Santosh Helekar wrote: The proof of this (alleged spin by Dr. Helekar on the issue of losing his cool) is harder to show than demonstrating that repeated name-calling was done jokingly, as claimed.
Mario replies: Dr. Helekar, it is disappointing to see you persist in your claim that I called you names during the Battle of the Behinds. I always use epithets advisedly, and rarely retract real targeted name calling I have engaged in, as Mervyn will confirm. In this case, I really believe I did not use any epithets against you, just spirited comments. Believe me, if and when I call you a name, there will be no doubt in anyone's mind. In the spirit of objectivity, I would like you to review the case I have made below where I try to show that I did not call you names during that Battle. I have used the examples of "name-calling" that YOU provided at the time to make my case. After review of the following, if you still feel that I called you names, I will leave it at that. My comments are in upper case below. HERE IS WHAT YOU SAID IN YOUR POST OF APRIL 3, 2005: "It is very clear to everybody that Mario Goveia posted an alarmist urban legend in this forum, and then started spreading offensive lies against those of us who exposed his hoax, calling us defenders of AIDS-infected drug users and sex predators, and AIDS-infected drug users, ourselves." MG: THE ARCHIVES WILL SHOW THAT I NEVER DISPUTED GEORGE PINTO WHEN HE POINTED OUT THAT MY ORIGINAL EMAIL WAS A HOAX. IN FACT, I SENT GEORGE'S EMAIL TO EVERYONE WHO HAD RECEIVED THE HOAX EMAIL ALONG WITH ME. SO, HOW WAS THIS SPREADING "OFFENSIVE LIES" AGAINST THOSE WHO EXPOSED THE HOAX? YES, I CALLED YOU A "DEFENDER OF AIDS-INFECTED DRUG USERS" FOR YOUR OBJECTION TO THE SUGGESTION THAT THEY MAY LEAVE INFECTED NEEDLES IN PUBLIC PLACES. IN ANOTHER POST I JOKINGLY SUGGESTED THAT SEX-PREDATORS MAY HAVE THE SAME DEFENDERS. BY WHAT OBJECTIVE STANDARD IS CALLING YOU A DEFENDER OF SOMEONE OR SOMETHING, "NAME-CALLING"? THE FOLLOWING ARE FROM YOUR POST OF APRIL 4, 2005 AND ARE SUPPOSED TO BE EXAMPLES OF MY QUOTES WHERE I HAD CALLED YOU NAMES. a) "Hey, Jose. The AIDS-infected drug users on Goanet must be gratified to see your staunch attack on the proposition that they may leave infected needles in public places, backed up by a scientific research opinion that this presents no risk." MG: WHERE IN THIS HAVE I CALLED YOU ANYTHING? I WASN'T EVEN ADDRESSING YOU. b) "You, and your other staunch defenders of AIDS-infected drug users would have understood from posts by Gabriel and Viviana that the hoax email was irrelevent to the suggestion that people watch their behinds when sitting in public places." MG: I HAVE REFERRED TO "STAUNCH DEFENDERS OF AIDS-INFECTED DRUG USERS". WHERE HAVE I CALLED YOU AN AIDS-INFECTED DRUG USER? WHY IS A "DEFENDER" OF ANYONE AN EPITHET? c) "Mario replies to Avelino D'Souza: Who knew that AIDS-infected drug users had such staunch defenders? AIDS-infected sex predators may have the same defenders." "Make sure you check with Santosh, Goanet's "truth detector", that adequate research has been done to verify your story." MG: NO REFERENCE TO YOU IN THE FIRST PARA. IN THE SECOND PARA I HAVE ASKED AVELINO TO CHECK WITH YOU WHETHER ADEQUATE RESEARCH HAD BEEN DONE. I HAVE REFERRED TO "STAUNCH DEFENDERS OF AIDS-INFECTED DRUG USERS" AND MADE REFERENCE TO SEX-PREDATORS POSSIBLY HAVING THE SAME "DEFENDERS". WHERE HAVE I REFERRED TO YOU BEING AN "AIDS-INFECTED DRUG USER"? d) "And finally, as expected, Mario Goveia continues to be defensive about his apparent gullibility in disseminating a fairly obvious chain letter hoax about HIV-infected needles in cinema theaters." MG: ANYONE WHO READS MY REPLY TO GEORGE PINTO, WHO FIRST ALERTED ME TO THE HOAX, WOULD KNOW THAT I HAVE NEVER DEFENDED THE HOAX, NOR HAVE I REPEATED IT. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE THAT THE ORIGINAL CHAIN EMAIL WAS AN OBVIOUS HOAX, WHEN ALL IT WAS ASKING WAS THAT PEOPLE BE CAREFUL IN PUBLIC PLACES? ALL I EVER ASKED WAS FOR PEOPLE TO NOT CONFUSE "LOW" PROBABILITY OF INFECTION WITH "NO" POSSIBILITY, AND TO WATCH WHERE THEY SIT IN A PUBLIC PLACE.
