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

Re: Raven-Dixon double act

Expand Messages
  • bobgould987
    Gould is not a provocateur, for the record, indeed A note to Mike Karadjis and Margaret, the moderator. Mike, I find your little post this morning insulting
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 21, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Gould is not a provocateur, for the record, indeed

      A note to Mike Karadjis and Margaret, the moderator.

      Mike, I find your little post this morning insulting and diversionary.
      You say, for the record, I'm not a provocateur, which leaves open the
      question of what you might think in private. What a gratuitous insult.

      You then say there's not much the moderator can do about Raven's
      slander. Margaret did say a week or two ago that she would get a
      retraction out of the man or woman who uses the name Roger Raven.

      Given the seriousness of the accusation against me, it's not
      unreasonable to ask what has been done about getting a retraction.

      A half-smart response from Mike Karadjis is not adequate.

      I repeat my request to Margaret, the moderator, that she tell me what
      has been done to get a retraction, and I believe I'm within my rights
      to ask whether this person who is slandering me is doing so in his own
      name or under a pseudonym. Margaret should know, as moderator, whether
      Roger Raven is a real name or a pseudonym.

      If it's a real name, I intend to pursue Mr Raven as vigorously as I
      can to get a retraction. If it's a pseudonym I intend to find out who
      it is so I can pursue the person for a retraction.

      I expect a reasonably prompt response from the moderator.
    • Kismet
      Sorry Bob but this is getting pretty bloody ridiculous! IF you REALLY have an issue with Roger then take it up with him directly and stop wasting my bandwidth.
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 21, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Sorry Bob but this is getting pretty bloody ridiculous!
        IF you REALLY have an issue with Roger then take it up with him directly and stop wasting my bandwidth. It took me three minutes to confirm that there is an entity called Roger Raven WITH a phone number, a postal address and an email. Now instead of sitting around waiting for others to fight your battles for you...get of your butt and do it!
        Comradely as always

        Daniel

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: bobgould987
        To: GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 12:02 PM
        Subject: [GreenLeft_discussion] Re: Raven-Dixon double act


        Gould is not a provocateur, for the record, indeed

        A note to Mike Karadjis and Margaret, the moderator.

        Mike, I find your little post this morning insulting and diversionary.
        You say, for the record, I'm not a provocateur, which leaves open the
        question of what you might think in private. What a gratuitous insult.

        You then say there's not much the moderator can do about Raven's
        slander. Margaret did say a week or two ago that she would get a
        retraction out of the man or woman who uses the name Roger Raven.

        Given the seriousness of the accusation against me, it's not
        unreasonable to ask what has been done about getting a retraction.

        A half-smart response from Mike Karadjis is not adequate.

        I repeat my request to Margaret, the moderator, that she tell me what
        has been done to get a retraction, and I believe I'm within my rights
        to ask whether this person who is slandering me is doing so in his own
        name or under a pseudonym. Margaret should know, as moderator, whether
        Roger Raven is a real name or a pseudonym.

        If it's a real name, I intend to pursue Mr Raven as vigorously as I
        can to get a retraction. If it's a pseudonym I intend to find out who
        it is so I can pursue the person for a retraction.

        I expect a reasonably prompt response from the moderator.






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


        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.11/543 - Release Date: 20/11/2006


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Kismet
        Sorry I meant to delete the dribble below my tirade...... Like this. . . . . . . . . . D. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 21, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Sorry I meant to delete the dribble below my tirade......
          Like this. . . . . . . . . .

          D.

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Duncan Meerding
          did you read my post yester day bob? Speaking of backing up claims..... are you going to back up any of yours? This is not a cyber entity. And I am not under
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 21, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            did you read my post yester day bob? Speaking of backing up claims..... are you going to back up any of yours?

            This is not a cyber entity. And I am not under the control, through some mind controlling device by the DSP leadership, oh that one hurt, there goes another electric brain waive from the DSP national office, sorry oh leaders.

            People may take you a bit more seriously, if you

            1. stop taking everything to have a secreet message and
            2. Back up some claims.
            I can not see how you see Mike karadjis's post as insulting, we in the DSP can not win, we agree with youon an issue, and there must be some secret message, re read Mike Karadjis's message.

            Solidarity
            Duncan

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: bobgould987
            To: GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:02 PM
            Subject: [GreenLeft_discussion] Re: Raven-Dixon double act


            Gould is not a provocateur, for the record, indeed

            A note to Mike Karadjis and Margaret, the moderator.

            Mike, I find your little post this morning insulting and diversionary.
            You say, for the record, I'm not a provocateur, which leaves open the
            question of what you might think in private. What a gratuitous insult.

            You then say there's not much the moderator can do about Raven's
            slander. Margaret did say a week or two ago that she would get a
            retraction out of the man or woman who uses the name Roger Raven.

            Given the seriousness of the accusation against me, it's not
            unreasonable to ask what has been done about getting a retraction.

            A half-smart response from Mike Karadjis is not adequate.

            I repeat my request to Margaret, the moderator, that she tell me what
            has been done to get a retraction, and I believe I'm within my rights
            to ask whether this person who is slandering me is doing so in his own
            name or under a pseudonym. Margaret should know, as moderator, whether
            Roger Raven is a real name or a pseudonym.

            If it's a real name, I intend to pursue Mr Raven as vigorously as I
            can to get a retraction. If it's a pseudonym I intend to find out who
            it is so I can pursue the person for a retraction.

            I expect a reasonably prompt response from the moderator.





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Margaret A
            Dear list members, I think there is a lot of over reaction here particularly from Bob. However, I also find a lot of Roger Raven s contributions on this list
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 22, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear list members, I think there is a lot of over reaction here particularly
              from Bob. However, I also find a lot of Roger Raven's contributions on this
              list obnoxious.

              Everyone involved should re-focus on contructive political discussion and
              get past ridiculous name calling.
              Bob Gould himself is no stranger to labelling and negative political
              characterisations without basis.

              I also find it completely bizarre that Gould is so obsessed by the notion
              that Roger Raven is some sort of constructed cyber identity and not a real
              person and that somehow the DSP are behind this.

              I agree with Mike K's recent sentiments:

              Mike K: "I agree that discussion should be kept political. Calling someone
              an
              'agent provocateur' should definitely off-limits around here, and
              Margaret did make that quite clear. However, I'm not sure there's much
              point trying to force Raven to 'withdraw' the slander. He is someone who
              very much speaks for himself, despite Bob's ongoing and strange delusion
              that he is an invention of the DSP. Roger Raven has actually spent a
              great deal of time on the list using the most disparaging possible
              characterisations of the DSP, in case you hadn't noticed Bob, generally
              relegating what he calls 'the left' in general, in which he specifically
              includes the DSP, as more or less useless and bereft of ideas. I don't
              think any serious list member takes him the slightest bit seriously when
              he calls you an 'agent provocateur', whatever else they might think of
              your political views. It mainly reflects badly on him. For the record
              however I agree he should withdraw it and cease using that kind of
              language." MK

              I think that we can move on and discuss the real issues at hand, and there
              no compulsion for anyone to be a part of this list if they feel that they
              cannot do this.

              comradely,
              Margaret A
              moderator, GL discussion list


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Margaret A
              Dear list members, I think there is a lot of over reaction here particularly from Bob. However, I also find a lot of Roger Raven s contributions on this list
              Message 6 of 10 , Nov 22, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear list members,

                I think there is a lot of over reaction here particularly from Bob. However,
                I also find a lot of Roger Raven's contributions on this list obnoxious.

                Everyone involved should re-focus on contructive political discussion and
                get past ridiculous name calling.
                Bob Gould himself is no stranger to labelling and negative political
                characterisations without basis.

                I also find it completely bizarre that Gould is so obsessed by the notion
                that Roger Raven is some sort of constructed cyber identity and not a real
                person and that somehow the DSP are behind this.

                I agree with Mike K's recent sentiments:

                Mike K:
                "I agree that discussion should be kept political. Calling someone an
                'agent provocateur' should definitely off-limits around here, and
                Margaret did make that quite clear. However, I'm not sure there's much
                point trying to force Raven to 'withdraw' the slander. He is someone who
                very much speaks for himself, despite Bob's ongoing and strange delusion
                that he is an invention of the DSP. Roger Raven has actually spent a
                great deal of time on the list using the most disparaging possible
                characterisations of the DSP, in case you hadn't noticed Bob, generally
                relegating what he calls 'the left' in general, in which he specifically
                includes the DSP, as more or less useless and bereft of ideas. I don't
                think any serious list member takes him the slightest bit seriously when
                he calls you an 'agent provocateur', whatever else they might think of
                your political views. It mainly reflects badly on him. For the record
                however I agree he should withdraw it and cease using that kind of
                language." MK

                I think that we can move on and discuss the real issues at hand, and there
                no compulsion for anyone to be a part of this list if they feel that they
                cannot do this.

                comradely,
                Margaret A
                moderator, GL discussion list,___
                >
                >


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • rogerraven
                No-one is obliged to read or reply to anyone s posts, including mine and Gould s. All appear to be agreed that this issue does not deserve the attention that
                Message 7 of 10 , Nov 22, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  No-one is obliged to read or reply to anyone's' posts, including mine
                  and Gould's. All appear to be agreed that this issue does not
                  deserve the attention that is being given to it. So do I. But it
                  has become topical because so many people have chosen to become
                  involved!

                  In contrast, there does seem a real reluctance to become involved in
                  serious discussion of serious issues; blogging seems to be regarded
                  as an end in itself, which should not be in leftist circles.

                  In her description of my posts, the (DSP) moderator is breaching her
                  own views on name-calling.

                  Most of my posts (I too would prefer it to be all) are about serious
                  issues, started by the dreadful standard of debate on East Timor.
                  Incidentally, not only did I seem to be the only contributor to make
                  positive suggestions, but also there was a total loss of interest on
                  this loop some time ago regarding East Timor's problems – and
                  solutions – even though it and wider island state issues are
                  increasingly visible.

                  It should be obvious from the left's complete inability to influence
                  events that there are very serious inadequacies in the way that the
                  left is doing things. To put it another way, the way that people on
                  the left – whether contributors to this list, in the DSP or not - are
                  doing things is far from the ideal. If there was a general
                  recognition of that AND a determination to do better, my main aim
                  would be achieved. It would seem an important aim. It would also
                  seem in the best interests of the left.
                • Michael Karadjis
                  Chill Bob. You are unable to see even a message of support for your view on this as a message of support. It appears to me your anti-DSP view is so
                  Message 8 of 10 , Nov 22, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Chill Bob.

                    You are unable to see even a message of support for your view on this as
                    a message of support. It appears to me your anti-DSP view is so
                    overwhelming that you can only view my post as somehow secretly saying
                    the opposite. This is strange, along with the continued implications
                    that Roger Raven is not a person.

                    You write:
                    > You say, for the record, I'm not a provocateur, which leaves open the
                    > question of what you might think in private. What a gratuitous insult.

                    No I did not say you are not a provocateur just "for the record". I said
                    that "for the record I agree he (Raven) should withdraw it (the insult)
                    and cease using that kind of
                    language."

                    That's clear enough isn't it?


                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "bobgould987" <bobgould987@...>
                    To: <GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:02 PM
                    Subject: [GreenLeft_discussion] Re: Raven-Dixon double act


                    > Gould is not a provocateur, for the record, indeed
                    >
                    > A note to Mike Karadjis and Margaret, the moderator.
                    >
                    > Mike, I find your little post this morning insulting and diversionary.
                    > You say, for the record, I'm not a provocateur, which leaves open the
                    > question of what you might think in private. What a gratuitous insult.
                    >
                    > You then say there's not much the moderator can do about Raven's
                    > slander. Margaret did say a week or two ago that she would get a
                    > retraction out of the man or woman who uses the name Roger Raven.
                    >
                    > Given the seriousness of the accusation against me, it's not
                    > unreasonable to ask what has been done about getting a retraction.
                    >
                    > A half-smart response from Mike Karadjis is not adequate.
                    >
                    > I repeat my request to Margaret, the moderator, that she tell me what
                    > has been done to get a retraction, and I believe I'm within my rights
                    > to ask whether this person who is slandering me is doing so in his own
                    > name or under a pseudonym. Margaret should know, as moderator, whether
                    > Roger Raven is a real name or a pseudonym.
                    >
                    > If it's a real name, I intend to pursue Mr Raven as vigorously as I
                    > can to get a retraction. If it's a pseudonym I intend to find out who
                    > it is so I can pursue the person for a retraction.
                    >
                    > I expect a reasonably prompt response from the moderator.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Green Left Weekly depends on your support!
                    >
                    > Subscribe to Green Left Weekly!
                    > http://www.greenleft.org.au/subscribe.htm
                    >
                    > Make a donation to help Green Left Weekly continue!
                    > http://www.greenleft.org.au/fogl.htm
                    >
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.