Posted by Seeker [Seeker] on November 17, 1999 at 10:19:57 {xx2d.1sWpQtDlUsHAETc79YAW9JMpc}:
Greg,
I did as you asked and read all three of your long postings about AF. I know you said you won't comment on new postings from others, so I don't expect you to respond to this. However, I hope you at least read it so as to understand the point of view I'm going to express.
My thoughts on your postings:
1. Too long. By giving excrutiating detail, you obfuscate the topic. It's quite hard to tell all that going on when you flood the board with this material. In addition, you don't structure things in a readable manner. It's good that you preface things with the handles of the speakers, but couldn't you break things up into logical sections, with clearly demarcated subsections and logical trains of thought?
2. Thank you for finally responding to AF's detailed questions about Schroeder. I know you think you answered it originally with your blanket denial. However, those of us who have been the victim of the WTS method of blanket denials that hide detailed lies, it's good for you to have finally reiterated your position in the specific.
3. AF believed his sources on the matter of you and Schroeder. You deny what he believed. Fine, but that is not a lie. You may be telling the truth, or it's entirely possible that you are lying. In other words, AF might still believe his sources, even now. In either case, he did not lie. He may have gotten wrong information, and he may have been too gullible in believing those sources, but he didn't set out to deceive.
4. Your style seems to be to ignore the big picture of an argument by burrowing into the minutiae of the little details. It took all this time for you to finally answer AF in detail, and even then you buried it amidst an avalanche of prose. Simplicity, Greg, simplicity.
5. I acknowledge it is hard to buck the tide on H2O. Unfortunately, there is a tendency for people to just take sides and argue personalities, not facts. And since you are taking on the dominant group, it can feel like you are being picked on unfairly. It can be unfair at times. Nevertheless, if you feel you are being unfairly labelled or insulted, resist the temptation to fight back. Stick to simple, clear, logical facts.
6. Finally, you quoted yourself in talking about your phony handle situation: "Thank you for your emails. I assure you, I had no intent to deceive anyone. I posted the two posts under the TRJ45 name so that the board would KNOW that I was, from here on, to be known as TRJ45. I had to post the new name quickly, as received the call while responding to Cygnus, and I knew he would reply soon, so I had to have "someone" ready to respond. I posted as a defender of the things I had said, so it would be a smooth transition to taking over for myself, if that makes any sense."
It doesn't make sense. At the time it was clear that your intent was to hide under a different handle. I've read both of those TJ45 posts, and in neither one was there any indication that you intended to publicly show that you had chosen a new handle. Instead you clearly were trying to make it seem that you were a disinterested 3rd-party who felt Greg "won" the debate. This is far more dishonest than anything AF did.
Seeker