Hello Andrea and all
I'd prefer not to speak about another group here and I'm sure this will
force a groan from many, but all those B-Style members who hadn't posted /
contributed to B-Style in the last few months were removed as members. They
were given the chance to renew membership, if they fancied it.
It was not person specifc, in case you thought it was .. honestly.
I don't think one person should ever be the reason you leave a group as it
is a 'group'.
I'm quite saddened by this.
Shelly
----Original Message Follows----
From: Freedom Lover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Freedom Lover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [MOPO] This does not go unanswered -- long out of necessity,
I'm afraid
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:29:17 -0400
I don't blame you, J.R. When reading your post and re-reading hers, it's
clear you were not to blame.
Susan is the reason I left style-b. Actually, I just stopped the emails
like you're doing here. She recently booted me off. I received two emails
the same day, one right after the other. The first said something about
needing to post or renewing...I didn't bother reading, quite frankly. When
I realized who was behind it, I automatically deleted it. The other said I
was booted off. Quite a relief!
I couldn't care less. Personally, I want nothing to do with her. Scott
suggested I simply delete or ignore her messages; which I shall do.
But truly,imo, Scott should have tossed her. IMO, she's just seeking
attention and I find that pathetic.
I don't think Susan has it in her to abide by the rules. We should have a
bet to see how long she can make it!
I'll bet she can't resist pounding me now. I won't know though, because
anything from her will never again make it to my eyes.
As my grandmother would have said, "Feh!"
Andrea
----- Original Message -----
From: JR
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 3:29 AM
Subject: [MOPO] This does not go unanswered -- long out of necessity, I'm
afraid
To those who care to read it, I'm sorry for the length of this post, but
I need to set the record straight before departing:
Recently, in a 24-hour period, Susan Olson sent 5 separate public
messages to this list in which she violated the long-standing rule of no
personal attacks. In each of those messages she personally attacked me with
foul-mouthed, abusive language and accused me of things which are outright
lies. I held off answering those attacks because I didn't think it would be
a healthy thing for this list to fight with her on MOPO (and because I would
have had to violate the personal attack rule if I did). Instead, I left it
up to Scott Burns, the moderator of this list, to deal with this blatant
violation of his rules. I thought this would be the appropriate thing to do.
Scott has now made it clear to me that he will not take any action
against Susan for violating his rules so egregiously... over and over
again... in message after message. I do not understand Scott's decision and
am disappointed in it. But since he won't intervene, I believe I have a
right to defend myself and respond to Susan's blatant lies and will now do
so, since Scott has left me no choice in the matter. Those of you who have
no interest in any of this should skip what follows and read the last
paragraph of this message. This is for the record. Since I am left which no
alternative but to answer in public Susan's very public lies about me, here
goes:
I did not "attack Susan first" as she claims. The facts: A few days ago
Susan sent her very first message to MOPO since rejoining the group after a
2 1/2 year absence. She left back then in a violent huff, blasting the
entire membership of this list as a bunch of asshole and singling out Scott
as a sniveling little weasel on her way out the door. So, what does Ms.
Olson do in her very first message upon returning to MOPO? She leaps to
criticize those people who had asked if anyone knew what was happening with
Frank Santos -- they were worried about the 53 valuable movie posters they
had sent to him after receiving no word from him for 45 days and after
seeing his eBay account tagged with "No longer a registered member of eBay".
She said to Frank:
"these people wont have a triple bypass or need stints if they don't get
theyre posters tomarrow! and if they take theyre business elsewhere try to
view it as a good thing!"
I thought her criticism of these people - who had a very legitimate
concern and were only asking what was going on with Frank -- was a strange
way to re-enter the MOPO community and I said so. I seems if Susan she has a
right to criticize those people for simply asking about Frank that I have
an equal right to question her for doing so. Yes? Or is Susan Olson the
only one allowed to criticize what other people say on this list? But I
guess the deal is that she can complain about us, but we can't complain
about her -- is that the new rule on MOPO? If so, I sorry, but I didn't get
that memo... so I replied to her unwarranted criticism of those concerned
MOPO members with this observation:
"For Susan to pop up like this and offer criticism of a dozen
justifiably-concerned people on one hand while ostensibly "supporting"
someone who didn't do the right thing seems like a funny way to reenter a
community to me.
"Susan, I am a bit disappointed that this is the way you choose to
announce your return to MOPO... seems like you're still willing to fire off
an emotional blast without considering ALL the aspects of a situation,
something that you became known for in the past but which I would have hoped
you might have mellowed out about. Look, it's been years... life is too
short -- shorter than it was a few years ago... so... how about dialing down
the purely emotional reactions and about sheathing the claws? Peace."
Susan claims this was an attack on her. But it was a simple observation
of facts... Or does anyone who knows her going to honestly stand up on this
list and claim that Susan does not sometimes get very emotional in her
posts? What I said above was certainly no worse... was in fact less harsh
and judgmental... than what she had said about those who had merely asked
about the status of their posters. What I clearly and VERY sincerely said
above was express hope that she would have mellowed out over the past couple
of years... that life is too short for this kind of emotionally-charged
leaping-before-one-is-looking kind of thing... and suggested in a friendly
and constructive way that maybe it would be a good idea to "dial down the
purely emotional reactions and sheath the claws" while getting back into the
flow on MOPO. Finally, to make it very clear that I was being sincere and
friendly, I finished my comment to her by saying: "Peace".
Peace. That's a word with a specific meaning, I believe. Not generally
open to misinterpretation.
So, it was no personal attack that I wrote and I would like to know how
anyone reading those words -- exactly as written -- could consider it an
"attack". You people (and Susan herself) have read enough of my writing to
know when I'm being sincere and when I'm being sarcastic. I was clearly
being sincere in this case. That's the tragedy of all this.
But rather that stop and think about the friendly suggestion I had
offered, Susan immediately did the *opposite* and let her emotions run wild
and launched into a vehement attack in reply in her second message to this
list:
"JR what ever you says holds no water for me, You have no credibility
with me sir, Mr defender of Eugene Hughes, Joe Deprenda and the Physcopath
Amanda who you tried to get me moderated for after she posted my private
emails and our private fight to Style-B list? You are relentlessly negative
and flip flop like a fucking hooked trout, and unfortunately, I have let you
troll me. I would love you to rejoin Style-B, so that I would have the
pleasure of kicking you ass out for the second time!"
Note how she claimed, while viciously attacking and lying about me, that
I had *made* her do it -- that she what she was writing was all somehow MY
FAULT -- that I had somehow "trolled her" and she had not control over what
she was writing -- that mean old JR has maliciously *tricked* poor helpless
Susan Olson into attacking him (which was the very last thing that she ever,
ever wanted to do... really and truly it was...). Right.
When she wrote that, I realized nothing I could say would do anything but
fan the flames, so rather than get into it, I simply replied to her:
"Thanks for making my point." (...meaning she had done exactly the
opposite of what I had honestly and constructively suggested might be a good
approach to take while getting her toes wet in MOPO again).
But rather than engage in a fire fight on MOPO, I thought the appropriate
thing to do was let Scott deal with such clear violation of his rules, so I
finished that message with:
"Scott... does this message constitute a clear violation of your
guidelines for no personal attacks on MOPO?"
To which Susan publicly replied with her third message titled "What's the
matter, poor baby!" :
"You started it don't get your panties in a knot and cry for a moderator,
is the moon not in your favour JR"
I believe I have already demonstrated that if anyone started anything,
Susan did with her unwarranted criticism of those who had merely asked what
was happening with Frank Santos. But I did not respond to her childish
cat-call and so she followed up a little bit later with a fourth public
message where she said:
"Personally I am laughing my ass off. this pussy is just incredible!"
But still, I did not respond and engage her in a shouting match --which
is clearly what she wanted. Frustrated at my unwillingness to play, she then
decides to change her tactics and sends a fifth public message where she
pretends to apologize to Scott and *volunteers* to leave the list for having
disrespected his rules. A few hours later, before Scott could even reply,
she flip-flopped on that and decided to stay after all, due to "public
demand". But check out the content of her so-called apology:
"I apologise Scott for disrespecting your Forum... " OK...she says she
apologizes... but ... in the SAME message just 3 sentences later she
CONTINUES to disrespect Scott's forum by continuing to attack me! Referring
to me as "negative TinfoilCap wearing forces with hidden personal agendas."
She also went on a few sentences later to say of me: ""He reminds me of the
Pink Panthers Kato! too bad its not as funny as it appears on the screen."
I love the logic of this particular message: Apologize to the list owner
so he doesn't kick you off for violating the rule against personal attacks a
full 4 times in 24 hours -- and then CONTINUE with the personal attacks in
the very same message where you apologize for engaging in personal attacks!
Unbelievable.
But you know what? Scott fell for it. Apparently so did quite a few
others, who rushed to her side, begging her to stay. More on this at the end
of this message.
That's the sad history of this completely one-sided flame war where the
only person throwing fire around was Susan Olson. But in the process she
told several lies about me which I thought were so laughable that I didn't
need to defend against them... until I realized that there are now a lot of
new people on MOPO who will not know what I *really* said years ago about
Joe DePrenda or Eugene Hughes and the other stuff she mentioned. So, in
self-defense I need to set the record straight on her specific accusations,
least her lies be taken as truth because of my silence. She claimed I was:
"defender of Eugene Hughes, Joe Deprenda and the Physcopath Amanda who
you tried to get me moderated for after she posted my private emails and
our private fight to Style-B list? You are relentlessly negative and flip
flop like a fucking hooked trout"
1) I *never* defended Joe DePrenda's thieving and fraudulent actions at
any time, anywhere. I defy Susan or anyone else to dig up a message from the
MOPO archive or any other archive that shows I did. Quite the opposite, I
condemned him in no uncertain terms.
2) I *never* defended Eugene Hughes' thieving and fraudulent actions at
any time, anywhere. Same challenge as # 1 above -- find a message of mine
where I defended Eugene Hughes for ripping off people. Again, I condemned
him in no uncertain terms. What I did do was defend someone calling himself
"Randy Pillar" when he was kicked off Style B by Donnie after saying
something Susan didn't like. I thought Donnie's action was uncalled for and
said so. That was the extent of it. Many weeks later it turned out "Randy
Pillar" was a pseudonym Eugene Hughes was hiding behind, but NOBODY knew
that at the time Donnie kicked him off and I protested the action -- not
Donnie, or Susan or me. And all this happened before Eugene did his big
flip-out and ripped off so many people. Oddly, I still maintain that a
person should not be kicked off of a list for saying something Susan Olson
doesn't like -- but apparently I am in the minority in this belief.
3) The Amanda thing happened on Style B. No point in going into the gory
details, besides explaining that Amanda dragged a private-email fight
between herself and Susan into public on Style B and Susan got so upset
about this that she unwisely carried on the fight in public and *escalated*
it in a really major way, saying some of the most virulent and hateful
things I have ever seen anyone say to another person on any list. Donnie
suspended Amanda for fighting, but not Susan. But then Susan *suspended
herself* temporarily from Style B when she calmed down and realized what a
frightful mess had been made -- I had nothing to do with that. But is there
a theme emerging here I wonder?
The truth of the matter is that, in a private message to moderator Donnie
Sullivan I wrote to him on Susan's behalf -- and I can quote this because it
is MY OWN private message -- I wrote:
"I completely agree that Susan's outburst was a one-time event and that
she apologized quickly (though not exactly immediately) and "punished"
herself into 10-day suspension. I believe in my 1st the post on the subject
I suggested she should be "paroled early".
I have date-and-time-stamped copies of this and other messages on the
subject on file and can prove that's what I did and what I said at the time.
Since they purge the Style B archives of all "off-topic" messages every once
in a while, I may be the only one who actually does have file copies of what
was *really* said and done at the time.
Susan knows full well that I did not try to get her kicked off of Style
B. She knows it, but she chooses to remember it differently and talk about
it differently. Now who's TinFoil Cap agenda is showing?
4) I do not believe anyone could demonstrate statistically that I am
"relentlessly negative", although I do adopt a curmudgeonly persona from
time to time, as much for a lark as anything else, which I believe most
people on this list understand. Sure, I'll say something critical if the
situation calls for it. But I believe the vast bulk of my posts to MOPO over
the years have been positive.
5) I do not "flip flop"... not like a "fucking hooked trout" or anything
else. I consider personal integrity to be a valuable possession -- one of
the few meaningful things a person can truly own for themselves. I have
maintained the integrity of my beliefs and opinions even when it meant
getting people irritated with me... when it meant losing business on
MoviePosterBid that I really could have used... when it meant getting kicked
off of Style B for daring to be a heretic and question the omnipotent wisdom
of Donnie Sullivan or the unsullied beneficence and truth-telling of a
certain self-proclaimed Voodoo Woman. Yes, I *have* changed my mind on
occasion, but when I do it is for a good reason... like when people who
claim to be your friends stab you in the back. I usually change my mind
about them being my friends at that point. I pick up on little clues like
that... But usually I change my mind because I have come across new
information that forces me to change my opinion, rather than ignore the new
information and continue to cling to my old opinion. When I do this, I
acknowledge it and explain why I have changed my mind. I believe it is
permissible for someone to change their mind occasionally without being
labeled a fucking flip-flopping hooked flounder? Or did I miss that memo as
well?
THE LAST PARAGRAPH --
Because I am so disappointed in the way Scott has chosen to NOT handle
this situation... and because there seems to be quite a few on this list (at
least the vocal ones, which is what counts on a list after all) who seem to
think I *did* viciously attack poor defenseless innocent Susan for no reason
and therefore deserved every single foul-mouthed, abusive thing she said to
me... well, in light of this I'm thinking... what's the point, then? I've
just spent a weekend fretting about this stupid scenario and 4 hours of my
life that I won't get back writing this attempt to document and examine
rationally what really happened -- but I doubt that it will make any
difference. Rationality doesn't seem to be in vogue this season. So, like, I
have to ask myself: Who needs this? I'm not exactly pulling a Bruce here...
for the time being I will keep my subscription to MOPO... but I will set it
not to receive emails for now. I'll check in at the archives from time to
time to see if any interesting in on-topic conversation is going on. But
I've no interest in the petty personal psycho-babble jive type of
discussions that now seem to be about to infect MOPO... spreading over from
Style B and NS4GE like some kind of touch-feely virus... fostering a
prevailing attitude of "I'm OK... you're OK (so long as you agree with me)".
Nah. Just not my scene. But it seems to be what Scott wants to encourage and
it's his list, so I'll catch y'all on the flip side.
-- JR
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows LiveĀ Messenger has arrived. Click here to download it for free!
http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/?locale=en-gb
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
