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

Re: Censorship and such

Expand Messages
  • ted.wrinch
    I seem to be providing a holealicious start to the New Year for those in WC. They ve moved from whinging to whining and Diana think it s paranoia again
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I seem to be providing a holealicious start to the New Year for those in WC. They've moved from 'whinging' to 'whining' and Diana think it's 'paranoia' again (one of her favourite theories) and that my last comment to Der Staudi's eco-fascism article was lost in the Christmas rush 'or something'. As it was posted on December 13 (message 48761) this is not really credible. Especially as my other comments, on the the 3-folding article, went through after this; in fact I posted those because my eco-fascism one had been blocked. Nice try Diana - it can't have happened therefore it didn't. I do remember the 'fun' trying to interact with such an open minded person when I was there and having a similar discussion involving 'paranoia' and my lack of a '101 understanding' concerning how the Google search engine worked; she lost that argument too. As I recall, she lost most of the arguments she started with me (she usually does start them; others have noticed her pugnacious love of a good fight too).

      T.

      Ted Wrinch


      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
      >
      > This doesn't explain my posts being bocked on the eco-fascism article after my *second* comment. And, overall, the effect of whatever they have been doing between them all - web-master, PS, admin or whoever - has been that my posts don't get through. It's censorship.
      >
      > Sheesh Frank!
      >
      > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > I doubt very much that that site is censoring you for content, Ted. If you send half a dozen short posts instead of one longer one incorporating what you want to say, it's no wonder a webmaster (and others) gets frustrated.
      > > Frank
      > >
      > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site"
      > > >
      > > > Should read:
      > > >
      > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism article"
      > > >
      > > > T.
      > > >
      > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > It's hardly worth responding to but Der Staudi has claimed that I have not been censored on his site. My use of 'his site' in that sentence, and other posts, is short-hand for 'his articles on the ISE site', which was the formulation I first used on this list. In the usual fashion on WC, they have mixed this up to claim that I think that the site is Der Staudi's - this is fairly typical of what passes for 'scholarship' over there and is similar to their other long-term and ongoing confusion concerning Der Staudi's supposed 'research assistants', that they claim we think he has. As for the censorship:
      > > > >
      > > > > 1) My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site, after he referred to 'engag[ing] in extended exchanges with antisemites, holocaust deniers, apologists for fascism', which was his response to my second comment
      > > > >
      > > > > 2) My last posting on his 3-folding article was originally submitted as four comments, which were also posted to this list in message 48848 on 21 December. Those comments sat in moderation for days and were were finally dropped by his site (by him, or, as he claims, an administrator). I re-posted them soon after as a combined post - I couldn't be bothered to re-post all four comments. The combined post is what went through and only did so when someone gave it the nod, co-incident with his post on WC on 24 December saying that I 'wasn't being censored'. The combined post is what can be currently seen on the site as my last post. It was originally censored, as I've said.
      > > > >
      > > > > T.
      > > > >
      > > > > Ted Wrinch
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • ted.wrinch
      I ve been looking over some of the AT postings from early Summer 06. The times when Joel was enlivening the list and you all were trying to talk Hale and
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        I've been looking over some of the AT postings from early Summer '06. The times when Joel was enlivening the list and you all were trying to talk Hale and Bradford out of their (crypto?) anti-Semitisms. Much enlightening content from Tarjei, Joel and everyone passed down the cyber stream. There was a really nice post when Joel posted on Anthro epistemology, as he does, and Tarjei agreed so much he had to start a mini lovathon just for Joel! Jean-Marc made a poignant assessment of the holocaust as the Christ denying experience of our age. Much, most, - all? - of my analyses of the various Hole and its denizens characteristics have been pre-figured then. Linda described their cliquiness and unwillingness to engage in any criticism of members of their own group; she then compared this with the freedom and willingness to discuss and criticise anything in this group. Tarjei nailed Diana, more poetically, but in the same way I've just done:

        "Dottie wrote:

        >Diana must've forgotten her panty talk Frank? Remember? I thought it
        >was crude enough for me to not want to hang out at AT. But I guess
        >she has a very short memory which Linda and Serena have ponited out
        >time and time again.

        I seem to remember Christine challenging Diana to meet her in some
        back alley so they could slug it out; that's the most action-packed
        flame-war we've ever seen around here. Diana can probably tease a
        solid rock to break itself loose from a mountain and come flying after her....

        Tarjei

        (message 28405)

        Great times, I can see, and a testament to the work done in times past by the list members. My thanks to everyone involved,

        T.

        Ted Wrinch


        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
        >
        > I seem to be providing a holealicious start to the New Year for those in WC. They've moved from 'whinging' to 'whining' and Diana think it's 'paranoia' again (one of her favourite theories) and that my last comment to Der Staudi's eco-fascism article was lost in the Christmas rush 'or something'. As it was posted on December 13 (message 48761) this is not really credible. Especially as my other comments, on the the 3-folding article, went through after this; in fact I posted those because my eco-fascism one had been blocked. Nice try Diana - it can't have happened therefore it didn't. I do remember the 'fun' trying to interact with such an open minded person when I was there and having a similar discussion involving 'paranoia' and my lack of a '101 understanding' concerning how the Google search engine worked; she lost that argument too. As I recall, she lost most of the arguments she started with me (she usually does start them; others have noticed her pugnacious love of a good fight too).
        >
        > T.
        >
        > Ted Wrinch
        >
        >
        > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
        > >
        > > This doesn't explain my posts being bocked on the eco-fascism article after my *second* comment. And, overall, the effect of whatever they have been doing between them all - web-master, PS, admin or whoever - has been that my posts don't get through. It's censorship.
        > >
        > > Sheesh Frank!
        > >
        > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > I doubt very much that that site is censoring you for content, Ted. If you send half a dozen short posts instead of one longer one incorporating what you want to say, it's no wonder a webmaster (and others) gets frustrated.
        > > > Frank
        > > >
        > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site"
        > > > >
        > > > > Should read:
        > > > >
        > > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism article"
        > > > >
        > > > > T.
        > > > >
        > > > > Ted Wrinch
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > It's hardly worth responding to but Der Staudi has claimed that I have not been censored on his site. My use of 'his site' in that sentence, and other posts, is short-hand for 'his articles on the ISE site', which was the formulation I first used on this list. In the usual fashion on WC, they have mixed this up to claim that I think that the site is Der Staudi's - this is fairly typical of what passes for 'scholarship' over there and is similar to their other long-term and ongoing confusion concerning Der Staudi's supposed 'research assistants', that they claim we think he has. As for the censorship:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > 1) My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site, after he referred to 'engag[ing] in extended exchanges with antisemites, holocaust deniers, apologists for fascism', which was his response to my second comment
        > > > > >
        > > > > > 2) My last posting on his 3-folding article was originally submitted as four comments, which were also posted to this list in message 48848 on 21 December. Those comments sat in moderation for days and were were finally dropped by his site (by him, or, as he claims, an administrator). I re-posted them soon after as a combined post - I couldn't be bothered to re-post all four comments. The combined post is what went through and only did so when someone gave it the nod, co-incident with his post on WC on 24 December saying that I 'wasn't being censored'. The combined post is what can be currently seen on the site as my last post. It was originally censored, as I've said.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > T.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Ted Wrinch
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • ted.wrinch
        Singleing out one other set of postings, I also liked Dottie s Tales of the Hassidm from the 06 period: profound and beautiful. I think I m going to have to
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 5, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Singleing out one other set of postings, I also liked Dottie's Tales of the Hassidm from the 06 period: profound and beautiful. I think I'm going to have to dig out my old Isaac Beshevis Singer set of tales...

          T.

          Ted Wrinch

          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@...> wrote:
          >
          > I've been looking over some of the AT postings from early Summer '06. The times when Joel was enlivening the list and you all were trying to talk Hale and Bradford out of their (crypto?) anti-Semitisms. Much enlightening content from Tarjei, Joel and everyone passed down the cyber stream. There was a really nice post when Joel posted on Anthro epistemology, as he does, and Tarjei agreed so much he had to start a mini lovathon just for Joel! Jean-Marc made a poignant assessment of the holocaust as the Christ denying experience of our age. Much, most, - all? - of my analyses of the various Hole and its denizens characteristics have been pre-figured then. Linda described their cliquiness and unwillingness to engage in any criticism of members of their own group; she then compared this with the freedom and willingness to discuss and criticise anything in this group. Tarjei nailed Diana, more poetically, but in the same way I've just done:
          >
          > "Dottie wrote:
          >
          > >Diana must've forgotten her panty talk Frank? Remember? I thought it
          > >was crude enough for me to not want to hang out at AT. But I guess
          > >she has a very short memory which Linda and Serena have ponited out
          > >time and time again.
          >
          > I seem to remember Christine challenging Diana to meet her in some
          > back alley so they could slug it out; that's the most action-packed
          > flame-war we've ever seen around here. Diana can probably tease a
          > solid rock to break itself loose from a mountain and come flying after her....
          >
          > Tarjei
          >
          > (message 28405)
          >
          > Great times, I can see, and a testament to the work done in times past by the list members. My thanks to everyone involved,
          >
          > T.
          >
          > Ted Wrinch
          >
          >
          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > >
          > > I seem to be providing a holealicious start to the New Year for those in WC. They've moved from 'whinging' to 'whining' and Diana think it's 'paranoia' again (one of her favourite theories) and that my last comment to Der Staudi's eco-fascism article was lost in the Christmas rush 'or something'. As it was posted on December 13 (message 48761) this is not really credible. Especially as my other comments, on the the 3-folding article, went through after this; in fact I posted those because my eco-fascism one had been blocked. Nice try Diana - it can't have happened therefore it didn't. I do remember the 'fun' trying to interact with such an open minded person when I was there and having a similar discussion involving 'paranoia' and my lack of a '101 understanding' concerning how the Google search engine worked; she lost that argument too. As I recall, she lost most of the arguments she started with me (she usually does start them; others have noticed her pugnacious love of a good fight too).
          > >
          > > T.
          > >
          > > Ted Wrinch
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > This doesn't explain my posts being bocked on the eco-fascism article after my *second* comment. And, overall, the effect of whatever they have been doing between them all - web-master, PS, admin or whoever - has been that my posts don't get through. It's censorship.
          > > >
          > > > Sheesh Frank!
          > > >
          > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Thomas Smith" <fts.trasla@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > I doubt very much that that site is censoring you for content, Ted. If you send half a dozen short posts instead of one longer one incorporating what you want to say, it's no wonder a webmaster (and others) gets frustrated.
          > > > > Frank
          > > > >
          > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site"
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Should read:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > "My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism article"
          > > > > >
          > > > > > T.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Ted Wrinch
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "ted.wrinch" <ted.wrinch@> wrote:
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > It's hardly worth responding to but Der Staudi has claimed that I have not been censored on his site. My use of 'his site' in that sentence, and other posts, is short-hand for 'his articles on the ISE site', which was the formulation I first used on this list. In the usual fashion on WC, they have mixed this up to claim that I think that the site is Der Staudi's - this is fairly typical of what passes for 'scholarship' over there and is similar to their other long-term and ongoing confusion concerning Der Staudi's supposed 'research assistants', that they claim we think he has. As for the censorship:
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > 1) My posts were blocked from the comments section of his eco-fascism site, after he referred to 'engag[ing] in extended exchanges with antisemites, holocaust deniers, apologists for fascism', which was his response to my second comment
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > 2) My last posting on his 3-folding article was originally submitted as four comments, which were also posted to this list in message 48848 on 21 December. Those comments sat in moderation for days and were were finally dropped by his site (by him, or, as he claims, an administrator). I re-posted them soon after as a combined post - I couldn't be bothered to re-post all four comments. The combined post is what went through and only did so when someone gave it the nod, co-incident with his post on WC on 24 December saying that I 'wasn't being censored'. The combined post is what can be currently seen on the site as my last post. It was originally censored, as I've said.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > T.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > Ted Wrinch
          > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.