Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

It was just an opinion piece!

Expand Messages
  • Sterling D. Allan
    FYI, here is the message the Rick Friedrick will not allow through to the Bedini_Monopole list. He has made a mountain of a mole hill, and he will not let me
    Message 1 of 3 , Jul 4, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      FYI, here is the message the Rick Friedrick will not allow through to the
      Bedini_Monopole list.

      He has made a mountain of a mole hill, and he will not let me make that
      point.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@...>
      To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 12:03 AM
      Subject: It was just an opinion piece!


      Rick,

      I'm sending this email (below) again and requesting that you allow me to
      present this sentiment which you did not approve the first time I sent it
      through.

      Your cruel treatment of me and all the hard work I have done in launching
      the Bedini_SG project and PESWiki will come back and haunt you in the form
      of Karma unless you change your ungrateful attitude. Spitting in my face
      will not get you very far in the long run.

      By the way, I was on the phone with John Bedini for several hours on Friday
      and Saturday. We covered a lot of turf.

      I will be modifying the Bearden/Bedini/Lutec... page some, and a story I had
      composed about GMCC is going to be revised significantly because of that
      conversation.

      I would say that John and I have a pretty good friendship, despite some of
      the things that go back and forth. He knows that my zeal is out of a desire
      to help save a dying planet, and he respects that.

      Your behavior on this list in regards to me has been less than stellar.

      Just because I do not follow your commands does not make me an enemy of the
      cause. I follow my conscience.

      Sterling


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@...>
      To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:21 AM
      Subject: It's just an opinion piece!


      Rick,

      It seems to me that you have not read the most recent draft which presently
      is on the site, and has been for about six hours.

      It is not my purpose to discredit any of the mentioned companies/individuals
      in the article. I wish them all well, including Lutec, GMCC, BTI, and Tom's
      endeavors (as well as GEET, which is mentioned tangentially).

      I do not think I drag John or Tom down by mentioning them in the same
      context. I mention them in a very favorable light and with respect.

      What is wrong with posting an opinion to then let people either affirm or
      show to be in error. I no problem whatsoever with people contradicting a
      theory and posting their reasons. I have routinely posted such
      point-counterpoint discussions.

      I almost get the feeling that I am touching on the holy grail, and people
      are jealous because they wanted to be the one to do it. That is what makes
      me stubborn in not taking this down.

      I'm not being presumptuous, just stalwart.

      I had a flash of insight, and I shared that flash.

      So what if I'm totally wrong. That's okay. It's called the manure of
      discovery. Not all ideas are correct. We go with what works and discard
      what doesn't.

      I really am quite puzzled as to why this article has generated such
      animosity.

      Maybe I am just totally oblivious to men and their ways or something. I
      just don't get it.

      Okay, so my first draft was rough -- duh. Yes I obviously had worded some
      things inappropriately and I have subsequently changed them.

      Have you never in your life said something and meant one thing, but the
      person you were talking to took it the wrong way. So you correct yourself
      to state what you meant more clearly, but they hold a grudge against you for
      what they thought you said to begin with, when that is not what you meant at
      all, and they don't trust you because they now think you are lying to them.
      That is how you are treating me. It is unfair and wrong.

      You are now casting me in the worst possible light, and not giving me an
      ounce of grace.

      No one put me up to this article. It is of my own instigation, and those
      outside the Bedini_Monopole list who reviewed it thought it was fine.

      You are unnecessarily horribleizing something that is really quite
      innocent -- making a mountain out of a mole hill. Get over it already.
      It's just a little opinion piece with me sharing some ideas and
      perspectives. It's okay if I'm wrong. I'm doing my best to share things as
      I understand them. That is usually something beneficial if taken in the
      right spirit. Don't get so bent out of shape.

      Sterling
    • rickfriedrich
      Sterling, Why are you causing all this trouble? You still refuse to answer any of my questions and statements. For someone who is now going to change your
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 5, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Sterling,

        Why are you causing all this trouble? You still refuse to answer any
        of my questions and statements. For someone who is now going to
        change your opinion article, I thought you would grant what I was
        saying. You're still causing trouble with this research aren't you?
        First you jump into the new list without reading and without any
        introduction, ignoring the rules, and give us your mistaken opinions
        (which people on this did not get to see the first draft, which I
        still have). You tell us you're going to post in a few hours and you
        rush this article when you state in it you don't even understand what
        you are talking about! Never mind all the needless slighting of
        Bedini and Bearden's work in associating them with these companies
        you are really after (by saying what do these guys have in common,
        not just in their supposed flipflop but in being competitive, etc.),
        never mind that which caused needless problems and the very kind of
        evil you claimed in the article to be trying to avoid, just consider
        you hasty posting of opinionated thoughts is contrary to real
        scientific research. This kind of thing is the ruin of the FE
        movement. Bad science!


        Here is the last email I sent on the other list about Sterling:

        Sterling,

        If you had read this list you would have found that several times I
        actually encouarged a lot of people to use your peswiki site and the
        other wiki site. I said it wasn't that hard to use when others said
        it was. In what you quote from me below that's all I said, others
        have complained and I would try and find something easier for people.
        So I gathered that it has hindered people from posting replications.
        I was able to encouage several people to post their stuff there, and
        was encouraging several others to till your latest rants as it has
        been called. I made much effort to draw more attention to your
        peswiki pages, and I believe the traffic has greatly increased as a
        result of that (judging from your numbers at the bottom of your
        pages).

        Again, I was not complaining against the site, and people will
        remember me saying the same thing you are saying here. I even said
        that was a slap in Sterling's face for all the work he has done. I
        could then, and do now, realize all the hard work that went into that
        setup, and even all the time you took to do your experiments. So I
        think you just have a case of being overly touchy presently perhaps
        because of your problems with that one company you say slanders you
        (by the way, I have not even read where they do that yet and have not
        been influenced by anything they have said).

        Sterling, it wouldn't bother me to work with any wiki website, only
        it is slow for me with dialup presently. But honestly I have had a
        good number of people tell me that they don't like you because of
        your actions previously on the old list and they don't want to put
        their stuff on your pages when you do the kind of things you do with
        John and now Tom's stuff. So as a director in this study, should I
        not consider other options? I see here a bunch of guys willing to
        help in many different ways, which they are doing now already. But
        how much have they helped with Peswiki? Really just about nothing. It
        has been since March or February since we started this group, and all
        the while I have been trying to encouarge people to help with the
        work on your peswiki site. I even had the main page for this list
        link to one such page. I don't believe that ANYWONE but me posted
        anything on that page. It was one of the main goals of this list! So
        what does that say when people are and have been contributing in so
        many other ways? Just what they are telling me privately, they don't
        like working with the site, and/or they don't like your politics. And
        even if John were to say on this list, Sterling is my friend, let's
        work on his site, I know a good number of people that would say "no
        way, not me".

        So what should I do here? Should I encouarge people to not worry what
        the OWNER of those pages does with his generalizing about this study
        and Mr. Bedini? When that owner uses his power to give unscientific
        opinionizing, which is contrary to good science? Again, I don't see
        your statements as objective, but taking advantage of the fact that
        you own that website. Your comments have not been objective, and they
        have not been "team-building".

        Again, this latest "opinion piece" was the opposite. You jumped in
        here without reading the list and knowing any of our discussions. You
        asked for help with your rushed draft. When, in the process of
        responding to that, you post it anyway when told to hold off until
        you understand what is going on. You could have seen that we covered
        some of the stuff that you misunderstood. You did not even need to
        talk with John about that. If you had just given us some time to
        discuss it with you and not put us all in this non-team-building
        position, then we could have progressed instead of gotten all messed
        up in yet another drama. One reason we did not go over the basic
        scientific misunderstanding you had with John's and Tom's machines
        was because we saw your rantings against these men and their
        supposive lack of "working together" as something more important to
        first correct. So you improved on some of that but not totally, and
        you did not care to wait and discuss out the other points. So where
        is your team-building example here? You're distorying the team
        efforts by not only driving people away from your site as I warned
        would happen, but you are using your position as owner and controller
        of your news to misrepresent what is happening in this team effort.
        And this is bad because you give the appearance of it being objective
        news when you don't even take the time to read what is going on, and
        have not even read our dissucssions about what is happening with the
        magnets contrary to your opinions. If your recent "opinion" article
        explained to readers that you have been out of the Bedini study group
        since Feb. that would have been a LITTLE different. Anyway, show me
        how these latest actions of yours have been team-building? How have
        they been consturctive at all? What purpose do they show other than
        being a news item that benefits you personally? And I mean all this
        in relation to your comments about John and Tom and their machines.

        Sterling, I read your other post that is pending. If you want me to
        post your defenses of your page, why not post my posted comments
        about your article under your article on your site? Fair trade?
        People have requested that this drama not go on. So when will you
        take back these anti-team-building actions and statements?
        [Sterling has sent another email to this group wondering why I have
        been unfair to him for not posting his other response, with that
        response below it.]
        Sterling, first show us you are being constructive and not
        distructive with this and related studies. Show us that you have even
        read the front page of this list and wish to submit to the
        limitations and policy here. Show us that you have made efforts to
        learn about what THIS GROUP has discussed about the matters you
        mention in your opinion article. NOBODY is welcome to jump in here
        and demand that their opinions be posted on this moderated group,
        especially when the person violates the group policy and acts in an
        anti-team-building way, again, especially when they try and rebuke me
        of being anti-team-building!

        You say, "Your cruel treatment of me and all the hard work I have
        done in launching the Bedini_SG project and PESWiki will come back
        and haunt you in the form of Karma unless you change your ungrateful
        attitude. Spitting in my face will not get you very far in the long
        run."
        This threat and charge against me is strange to say the least. Again,
        you have not followed this list and that is your problem. If you did
        you would not say this sort of thing. Second, I have no personal
        agenda with this study. I have no business or money or reputation
        interests in this study. It is purely a hobby of my own free time
        which I hope will help others. But again, here I am in the place of a
        moderator who is somewhat directing this study here. What am I to do
        when someone like you NEGLECTS to read the list and thus
        misunderstands my actions and statements, doesn't care to follow the
        policy of this list, and slams me for acting in a way contrary to
        team work while that is in fact what you are doing? As far as I can
        see, people feel that is exactly what I should be doing (without even
        mentioning the details on this board). Keeping the toublemakers away
        so we can work as a sucessful team as we have been doing. Notice,
        this list was formed partly or mostly because of constant complaints
        againts your lack of moderation in this respect on the other list. So
        now, instead of you actually reading what has happened on this list,
        you are just making assumptions contrary to fact.

        Sterling, only one postive thing you posted in that submission this
        morning: "By the way, I was on the phone with John Bedini for several
        hours on Friday and Saturday. We covered a lot of turf. I will be
        modifying the Bearden/Bedini/Lutec... page some, and a story I had
        composed about GMCC is going to be revised significantly because of
        that conversation. I would say that John and I have a pretty good
        friendship, despite some of the things that go back and forth. He
        knows that my zeal is out of a desire to help save a dying planet,
        and he respects that."

        Well I have not got any word about that. All I can do is see what you
        do change. And even if you do change things, you still need to
        explain yourself and not show yourself a troublemaker here. But while
        you continue to behave unscientifically with your news opinionizing
        hastily, and while you trample on the efforts made here, you are not
        welcome to post them here. I have not removed you for your disruptive
        comments and actions as I have rarely had to do with others (I think
        only once), because I was hoping you would take the time to read what
        has been done here and contribute postively and not so personally.

        So what's it going to be Sterling? They say it takes saying 10
        positive things to correct a negative thing said. I don't personally
        believe that, but it does show that it takes a lot to undo negative
        actions...

        Sincerely,

        Rick

        --- In Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com, "Sterling D. Allan"
        <sterlingda@p...> wrote:
        > FYI, here is the message the Rick Friedrick will not allow through
        to the
        > Bedini_Monopole list.
        >
        > He has made a mountain of a mole hill, and he will not let me make
        that
        > point.
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@p...>
        > To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 12:03 AM
        > Subject: It was just an opinion piece!
        >
        >
        > Rick,
        >
        > I'm sending this email (below) again and requesting that you allow
        me to
        > present this sentiment which you did not approve the first time I
        sent it
        > through.
        >
        > Your cruel treatment of me and all the hard work I have done in
        launching
        > the Bedini_SG project and PESWiki will come back and haunt you in
        the form
        > of Karma unless you change your ungrateful attitude. Spitting in
        my face
        > will not get you very far in the long run.
        >
        > By the way, I was on the phone with John Bedini for several hours
        on Friday
        > and Saturday. We covered a lot of turf.
        >
        > I will be modifying the Bearden/Bedini/Lutec... page some, and a
        story I had
        > composed about GMCC is going to be revised significantly because of
        that
        > conversation.
        >
        > I would say that John and I have a pretty good friendship, despite
        some of
        > the things that go back and forth. He knows that my zeal is out of
        a desire
        > to help save a dying planet, and he respects that.
        >
        > Your behavior on this list in regards to me has been less than
        stellar.
        >
        > Just because I do not follow your commands does not make me an
        enemy of the
        > cause. I follow my conscience.
        >
        > Sterling
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@p...>
        > To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:21 AM
        > Subject: It's just an opinion piece!
        >
        >
        > Rick,
        >
        > It seems to me that you have not read the most recent draft which
        presently
        > is on the site, and has been for about six hours.
        >
        > It is not my purpose to discredit any of the mentioned
        companies/individuals
        > in the article. I wish them all well, including Lutec, GMCC, BTI,
        and Tom's
        > endeavors (as well as GEET, which is mentioned tangentially).
        >
        > I do not think I drag John or Tom down by mentioning them in the
        same
        > context. I mention them in a very favorable light and with respect.
        >
        > What is wrong with posting an opinion to then let people either
        affirm or
        > show to be in error. I no problem whatsoever with people
        contradicting a
        > theory and posting their reasons. I have routinely posted such
        > point-counterpoint discussions.
        >
        > I almost get the feeling that I am touching on the holy grail, and
        people
        > are jealous because they wanted to be the one to do it. That is
        what makes
        > me stubborn in not taking this down.
        >
        > I'm not being presumptuous, just stalwart.
        >
        > I had a flash of insight, and I shared that flash.
        >
        > So what if I'm totally wrong. That's okay. It's called the manure
        of
        > discovery. Not all ideas are correct. We go with what works and
        discard
        > what doesn't.
        >
        > I really am quite puzzled as to why this article has generated such
        > animosity.
        >
        > Maybe I am just totally oblivious to men and their ways or
        something. I
        > just don't get it.
        >
        > Okay, so my first draft was rough -- duh. Yes I obviously had
        worded some
        > things inappropriately and I have subsequently changed them.
        >
        > Have you never in your life said something and meant one thing, but
        the
        > person you were talking to took it the wrong way. So you correct
        yourself
        > to state what you meant more clearly, but they hold a grudge
        against you for
        > what they thought you said to begin with, when that is not what you
        meant at
        > all, and they don't trust you because they now think you are lying
        to them.
        > That is how you are treating me. It is unfair and wrong.
        >
        > You are now casting me in the worst possible light, and not giving
        me an
        > ounce of grace.
        >
        > No one put me up to this article. It is of my own instigation, and
        those
        > outside the Bedini_Monopole list who reviewed it thought it was
        fine.
        >
        > You are unnecessarily horribleizing something that is really quite
        > innocent -- making a mountain out of a mole hill. Get over it
        already.
        > It's just a little opinion piece with me sharing some ideas and
        > perspectives. It's okay if I'm wrong. I'm doing my best to share
        things as
        > I understand them. That is usually something beneficial if taken
        in the
        > right spirit. Don't get so bent out of shape.
        >
        > Sterling
      • Donald Plisco
        unsubscribe me ... From: rickfriedrich To: Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 6:55 AM Subject: [Bedini_SG] Re: It was just an opinion
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 5, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          unsubscribe me
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 6:55 AM
          Subject: [Bedini_SG] Re: It was just an opinion piece!

          Sterling,

          Why are you causing all this trouble? You still refuse to answer any
          of my questions and statements. For someone who is now going to
          change your opinion article, I thought you would grant what I was
          saying. You're still causing trouble with this research aren't you?
          First you jump into the new list without reading and without any
          introduction, ignoring the rules, and give us your mistaken opinions
          (which people on this did not get to see the first draft, which I
          still have). You tell us you're going to post in a few hours and you
          rush this article when you state in it you don't even understand what
          you are talking about! Never mind all the needless slighting of
          Bedini and Bearden's work in associating them with these companies
          you are really after (by saying what do these guys have in common,
          not just in their supposed flipflop but in being competitive, etc.),
          never mind that which caused needless problems and the very kind of
          evil you claimed in the article to be trying to avoid, just consider
          you hasty posting of opinionated thoughts is contrary to real
          scientific research. This kind of thing is the ruin of the FE
          movement. Bad science!


          Here is the last email I sent on the other list about Sterling:

          Sterling,

          If you had read this list you would have found that several times I
          actually encouarged a lot of people to use your peswiki site and the
          other wiki site. I said it wasn't that hard to use when others said
          it was. In what you quote from me below that's all I said, others
          have complained and I would try and find something easier for people.
          So I gathered that it has hindered people from posting replications.
          I was able to encouage several people to post their stuff there, and
          was encouraging several others to till your latest rants as it has
          been called. I made much effort to draw more attention to your
          peswiki pages, and I believe the traffic has greatly increased as a
          result of that (judging from your numbers at the bottom of your
          pages).

          Again, I was not complaining against the site, and people will
          remember me saying the same thing you are saying here. I even said
          that was a slap in Sterling's face for all the work he has done. I
          could then, and do now, realize all the hard work that went into that
          setup, and even all the time you took to do your experiments. So I
          think you just have a case of being overly touchy presently perhaps
          because of your problems with that one company you say slanders you
          (by the way, I have not even read where they do that yet and have not
          been influenced by anything they have said).

          Sterling, it wouldn't bother me to work with any wiki website, only
          it is slow for me with dialup presently. But honestly I have had a
          good number of people tell me that they don't like you because of
          your actions previously on the old list and they don't want to put
          their stuff on your pages when you do the kind of things you do with
          John and now Tom's stuff. So as a director in this study, should I
          not consider other options? I see here a bunch of guys willing to
          help in many different ways, which they are doing now already. But
          how much have they helped with Peswiki? Really just about nothing. It
          has been since March or February since we started this group, and all
          the while I have been trying to encouarge people to help with the
          work on your peswiki site. I even had the main page for this list
          link to one such page. I don't believe that ANYWONE but me posted
          anything on that page. It was one of the main goals of this list! So
          what does that say when people are and have been contributing in so
          many other ways? Just what they are telling me privately, they don't
          like working with the site, and/or they don't like your politics. And
          even if John were to say on this list, Sterling is my friend, let's
          work on his site, I know a good number of people that would say "no
          way, not me".

          So what should I do here? Should I encouarge people to not worry what
          the OWNER of those pages does with his generalizing about this study
          and Mr. Bedini? When that owner uses his power to give unscientific
          opinionizing, which is contrary to good science? Again, I don't see
          your statements as objective, but taking advantage of the fact that
          you own that website. Your comments have not been objective, and they
          have not been "team-building".

          Again, this latest "opinion piece" was the opposite. You jumped in
          here without reading the list and knowing any of our discussions. You
          asked for help with your rushed draft. When, in the process of
          responding to that, you post it anyway when told to hold off until
          you understand what is going on. You could have seen that we covered
          some of the stuff that you misunderstood. You did not even need to
          talk with John about that. If you had just given us some time to
          discuss it with you and not put us all in this non-team-building
          position, then we could have progressed instead of gotten all messed
          up in yet another drama. One reason we did not go over the basic
          scientific misunderstanding you had with John's and Tom's machines
          was because we saw your rantings against these men and their
          supposive lack of "working together" as something more important to
          first correct. So you improved on some of that but not totally, and
          you did not care to wait and discuss out the other points. So where
          is your team-building example here? You're distorying the team
          efforts by not only driving people away from your site as I warned
          would happen, but you are using your position as owner and controller
          of your news to misrepresent what is happening in this team effort.
          And this is bad because you give the appearance of it being objective
          news when you don't even take the time to read what is going on, and
          have not even read our dissucssions about what is happening with the
          magnets contrary to your opinions. If your recent "opinion" article
          explained to readers that you have been out of the Bedini study group
          since Feb. that would have been a LITTLE different. Anyway, show me
          how these latest actions of yours have been team-building? How have
          they been consturctive at all? What purpose do they show other than
          being a news item that benefits you personally? And I mean all this
          in relation to your comments about John and Tom and their machines.

          Sterling, I read your other post that is pending. If you want me to
          post your defenses of your page, why not post my posted comments
          about your article under your article on your site? Fair trade?
          People have requested that this drama not go on. So when will you
          take back these anti-team-building actions and statements?
          [Sterling has sent another email to this group wondering why I have
          been unfair to him for not posting his other response, with that
          response below it.]
          Sterling, first show us you are being constructive and not
          distructive with this and related studies. Show us that you have even
          read the front page of this list and wish to submit to the
          limitations and policy here. Show us that you have made efforts to
          learn about what THIS GROUP has discussed about the matters you
          mention in your opinion article. NOBODY is welcome to jump in here
          and demand that their opinions be posted on this moderated group,
          especially when the person violates the group policy and acts in an
          anti-team-building way, again, especially when they try and rebuke me
          of being anti-team-building!

          You say, "Your cruel treatment of me and all the hard work I have
          done in launching the Bedini_SG project and PESWiki will come back
          and haunt you in the form of Karma unless you change your ungrateful
          attitude. Spitting in my face will not get you very far in the long
          run."
          This threat and charge against me is strange to say the least. Again,
          you have not followed this list and that is your problem. If you did
          you would not say this sort of thing. Second, I have no personal
          agenda with this study. I have no business or money or reputation
          interests in this study. It is purely a hobby of my own free time
          which I hope will help others. But again, here I am in the place of a
          moderator who is somewhat directing this study here. What am I to do
          when someone like you NEGLECTS to read the list and thus
          misunderstands my actions and statements, doesn't care to follow the
          policy of this list, and slams me for acting in a way contrary to
          team work while that is in fact what you are doing? As far as I can
          see, people feel that is exactly what I should be doing (without even
          mentioning the details on this board). Keeping the toublemakers away
          so we can work as a sucessful team as we have been doing. Notice,
          this list was formed partly or mostly because of constant complaints
          againts your lack of moderation in this respect on the other list. So
          now, instead of you actually reading what has happened on this list,
          you are just making assumptions contrary to fact.

          Sterling, only one postive thing you posted in that submission this
          morning: "By the way, I was on the phone with John Bedini for several
          hours on Friday and Saturday. We covered a lot of turf. I will be
          modifying the Bearden/Bedini/Lutec... page some, and a story I had
          composed about GMCC is going to be revised significantly because of
          that conversation. I would say that John and I have a pretty good
          friendship, despite some of the things that go back and forth. He
          knows that my zeal is out of a desire to help save a dying planet,
          and he respects that."

          Well I have not got any word about that. All I can do is see what you
          do change. And even if you do change things, you still need to
          explain yourself and not show yourself a troublemaker here. But while
          you continue to behave unscientifically with your news opinionizing
          hastily, and while you trample on the efforts made here, you are not
          welcome to post them here. I have not removed you for your disruptive
          comments and actions as I have rarely had to do with others (I think
          only once), because I was hoping you would take the time to read what
          has been done here and contribute postively and not so personally.

          So what's it going to be Sterling? They say it takes saying 10
          positive things to correct a negative thing said. I don't personally
          believe that, but it does show that it takes a lot to undo negative
          actions...

          Sincerely,

          Rick

          --- In Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com, "Sterling D. Allan"
          <sterlingda@p...> wrote:
          > FYI, here is the message the Rick Friedrick will not allow through
          to the
          > Bedini_Monopole list.
          >
          > He has made a mountain of a mole hill, and he will not let me make
          that
          > point.
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@p...>
          > To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 12:03 AM
          > Subject: It was just an opinion piece!
          >
          >
          > Rick,
          >
          > I'm sending this email (below) again and requesting that you allow
          me to
          > present this sentiment which you did not approve the first time I
          sent it
          > through.
          >
          > Your cruel treatment of me and all the hard work I have done in
          launching
          > the Bedini_SG project and PESWiki will come back and haunt you in
          the form
          > of Karma unless you change your ungrateful attitude.  Spitting in
          my face
          > will not get you very far in the long run.
          >
          > By the way, I was on the phone with John Bedini for several hours
          on Friday
          > and Saturday.  We covered a lot of turf.
          >
          > I will be modifying the Bearden/Bedini/Lutec... page some, and a
          story I had
          > composed about GMCC is going to be revised significantly because of
          that
          > conversation.
          >
          > I would say that John and I have a pretty good friendship, despite
          some of
          > the things that go back and forth.  He knows that my zeal is out of
          a desire
          > to help save a dying planet, and he respects that.
          >
          > Your behavior on this list in regards to me has been less than
          stellar.
          >
          > Just because I do not follow your commands does not make me an
          enemy of the
          > cause.  I follow my conscience.
          >
          > Sterling
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@p...>
          > To: <Bedini_Monopole@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:21 AM
          > Subject: It's just an opinion piece!
          >
          >
          > Rick,
          >
          > It seems to me that you have not read the most recent draft which
          presently
          > is on the site, and has been for about six hours.
          >
          > It is not my purpose to discredit any of the mentioned
          companies/individuals
          > in the article.  I wish them all well, including Lutec, GMCC, BTI,
          and Tom's
          > endeavors (as well as GEET, which is mentioned tangentially).
          >
          > I do not think I drag John or Tom down by mentioning them in the
          same
          > context.  I mention them in a very favorable light and with respect.
          >
          > What is wrong with posting an opinion to then let people either
          affirm or
          > show to be in error.  I no problem whatsoever with people
          contradicting a
          > theory and posting their reasons.  I have routinely posted such
          > point-counterpoint discussions.
          >
          > I almost get the feeling that I am touching on the holy grail, and
          people
          > are jealous because they wanted to be the one to do it.  That is
          what makes
          > me stubborn in not taking this down.
          >
          > I'm not being presumptuous, just stalwart.
          >
          > I had a flash of insight, and I shared that flash.
          >
          > So what if I'm totally wrong.  That's okay.  It's called the manure
          of
          > discovery.  Not all ideas are correct.  We go with what works and
          discard
          > what doesn't.
          >
          > I really am quite puzzled as to why this article has generated such
          > animosity.
          >
          > Maybe I am just totally oblivious to men and their ways or
          something.  I
          > just don't get it.
          >
          > Okay, so my first draft was rough -- duh.  Yes I obviously had
          worded some
          > things inappropriately and I have subsequently changed them.
          >
          > Have you never in your life said something and meant one thing, but
          the
          > person you were talking to took it the wrong way.  So you correct
          yourself
          > to state what you meant more clearly, but they hold a grudge
          against you for
          > what they thought you said to begin with, when that is not what you
          meant at
          > all, and they don't trust you because they now think you are lying
          to them.
          > That is how you are treating me.  It is unfair and wrong.
          >
          > You are now casting me in the worst possible light, and not giving
          me an
          > ounce of grace.
          >
          > No one put me up to this article.  It is of my own instigation, and
          those
          > outside the Bedini_Monopole list who reviewed it thought it was
          fine.
          >
          > You are unnecessarily horribleizing something that is really quite
          > innocent -- making a mountain out of a mole hill.  Get over it
          already.
          > It's just a little opinion piece with me sharing some ideas and
          > perspectives.  It's okay if I'm wrong.  I'm doing my best to share
          things as
          > I understand them.  That is usually something beneficial if taken
          in the
          > right spirit.  Don't get so bent out of shape.
          >
          > Sterling




          =================
          Bedini "School Girl" (Simplified)
          http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bedini_SG

          by PES Network Inc
          http://pureenergysystems.com
          http://freeenergynews.com
          http://pesn.com
          http://peswiki.com




          SPONSORED LINKS
          Science fair projectsScience projects
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.