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

Re: Members moved on

Expand Messages
  • lasallia
    ... to this crude behavior, John objected as did Janet. It s been going on ... As your insults have been objected to ... and John s. Neither of you have
    Message 1 of 33 , Sep 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      > Yes, and what about the dozens of instances since then? I objected
      to this crude behavior, John objected as did Janet. It's been going on
      > for weeks... so why keep pointing out that the first instance was an
      > error?

      As your insults have been objected to ... and John's. Neither of you
      have adressed those complaints.

      > Do I need to explain the difference between criticism and calling
      him names? Do you not understand the difference between criticism and
      > smearing him as working for "oil industry funded think tanks" when
      > the organization you are pointing to isn't one?

      The organisation that you introduced us to says they receive about $8
      million a year. They also say that Exxon only contributed about 1% of
      their income. I think that's a fair amount of money for people to
      decry climate change.

      > Accusations that he is being paid for lies doesn't qualify?

      Not if they are true. Dr. Tim is misleading people and if he is
      giving talks (about 600 lunch or dinner engagements, I read) for free,
      then he is running a charity. His CV says this:

      1996 - present: Environmental Consultant, Public Speaker, Columnist

      Now, does that sound like charity?

      >>Then saying if he isn't getting paid he is dumb? If we changed the
      >>name
      > from Dr. Tim Ball to Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt or any other name
      > and the same baseless accusations were freely slung about would that
      > be acceptable?

      But they are NOT baseless accusations.

      > It's not about suing but about what is acceptable behavior. The
      point is should such slurs be allowed? Are we open to start slinging
      such slurs at any public figures? I can't imagine that would be
      desirable for the group, but since they are being slung at skeptics it
      seems to be allowable.

      Frankly, I think your personal insults towards group members are far
      less acceptable. I deplore the fact that I am incensed enough to
      reply in the same vein. This is an issue that you steadfastly refuse
      to address. I also remember you slandering the people who were
      calling the truth on Dr. Tim. Evidently that is allowed! You can
      call someone scum for telling the truth, but I cannot expose lies.
      What game are YOU playing, Jim?

      Thank you for the link to the Elsner article ... it has a clickable
      icon for the full piece which is a pay up or subscribe. If that link
      does not have the full thing I'll get it elsewhere.

      S
    • Bill Provost
      Do you get lonely hanging on your cross? ... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
      Message 33 of 33 , Sep 2, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Do you get lonely hanging on your cross?



        --- jtr_iv <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

        > Hi Janet,
        >
        > Unfortunately your pleas will fall on deaf ears. One
        > would think it
        > obvious that this crude behavior should be
        > unacceptable and as much
        > as they may enjoy attacking those they disagree
        > with many find it
        > objectionable. But regardless of people objecting it
        > continues...
        > they enjoy Bill's crude attacks. He is the new
        > champion of global
        > warming and if he has to do it by crude remarks and
        > slander that
        > apparently is acceptable.
        >
        > If anyone follows their lead, being equally crude
        > they quickly find
        > themselves gone from the group.
        >
        > Would you believe the group founder, Ken MacClune is
        > a scientist?
        >
        > Anyway.... one has to toe the line and be careful to
        > realize that as
        > in life being in the globalwarming group isn't fair.
        > Hypocrisy is
        > alive and well....
        >
        > Jim
        >
        > --- In globalwarming@yahoogroups.com,
        > united_progressives
        > <no_reply@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Lasallia, as a fellow Progressive I am with you on
        > most of the
        > > issues. However, I must say that I do not approve,
        > at all, of the
        > > manner in which you control this board. You allow
        > both Bill
        > > and "Pawnfart" to say anything they please. You do
        > not ban them
        > from
        > > the group (any member can easily check our
        > membership list at the
        > > website) Neither do you delete their posts (anyone
        > can check the
        > > message board and see which posts have been
        > removed). In fact, you
        > do
        > > not even ask them to refrain from making their
        > profoundly
        > disgusting
        > > comments and remarks, many of which are downright
        > OBSCENE. Bill
        > > repeatedly referred to Dr Tim Ball as "Dr B*lls".
        > You said
        > > nothing. "Pawnfart" wrote: "Dr Tim has the b*lls
        > to say..." You
        > said
        > > nothing. Please, let us focus on our mission and
        > put an end to the
        > > disgusting language. If they do not respect your
        > demands, remove
        > them
        > > as you did 'John', 'Tom' and 'Jeffrey'. I just
        > checked the
        > membership
        > > list and saw all three were removed, yet Bill and
        > "Pawnfart"
        > remain???
        > >
        > > Peace, my sista!
        > > Janet
        > >
        > > --- In globalwarming@yahoogroups.com, lasallia
        > <no_reply@> wrote:
        > >
        > > > Yes, and what about the dozens of instances
        > since then? I objected
        > > to this crude behavior, John objected as did
        > Janet. It's been going
        > > on
        > > > for weeks... so why keep pointing out that the
        > first instance was
        > > an error?
        > >
        > > As your insults have been objected to ... and
        > John's. Neither of
        > you
        > > have addressed those complaints.
        > >
        > > > Do I need to explain the difference between
        > criticism and calling
        > > him names? Do you not understand the difference
        > between criticism
        > > and
        > > > smearing him as working for "oil industry funded
        > think tanks"
        > when
        > > > the organization you are pointing to isn't one?
        > >
        > > The organisation that you introduced us to says
        > they receive about
        > $8
        > > million a year. They also say that Exxon only
        > contributed about 1%
        > of
        > > their income. I think that's a fair amount of
        > money for people to
        > > decry climate change.
        > >
        > > > Accusations that he is being paid for lies
        > doesn't qualify?
        > >
        > > Not if they are true. Dr. Tim is misleading
        > people and if he is
        > > giving talks (about 600 lunch or dinner
        > engagements, I read) for
        > free,
        > > then he is running a charity. His CV says this:
        > >
        > > 1996 - present: Environmental Consultant, Public
        > Speaker, Columnist
        > >
        > > Now, does that sound like charity?
        > >
        > > >>Then saying if he isn't getting paid he is dumb?
        > If we changed the
        > > >>name
        > > > from Dr. Tim Ball to Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt
        > or any other
        > name
        > > > and the same baseless accusations were freely
        > slung about would
        > > that
        > > > be acceptable?
        > >
        > > But they are NOT baseless accusations.
        > >
        > > > It's not about suing but about what is
        > acceptable behavior. The
        > > point is should such slurs be allowed? Are we open
        > to start slinging
        > > such slurs at any public figures? I can't imagine
        > that would be
        > > desirable for the group, but since they are being
        > slung at skeptics
        > it
        > > seems to be allowable.
        > >
        > > Frankly, I think your personal insults towards
        > group members are far
        > > less acceptable. I deplore the fact that I am
        > incensed enough to
        > > reply in the same vein. This is an issue that you
        > steadfastly
        > refuse
        > > to address. I also remember you slandering the
        > people who were
        > > calling the truth on Dr. Tim. Evidently that is
        > allowed! You can
        > > call someone scum for telling the truth, but I
        > cannot expose lies.
        > > What game are YOU playing, Jim?
        > >
        > > Thank you for the link to the Elsner article ...
        > it has a clickable
        > > icon for the full piece which is a pay up or
        > subscribe. If that
        > link
        > > does not have the full thing I'll get it
        > elsewhere.
        > >
        > > S
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >


        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        http://mail.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.