Re: [UC] the defectors to UCNeighbors (was: Yet more help from Hollywood)Hi Mr. 
Dominick,

Since you are new to the list, let me help you understand the genesis of the 
University of Pennsylvania censored e-mail listserv critisized on this public 
list. I have been a long term member of the Penn community, and this censored 
listserv will ultimately bring shame to our university. 

I would suggest that you review the archives of the public purple list just 
prior to July 30 to confirm my explanation. In addition to founding members 
Cassidy, Anderson, Lamond, Siano, West, I can point you to others appearing in 
the archives so that you can see that the claim about civility by the 
justifiers of censorship cannot possibly be supported.

As has been pointed out publicly, several founders of the censored Penn list 
were part of a gang of individuals who have been employing various fallacious 
argumentative strategies for years. These folks and their gang like tactics 
were thoroughly and publicly exposed and were recognized as the primary source 
of incivility on this list. They appear to consider themselves Penn partners in 
a new elite who will dominate society in a new plutocracy. 

Banning dissenters on one side of neighborhood issues is not"light moderation 
or light censortship." Yet it is the supportable conclusion for the 
establishment of the new censored list. Prior to the establishment of barking 
cheese not only had its founders tactics been thoroughly exposed but the public 
list emerged as one of the rare opportunities allowing dissent, disclosure, and 
questioning which is considered necessary in democratic societies.

In the year 2007, this public list emerged as a powerful obstacle to the 
overwhelming Penn "marketing" machine. As the various unethical practises and 
frauds driven by the University of Pennsylvania Real Estate monopolists 
continue to demand absolute power and the establishment of an elite plutocracy, 
this list emerged as one of the few venues for honest discussions and 
questioning. The archives served as a public historical record. 

As Penn's cloaked agent UCD was caught violating federal law in 2007, it was 
this listserv which provided the community stakeholders a powerful public 
gathering for discussion. When Penn's Real Estate spokesperson, Andrew Zitcer 
attempted to denegrate dissent and opposition to Penn's marketing scheme and 
corporate domination, in a city wide publication; it was on this listserv that 
the ethical failure to disclose their spokesperson's true identity was exposed. 
To this day, the rest of the city believes the spokesperson for Penn Real 
Estate, Andrew Zitcer, is Everyman who finds citizens concerns about Penn 
marketing and monopoly to be frivilous and stupid. The folks on this public 
list shared his actual role in the Penn machine and we have the opportunity to 
see how dishonest the tactics of Penn Real Estate are in 2007..

Penn's move to sponsor a censored private list called "UC Neighbors" is 
designed to replace and minimize this rare public place for important 
neighborhood discussions. As long term list readers understand, this "sweet 
barking cheese" list is also a set-up for future astroturfing to support 
corporate domination and rule over our community. 

All local Penn agendas are masked with the claim that 80% to 100% of "good" 
neighborhood consumers demand the Penn agenda. Astroturfing is a rather new 
term describing the false claim of grassroots support which the censored list 
will falsely prove.

Please read back in the listserv archives and you will see that civility and 
the need to ban 5 or 6 wrong thinking people is nothing but a bold lie. Penn 
believes it will intimidate the rest of the community by its silencing and 
punishment of dissenters. Several years ago, a local civic association, the 
squirrel hill association, was similarly punished to send a similar 
intimidating message to the other civic clubs. And it worked against their 
leaders often referred to as the "anointed."

Mr. Dominick, I truly believe if democratic principals are resurrected 
nationally and locally, our University of Pennsylvania is going to regret this 
"UC neighbors" list. There are many scholars and researchers at Penn who depend 
upon and protect the reputation of ethical conduct at our university. The 
censorship list as well as the widespread unethical conduct of Penn Real Estate 
and its operatives will cause shame to our entire university community when 
sweet barking cheese is studied and exposed.. 

One of the banned evil doers, I am deeply concerned about the ramifications 
censorship holds for this country and our university. It's not because the 
"civil gang" regularly posted wishes for my death or called me so many names, 
or made fun of murder victims which frightens me.   I hope you join with the 
public and condemn, ridicule, and stand against Penn's new cloaked censorship 
policy and the continued unethical propaganda pushed by Penn Real Estate.

Thanks for your interest in this matter. I hope my comments are helpful 

Sincerely,

Glenn Moyer






  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tony Dominick 
  To: UnivCity listserv 
  Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 11:40 AM
  Subject: Re: [UC] the defectors to UCNeighbors (was: Yet more help from 
Hollywood)


  Hello all,

  Just my own point of clarification.  To reference Wilma's words:

  "The people on UCNeighbors did not approve of those of us who had a different 
view of how events unfolded and left.  They also sowed enough seeds of nasty 
behavior, disrespect and contempt on this list as well, that this should not 
have been the rationale for forming another list in my opinion."

  First off, as one member of the UCNeighbors list, thanks for being able to 
read my mind. And I did't know you were the collective voice for everyone on 
the UCNeighbors list.  That is sarcasim for those that didn't realize, but my 
point is that I find it odd that people on this list think they know exactly 
why people joined the other list.  It is often referenced that anyone who 
joined "UCNeighbors" has left "UnivCity".  This is not always true and so I am 
clear, I am on both lists.  Yes Virginia, one can be on multiple lists, and 
welcome to the Internet since you are new here.

  Second off, while I am all for people speaking their mind I, like I assume 
others, have gotten tired of the 5 or 6 people on this list that has resorted 
to name-calling, whining, and ranting to get their point across.  A sample of 
the childish name-calling from just the last week alone: "Ceasar Amy", "Sweet 
Barfing Cheese", not to be confused with "sweetbarkingcheese.com", "UC Lords", 
"the anointed" (FYI, I don't think there was any anointing involved).  I get my 
fair share of whining, complaining, and name-calling from my 3 year old that I 
got tired of having to hear it coming from adults acting like 3 year olds.  So 
I joined UCNeighbors _not_ for the reasons that Wilma suggests, that I "did not 
approve of those of us who had a different view of how events unfolded."  I 
actually like the different views that come up and enjoy reading them.  But I 
personally have found that "UnivCity" has gotten less informative lately and 
more like noise to me and I joined "UCNeighbors" in the hopes that it will 
serve the purpose that the "UnivCity" once did, of getting information out.  

  So far the "UCNeighbors" list has been informative without the name-calling.  
But don't worry folks, I will still read "UnivCity" for the enjoyment.


  Now let the name-calling resume,
  Tony Dominick



  ----- Original Message ----
  From: Wilma de Soto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  To: Anthony West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; UnivCity listserv 
<[email protected]>
  Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 7:28:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [UC] the defectors to UCNeighbors (was: Yet more help from 
Hollywood)

  Dear Tony,

  You may have a point, but I found your post to be rather high-handed and 
disparaging with regard to most of the high-thinkers have gone over to the 
other list, etc.  Second-raters and fool doesn’t help either.

  However, it is an accurate description of many who are on the new list as to 
how do they think of us on this listserv.

  Many of us here have had years of community service and have paid our dues. 
We have been here longer than many of the initial posters on the other list.

  It eventually came down to some us actually love everything Univ. of PA. is 
doing here and stand to benefit from it personally or professionally.  Others 
see a re-vamping of the neighborhood and displacement of its long time 
residents; especially people of color and are battle-scarred from attacks and 
other negative experiences with the institution.

  The people on UCNeighbors did not approve of those of us who had a different 
view of how events unfolded and left.  They also sowed enough seeds of nasty 
behavior, disrespect and contempt on this list as well, that this should not 
have been the rationale for forming another list in my opinion.

  That’s my view for what it is or isn’t worth.

  Regards,

  Wilma





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.13/998 - Release Date: 9/10/2007 
8:48 AM

Reply via email to