That was interesting about him having access to inside knowledge that it was 
not me. Or perhaps a superficial acquaintance with the Internet lead him to 
draw conclusions about similar IP addresses. I don't know how it works at the 
moderator end. Maybe anyone from my area comes up with a similar regional IP 
code?" But with Yahoo so far up my internet identity butt combining information 
about me from different sites, it would surprise me if it was not clear that 
whoever tried to use that name was not me.

This is not the first time I have had to assess whether the forum malice comes 
from ignorance or intended harm. In the end the result is the same, someone who 
wishes me ill can win by attrition if they just post after me.  KInda took the 
charm out of posting here for me.
 

---In [email protected], <turquoiseb@...> wrote :

 Thanks for clearing this up, Curtis. Further comments below:
 

 From: "curtisdeltablues@... [FairfieldLife]" <[email protected]>
 To: [email protected] 
 Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 4:53 PM
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] Message for Jim at the Peak
 
 
   A few times a year I do a search on my name here and at the Peak. I found 
this entry by Jim from back in January:


 Jim: "PS Before you get too carried away with the whole "boot me" meme, I have 
banned one person, Curtis, who tried to sneak on under false pretenses, just to 
cause trouble. His alias was cardozy or something. Other than that, everyone 
who has applied, has been accepted, and no one has been booted. Yes,  everyone, 
no exceptions."


Me:  I have never applied for the Peak under my own or any other name. I 
suspect that Jim used his "intuition" rather than any actual facts to make this 
claim. But on the lighter side someone got canned from his tiny kingdom and was 
accused of being someone else by an "enlightened" guy! Methinks he may have 
blown out a possible follower due to paranoid delusions.

I find this particularly interesting for several reasons. First, as you say, 
this "enlightened" guy's "intuition" is obviously for shit. :-) Second, and 
more important, if he is the moderator of a Yahoo forum, he had *full access* 
to cardozy's information, and thus almost certainly knew it wasn't you. So it 
appears he was LYING about who he kicked off. 

Finally, and most hilariously, the "sin" he kicked this poor sod off for was 
*telling other people on The_Leak the kinds of things Jimbo was posting over on 
FFL while pretending he was all about sweetness and light on The_Leak*. That's 
not just duplicitous, that's kinda insane in my book. 

Jim, you and I have nothing to discuss ever so I don't need to join your group. 
But I hope you have the integrity to print a retraction for your baseless 
accusation. And if someone here was using that name I hope you will come 
forward to bust Jim on his false accusation because if I know Jim, this will 
start a round of the infamous "doubledown" routine.

Of course he will. When he accuses you of lying, I urge people here (and on 
The_Leak, since they seem to spend more time reading FFL than they do over 
there) to remember that the person claiming this was the person who lied to 
everyone on FFL for months while he was pretending to be a woman and posting 
under the name of enlightened_dawn11. Even ignoring the laughable idea of 
claiming to be enlightened, he has ZERO credibility from that debacle. 

I know it is appealing for Jim to believe that his group is so desirable that I 
would take this trouble. But if anyone with a brain actually looks a my posting 
pattern, I own everything I write, and have never (unlike the slippery Jim) 
posted as anyone else from my earliest days on AMT.

Obviously, I have never had any interest in joining the Whine-fest over at 
The_Leak, either. But I do find it hilarious that Jimbo managed to kick out 
someone just for revealing that 1) not only was he still posting on FFL after 
claiming that he never would again as long as I was there, but 2) that he was 
posting his usual insults and slander, while claiming that he had "left" FFL to 
get away from such stuff. What a nut case. :-)

Not only falsely imagining that it was me, Jim compounds his misguided self 
confidence by claiming to know about the motive of the person who used that 
name. I am always a fan of an example that shows why the subjective means of 
gaining "knowledge" is a farce. Oddly it is the quest for subjective confidence 
in one's knowledge that often draws people to spiritual groups. It makes life 
so much easier not to have to worry about messy facts!

I simply can't wait to see how "Mr. Enlightenment" deals with this. I predict 
hysteria. Maybe crying and whimpering. :-)



   

 


 


 









Reply via email to