Hello again, Just so you all know, Glenn is wrong when he thinks I am new to this list. If he would have only taken his own advise and checked the archives for my name he would see that I'm about 5 years "new" to this list. Too bad I didn't post the first day I joined or I might be 6 years "new".
Interesting to see Glenn's quote though, "Penn believes it will intimidate the rest of the community by its silencing and punishment of dissenters." Apparently now he can channel the collective thoughts of the thousands of people that work for Penn. (Once again, that is sarcasm for those that didn't follow it.) "barking cheese", "anointed", Glenn can't help but resorting to name-calling instead of using the true names. I guess name-calling is the level that some really feel comfortable operating at. Now back for some more name-calling, Tony Dominick ----- Original Message ---- From: Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Tony Dominick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; UnivCity listserv <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:48:35 AM Subject: Re: [UC] the defectors to UCNeighbors (was: Yet more help from Hollywood) Re: [UC] the defectors to UCNeighbors (was: Yet more help from Hollywood) DIV { MARGIN:0px;} 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
