Herein is the fallacy of your comments.
You claim that the insults are "mild", and that I do not have the right to
respond to "mild" insults. This is the lie you keep on propagating.
Whether the insult in "mild" or "grave" is not for you to decide. The
person that the insult is directed at is the person that has the right to
decide whether the insult was mild or grave. You have no right to claim that
I "should not" be offended because in your eyes, the insult is "mild".
That's bullcrap.
Heck, in my eyes, calling allah a moon god and calling muhammed a sex
pervert is a "mild" insult; yet I do not go around and lie that your
response to me was improper because I only "mildly" insulted you. The
graveness of the insult is the gravenes of how the recipient have percieved
it. The recipient's perception is the only valid basis for deciding whether
an insult is mild or grave.
All my insults have always been a response to an insult, whether personal,
as in "F*** yourself" or general as in "the Bible is a fairy tale" or "The
Bible is written by illiterate goat herders." Both statements are false,
and insulting whether they are personal or general. For the same reason
why you feel that I have insulted you by calling muhammed a sex pervert.
You seem to think that my vigorous response to an insult is unwarranted
because the initial insults are "mild". That is not for you to decide my
friend. You have no right to dictate the level of response I give out. But
I can assure you, I take great pains in deciding the level of nastiness I
give back. I take considerable consideration that it is always calibrated
to the level of nastiness directed my way.
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 4:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:List integrity
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!
