Salutatio Rev_Null!
15-Apr-98, Rev_Null wrote to Richard Meic
          Subject: !!!
 RM>> I recall, now, finding it very interesting that it only happened
 RM>> to those netmails (and the email I sent as well).
 R> I received, and responded to, your internet email.
Oh, what a short memory you have.  You responded to the email I sent 
after the issue was raised on the echo when you got back from vacation.
You DID NOT respond to the email I sent long before then.  Of course 
not, you were on vacation.  But, hey how was I to know that then, seeming 
how you never mentioned a word about it until AFTER you got back.
 R> Have you
 R> forgotten this as well?  
    
Obviously I remember more about the whole thing than you do. 
 R> If you consider it interesting that routed
 R> netmail might get lost, then perhaps you haven't become used to
 R> this fact.  
    
In all these years I spent on international Fidonet, it has only 
happened with mail to you,... and (BTW) I was sending quite a lot back
then.  Thus I find it really interesting that it ONLY happened with mail
to you.
 R> I expect one half of all routed netmail to get lost en
 R> route (that's the nature of the beast), so if I have anything
 R> really important to say, I make it a policy to send the netmail
 R> direct/crash
I have never had to do that in the past.  Perhaps you are doing
something wrong with routing mail.
 R>>> You seem to have selective memory as well as a belligerent
 R>>> attitude.
 RM>> "Belligerent"?  This is far more hilarious, Scott.  Care to take
 RM>> a vote on how "belligerent" I am?
 R> What does voting have to do with it, Dick?
       
Well, you obviously are paying NO attention to what others here think of
my personality, I figured you would like to be enlightened to the truth.
 R>>> I have some information which will punch a hole in some of the
 R>>> statements you are making and may make you embarassed about it.
 R>>> I was thinking of giving you this information, but I think it
 R>>> will be more amusing to watch you continue to follow the path
 R>>> that you're currently on
 RM>> Why am I not surprised, that you would use this tactic?  ;)
 R> Probably because you've gained some insight into my personality.
                                                                        
You would not like the insight I have about your personality fully 
revealed.
 RM>> Here is my philosophy of what I am doing here:
 RM>> 1) The moderator has decreed that PHIL remain in a state of
 RM>> anarchy.
 RM>> 2) One individual has actually told the moderator to "fuck off".
 RM>> From these two points I gather that if it is okay to tell the
 RM>> moderator to "fuck off", then it is quite alright to hound the
 RM>> moderator at will without any risk of being banned from the echo.
 RM>> Furthermore, if by some freak chance the one doing the hounding
 RM>> gets banned, then it stands to reason that the individual that
 RM>> told him to "fuck off" gets banned as well.  ;)
 R> Why are you stating that last implication?  I can easily conceive
 R> of banning you while not banning Andrew, without Universe
 R> collapsing due to a failure of internal consistency
         
So, then it would be a more accurate conclusion that you would only ban 
someone for hounding you and not for telling you to "fuck off", or for 
insulting others on this echo, and having a REAL belligerent attitude.
 RM>> Still amused?
 R> Actually I'm more confused than amused at this point (though, as
 R> usual, there is an element of amusement).  Are you telling me that
 R> you are trying to goad me into banning you so that I will then feel
 R> compelled to ban Andrew as well?                   
 
Well, Mr. Woodward I am simply pointing out aspects of your personality 
that others here may wish to know about.  I really doubt that you would 
ban Andrew, you seem to prefer his crap in here.  
 R> I do not seem to grok this path you have been following --
Too bad.
 R> it may have to do with my eristic
 R> temperament and your apparent aneristic temperament
I really do not think that any assessment of my personality using words
coined by Heinlein is of any use.  Actually any assessment of my
personality by YOU has much potential for inaccuracy.
Tell me, why are you even here (especially as moderator)?  You do not
converse with us.  In fact, you have not been a part of the echo
since you officially had your name in the elist.  Man, you even tried to
moderate that individual who brought the topic "AIDS IS NOT CONTAGIOUS"
here (what was one of the things you demanded, "get this shit out of
here", or some such profane statement?)... and you did not even have
moderation authority at the time, either (if you did your name would
have been in the elist, and it was not).  Now that you have moderation
authority you decide that you no longer wish to be a part of us and not
to moderate the biggest jerk this echo has seen since I have been here
(Andrew).  You used to be quite active in here and had many useful
insights, I respected you then.  Now?  I do not.  
 Dicere...
 email address (vrmeic@nucleus.com)
Richard Meic
--- Terminate 5.00/Pro 
---------------