amazing.
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    ... P.S. Considering the nature of the trouble I make for you, Helge, etc., I consider this a compliment. And considering to whom and on account of what I am
    Message 3 of 4 , Oct 2, 2005
    View Source
    On Oct 2, 2005, at 12:53 AM, René Vega wrote:

    > At this point I consider you nothing but a trouble maker;

    P.S. Considering the nature of the "trouble" I make for you, Helge,
    etc., I consider this a compliment. And considering to whom and on
    account of what I am "troubling" -- facts and truth always being
    "troubling" to political, anti-scholarly fiction-makers like
    yourselves -- I should be very happy indeed to be "nothing but" a
    "trouble maker".
  • Carl F. Hostetter
    ... I most certainly did not. I quoted selectively _from_ your (_single_, btw) e-mail to me, namely those parts pertaining to a matter made public on Elfling
    Message 4 of 4 , Oct 2, 2005
    View Source
    On Oct 2, 2005, at 12:57 PM, René Vega wrote:

    > Why Carl, you really bad, bad boy! You took several of my private
    > emails to you and published them on elfling-d,

    I most certainly did not. I quoted selectively _from_ your (_single_,
    btw) e-mail to me, namely those parts pertaining to a matter made
    public on Elfling by you, for the purposes of illustration and debate
    in that matter, and for purposes of conveying your evasion
    (continuing even now) of the objections raised in the open letter I
    addressed to you on this list, which occasioned your e-mail; to which
    I added considerable amounts of my own commentary in response to your
    points and claims. All of which is amply covered under Fair Use.

    (And all of which is considerably "shy" of the "standard" of "ethics"
    set by the original founder of elfling-d, Dorothea Salo, who
    announced the formation of this list with these words <http://
    members.terracom.net/~dorothea/elfling.html>:

    "Be aware that a separate list, elfling-d, serves as a public record
    of insulting or abusive comments to Elfling’s moderation team. Any
    such comment sent to the elfling-owner address or any of the private
    addresses of the moderation team is subject to posting to elfling-d,
    where it will be world-readable.")

    > Again, I ask you to reflect on the damage your continued tirade is
    > doing to you,

    It's not doing the slightest bit of "damage" to me, nor would I care
    if it were so long as it gets the truth of the matter aired.
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
  • Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
OK
Cancel
  • Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer. We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.
Got it
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/elfling-d/conversations/topics/534?xm=1&m=s&l=1
groups.yahoo.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2013-48
82379
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:SELJJWVBXHZ2SNON2XOB4XLUEX756ARH
<urn:uuid:591043f6-da27-47fa-8e95-aae5cff57d8f>
2013-12-13T06:42:14Z
98.136.145.152
sha1:IE4CIAX6A5WXMIUYUHSLR7TK4NQMHGWK
<urn:uuid:519758ad-b6e7-4e5f-abce-66562788d987>
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/elfling-d/conversations/topics/534?xm=1&m=s&l=1
length
response
<urn:uuid:bdd77183-89fb-4357-af45-85b0f5b7bf71>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-33-133-15.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2013-48
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for Winter 2013
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf