I originally wrote everything below on the night of December 13th,
before the Klahnsman published his stupid revised rules for Debate.  I
intended to post it in Debate, but I never got around to it.  Now, while
still true, it's a bit past topical for posting in Debate.  I've been
lurking in the meanwhile, and I see that Klahn is still half-nuts, and
busily cultiviating his multitude of feuds with other fidonetters, with
some new victims added to his list.

- - -  JimH.


-=> On 12-13-08 18:45 JOHN MASSEY wrote to BOB KLAHN <=-

 JM> bob klahn -> ALL wrote:

 bk>  There have been attacks on this echo in other echoes for some
 bk>  time. I have defended this echo whenever I can. However,
 bk>  recently I have seen postings in other echos that qualify as
 bk>  attempts to sabatoge this echo. Sometimes they do it by claiming
 bk>  that the rules in this echo either have changed or don't have to
 bk>  be obeyed.

 bk>  While I can't stop them from doing it there, I can stop them
 bk>  from posting here.

 bk>  I am making it a rule that anyone attempting to sabatoge this
 bk>  echo in another echo will be banned from this echo immediately.


 JM> An occasional vacation isn't so bad but I would hate to slip and go
 JM> over the line and get banned, for something I don't quite understand.

 JM> Would you please clarify or clearly define what you mean by "attempting
 JM> to sabotage"?
 JM> Would comments about you personally, made in those echoes,  be attempts
 JM> to sabotage this echo?

This is getting downright bizarre.  Since I can't post the below
anywhere else, lest I become the first victim of Klahn's newest power
grab, I'll take my chances and post this here.

Klahn's post breaks his own current echorules - - he is dragging his
feuds from other echoes (of which he has many, and is currently keeping
them well cultivated) into this echo. And now he wants to enshrine those
feuds into the echorules here, as a pre-emptive strike (the Klahn
doctrine?) in order to protect himself from what seems to be a paranoid
fear of an imagined threat from impending 'sabotage.'

The part which I can't quite understand is how can remarks made in some
other echo actually damage or 'sabotage' this echo?  How is this echo
affected by something said somewhere else? (I mean other than as in the
example at hand, where Klahn is dragging his feuds from other echoes
into his own echo).  Seems to me if there is any "sabotage" going on,
this is it right here, and he is the source of it.   Heck, if he
strictly enforces his proposed new echorule, he will ban himself from
here, because of the way he has been conducting himself in those other
echoes!

They told me that if Obama were elected president, we would see new
limits placed on our right to freedom of expression, and they were
right!

- - -  JimH.



... "Ayatollah isn't good enough; I want to be Pharaoh." -B. Klahn 3/9/07
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47