I this post I review the early history of controversy involving Jojo
Jaro on this list. Jojo began with clearly relevant postings on
alternative energy research. That went on for some time, until May,
2012, when a problem appeared.
Ultimately, this study leads to a clear example of what Jojo does. He
imagines insult, then insults "back," initiating a cycle of insult,
escalating. At the same time, he holds a series of strong beliefs,
apparently not suscpetible to evidence or genuine discussion, on
topics that are likely to be inflammatory if brought here (and just
about anywhere on the internet, except for certain odd corners), and
he readily drops these into discussions.
At 04:46 AM 12/30/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Yes, I stand corrected.
If calling for the open, transparent and proper accountability of
his qualifications is an insult, then yes, I've insulted Obama.
I will separately address this in another post.
I decided to look back and see if I could find the origin of Jojo's
sense of Vortex and the Vortex community, so I reviewed the
contributions of Jojo to this forum. Jojo has repeated claimed that
he doesn't "start" insulting, but that others insult him, and he
responds with insult.
He made comments early on that could indicate a certain
combativeness, but that is not unusual here. In a post, resent 26 Apr
2012 20:33:31 -0700, in which he complimented Jed Rothwell, he
mentioned that he disagreed on "Darwinian Evolution." (By the way,
source time confirms location in the Philippines, I think.)
However, the post to which he was responding, apparently, did not
mention "Darwinian Evolution," so this must have been a reference to
some other post. Another list subscriber chimed in with some support
for Jojo, but nobody started debating evolution.
But on Fri, 25 May 2012 14:37:50 -0700 (resent time), Jojo sent an
extensive post on "Darwinian Evolution."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66036.html
Jojo might think that this post did not insult anyone. But it did. It
was in response to a casual comment by James Bowery:
I hate to think what would have become of Newton or Darwin had they not been
among the relatively independent British middle (yeoman) class.
This comment is, in no way, propaganda for Darwinian Evolution. Yes,
it assumes a certain importance to Darwin, but we need to understand
this: that importance is a routinely accepted fact, tantamount to a
belief, among most people interested in science. Were there some
necessity to attack Darwinian evolution -- difficult to understand
for Vortex-l -- okay. But there was not. The subject was not
Darwinian Evolution.
Jojo escalated, with a rant on Darwinian Evolution that connected it
with *everyone who accepts Darwinian Evolution.* Read the post! Jojo
knew that he was changing the subject. He knew that it would be
highly controversial. He anticipated "shots." He implied that he'd
not be responding.
Resent Fri, 25 May 2012 16:05:54 -0700, Jojo wrote this:
I hesitated to post my original critique of Darwinian Evolution; and
it is the reason why I refrained from responding about Darwinian
Evolution for so long - that is; that I value this forum so much,
that I do not want to involve other topics in this forum other than
Cold Fusion. I wish people would not use this forum for propaganda
of their beliefs and then exclude other points of view; just like
what Parks, Huzienga, and others are doing wrt to Hot fusion.
However, he then proceeded to "challenge" Jed Rothwell, who had
responded civilly to Jojo. However, Jed noted that Jojo was
"ignorant." That kind of comment is typically taken by Jojo as an
"insult." Rothwell promised to let Jojo have the last word. He kept
that promise for that thread. The discusion of evolution continued a
little, but other readers started to complain about off-topic.
A thread on a cold fusion topic had been hijacked by the insertion of
a discussion of "Darwinian Evolution," based not, as Jojo has often
claimed, on "propaganda," but a mere reference to Darwin as a man
with ideas that were not popular in his time, dicta. In the process,
Jojo set up a *political argument.* Read the post!
Then Jojo started a new thread, specifically on Darwinian Evolution,
resent Sat, 26 May 2012 02:22:30 -0700.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66051.html
He did not keep to his intention. He continued to poke at Jed. Jed
had answered, and indicated intention not to respond further, and had
not responded further. Others had made small comments. Yet Jojo's
post mentioned Jed five times, in addition to continuing to quote
Jed's original response. The mentions were not complimentary.
Jed Rothwell did not bite. However, James Bowery did, becoming
incensed that Jojo apparently would not consider an experiment to
distinguish between Intelligent Design and Darwinian Evolution. The
interchange revealed clearly that this was a *religious* argument.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66108.html and the
incivility was quite what can be expected when people argue religion
*without listening.* So now there was a reader who had "insulted"
Jojo, though this was still somewhat within normal forum behavior.
The topic, though, generated a lot of posts, and this was now heavily
off-topic. Vortex-l allows limited off-topic discussion, and this was
straying outside that.
Dave Roberson, who is perhaps sympathetic to Jojo's view on Darwinian
Evolution, objected to the uncivil comment, but also suggested that
Jojo move the discussion elsewhere.
In a post resent Sun, 27 May 2012 10:10:57 -0700, Jojo wrote:
This will be my last response to you. You're welcome to have the last word.
Jojo, however, continued to respond in the thread. I jumped in with
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg66144.html
Ah, I do write lengthy posts! However, this did not insult Jojo,
unless my pointing to his self-revelation in his post would be an
insult. It wasn't. I took Jojo literally and looked at what his posts
implied about him, and described it.
Just be aware, Jojo, that you are describing yourself, better and
more accurately than you are describing Jed, whom you do not really know.
Jojo responded to me, resent Mon, 28 May 2012 02:47:05 -0700. He
sought to move the discussion with me off list. He responded again,
Tue, 29 May 2012 04:39:16 +0800
First you criticize me for "hijacking" this thread (which was not a
hijack because I was trying to draw a parallel and I renamed the
thread.), then you continue to criticize me for hijacking even
though I have stopped responding, then you continue to keep this
topic alive even though I and others have given it a rest.
Here we can start to see a pattern. I had not "criticized" Jojo for
hijacking the thread. The thread, regarding which I'd mentioned
hijacking, was the *prior* thread. Jojo had renamed it (which was
proper, but he left out the OT tag.) What I had done was to respond
to a series of Jojo posts, not yet to the latest one. Now that I'd
seen that, I responded Mon, 28 May 2012 21:16:16 -0400
Jojo, you make up fantasies about what shows in this record. Why would
I expect you'd have anything of substance to discuss elsewhere?
I did not criticize you for hijacking the thread. This is a great
example of meaning created in the mind of the reader.
We were now discussing what happened on-list. Not Darwinian
Evolution, about which we could argue forever. I declined Jojo's
invitation to take it elsewhere. I indicated that I thought the
dicussion was not likely to have value for me.
(By the way, that could be considered my Favorite Debate Tactic, for
on-line discussion, where there is a *complete and accurate record*
of the discussion. It could be considered a test. If someone is going
to firmly insist on allegations regarding the record, and neither
verify them by reference to the record, nor acknowledge error -- or
show alternative interpretation *that respects the record,* it's
hopeless to imagine that we might come to agreement on difficult and
abstract topics. As a "debate tactic," it establishes the lack of
credibility of the other writer. I'd prefer they not do this. I don't
like to "win debates" through the stupidity of the other. And this
tactic can backfire in some contexts where people simply assume that
anyone asserting a strong position will post false evidence. They
take compilations of evidence as proof of obsession. That happens on
Wikipedia.)
Jojo replied, resent Mon, 28 May 2012 20:04:11 -0700
OK Whatever. This will be my last response to you ever. You are
welcome to have the last word and deliver some parting insult or snide remark.
No sense in arguing with Darwinian Evolution fanatics; who's only
interested in blaberring about things he does not know. It's akin
to arguing with Parks regarding cold fusion.
It's quite visible here how Jojo created a highly contentious
discussion, then took offense when it was described dispassionately.
He completely ignores what he did: perceive a criticism where there
was only a description, and then solidify that perception as if it
were a fact, which he will remember, as people often do when they do
this, as a "fact." To be repeated and relied upon. It's a variation
on what James Bowery saw and responded to. Not interested in
*evidence*. I know what's true, and even if I can look at the
evidence by just looking at my own email, I won't. Not needed. I
already know the Truth (TM). This was guaranteed to end badly, unless
Jojo wakes up, which doesn't happen very often.
I did not respond again in that thread. Jojo did twice, tossing in
claims likely to set off anyone with strong opinions about Bible
archeology (what does this have to do with Darwinian Evolution, the
subject?), Gnostic Christians, and just about anyone with knowledge
or established opinion on a wide variety of topics, that happen to be
topics that *often* lead to useless flame wars in internet fora.
What's amazing is that relatively few readers took the bait. Jojo had
the last word in the topic for over two months, when it was
reawakened by Axil Axil.
The last word in this topic was
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg68373.html Jojo
would doubtlessly not like that post, but it probably represents a
very common view among Vorticians. He did not respond.
But he continues to argue Darwinian Evolution, with claims that
anyone who accepts it is naive, ignorant, and hoodwinked. Which is
the large majority of us on this list. Yet he thinks he isn't insulting people!
