R> Hello Dick.
Hello Scotty.
 R>>> I received, and responded to, your internet email.
 RM>> Oh, what a short memory you have.  You responded to the email I
 RM>> sent after the issue was raised on the echo when you got back
 RM>> from vacation. You DID NOT respond to the email I sent long
 RM>> before then. Of course not, you were on vacation.  But, hey how
 RM>> was I to know that then, seeming how you never mentioned a word
 RM>> about it until AFTER you got back.
 R> I received two pieces of internet mail from you, and responded to
 R> both.
Selective ignorance.
 R>>> If you consider it interesting that routed netmail might get
 R>>> lost, then perhaps you haven't become used to this fact.
 RM>> In all these years I spent on international Fidonet, it has only
 RM>> happened with mail to you,... and (BTW) I was sending quite a lot
 RM>> back then.  Thus I find it really interesting that it ONLY
 RM>> happened with mail to you.
 R> You have apparently had better luck with routing netmail than I
 R> have.
Luck has little to do with it.
 R>>> I expect one half of all routed netmail to get lost en route
 R>>> (that's the nature of the beast), so if I have anything really
 R>>> important to say, I make it a policy to send the netmail
 R>>> direct/crash
 RM>> I have never had to do that in the past.  Perhaps you are doing
 RM>> something wrong with routing mail.
 R> What the hell do -I- have to do with the routing?  If mail gets
It is easy for some to screw things up (especially simple things like
routed netmail).  Perhaps you did not understand how to use your mail
editor. ;)
 R> lost en route, what can I possibly do about it?  Do you really
 R> understand how the system works?
Same question can be asked of you.
 R> (Don't try to cite all your years
 R> in Fido as evidence of understanding, people can be clueless for
 R> years.
Ditto.
 R> Also don't bother taking a poll of the echo participants
 R> about their opinions of your techincal expertise, it wouldn't sway
 R> me.
ROFL!
 R>>> What does voting have to do with it, Dick?
 RM>> Well, you obviously are paying NO attention to what others here
 RM>> think of my personality, I figured you would like to be
 RM>> enlightened to the truth.
 R> Who cares what other people think about your personality?
There, there... stay ignorant by choice, Scotty.  Keep building that 
wall of protective ignorance.
 R> Well, you might, but I don't.  Why should I?
You cannot answer that question yourself?
 RM>>>> Why am I not surprised, that you would use this tactic?  ;)
 R>>> Probably because you've gained some insight into my personality.
 RM>> You would not like the insight I have about your personality
 RM>> fully revealed.
 R> Don't presume to make such statements about my preferences.
Then the games continue.  
 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
 RM>> So, then it would be a more accurate conclusion that you would
 RM>> only ban someone for hounding you and not for telling you to
 RM>> "fuck off", or for insulting others on this echo, and having a
 RM>> REAL belligerent attitude.
 R> No, I am not interested in either banning Andrew for being an
 R> asshole, or banning you for the same disorder.  I don't know from
 R> whose rectum you pulled the idea that I wanted to ban you for this
 R> silly crap you've been posting in this echo, but I'm not having any
 R> of it
 R> I can easily conceive of banning you while not banning Andrew,
 R> without Universe collapsing due to a failure of internal consistency
I pulled it from your own.  Besides I stated that it would be "... more
accurate...".  Try to read more carefully.
 R>>> I do not seem to grok this path you have been following --
 RM>> Too bad.
 R>>> it may have to do with my eristic temperament and your apparent
 R>>> aneristic temperament
 RM>> I really do not think that any assessment of my personality using
 RM>> words coined by Heinlein is of any use.  Actually any assessment
 RM>> of my personality by YOU has much potential for inaccuracy.
 R> Any assessment of any personality is subject to inaccuracy.  I take
 R> care to include words like "apparent" so that my statements are
 R> accurate
Oh, such an honorable person you are.  >:)
 RM>> Tell me, why are you even here (especially as moderator)?
 R> (blah blah... much indignation trimmed.)
Too unpleasant?  "Blah, blah"?  Now THAT was profound as hell.
 R> I was originally here to read and post to the echo.  When I got the
 R> echolist password, my goal was to keep the echo from disappearing.
 R> Now I am here to keep the echo in the dominion of the Lords of
 R> Chaos
You are no longer one of us.
 R> If you don't like it, too bad.  Feel free to fuck off.
Ooooo,... a wee bit pissed off at the truth coming out in public?  Hmmm,
the only other individual I have seen here actually tell someone to
"fuck off" was Andrew Cummins, perhaps you two have more in common than
I thought.
 R> I am not here to please you or any other person.
IOW, you are here for purely selfish reasons.
 R> If you would prefer an
 R> echo with stricter controls on content, you are free to vote with
 R> your feet and start a new echo with yourself as moderator.
I have two local ones and they are doing fine, thank you.
 R> You are
 R> also free to stay here, and you may even whine about the moderation
 R> (or lack thereof) as you have been doing
You call it whining while I call it exposing the truth about the
moderator of this echo, and the reasons why no one should not expect
things to get any better in here.
 R> However, your moaning and griping and pissing and bitching will not
 R> get either you or Andrew banned.  At most it will cause me to
 R> ignore you or respond with a nasty message such as this one.  If
 R> such activities entertain you, then you might as well continue, but
 R> if you're counting on accomplishing some goal other than provoking
 R> a nasty response, you might want to cut it out
I am just *beginning* to have fun. >:D
 R> Have a nice day.
I always do. >;)
 R> Rev_Null
Why are you so ashamed to use your real name, Scott Woodward?
 Dicere...
 email address (vrmeic@nucleus.com)
Richard Meic
--- Terminate 5.00/Pro 
---------------