jim bell wrote:
I think an explanation for this is due. Jim is going to move his complaints here instead of dealing with them with me no matter what I do...
Alan Olsen is correct, here.
This is childish and pointless. Please shut up or take it to email.
But he (the anonymous poster): 1. FLamed me on this national list, similarly to the way Alan Olsen later did.
FWIW, this is an _international_ list with a lot of people who are just not interested in your petty bickering. If you want to argue about this, please do it in private. If Alan posts responses to the list, that's his problem. You don't _have_ to answer in public.
2. Failed to be willing to sustain the debate in a more appropriate list, even under a stable nym.
You have something against anonymity? In this case, perhaps this list is not the best place to be.
that I had been flamed by that anonymous poster. The fact that he was anonymous says it all. The fact that he has not returned says it all. The
The fact that he was anonymous says nothing whatsoever. So what if you received some email agreeing that you'd been flamed?
the fact that I am relatively new here. I have no intention of inflicting an unwelcome discussion of "Assassination Politics" on the list, and
Actually, and Perry may disagree here, but I'd have no objection to a discussion of "Assassination Politics", or any other nutty political theories, as long as we can stick to reasonably mature discussion and not flames and petty ego boosting.
suffered any longterm loss of reputation of his own. I, on the other hand, use my REAL NAME.
Whoopie! A True Name! Big deal. I care not one jot whether or not you use your REAL NAME. I have no way of knowing if it is, in fact, your real name. Should it make a difference? No one is going to "suffer any longterm loss of reputation" by disagreeing with you, or anyone else, whether or not they use a nym (or anonymity).
Only a fool would have taken an anonymous flamer seriously under those circumstances.
An anonymous post is no less valid for being anonymous. The only advantage of a stable nym, whether or not it's a True Name, is the ability to gain (or lose) reputation through the content of its posts. Perhaps a nym with some reputation is taken more seriously than an anonymous poster, but so is an unknown nym. Neither you nor Alan has any reputation to speak of (to me, at least), so an anonymous post has no less.
Jim ignored that request and I removed him from the list.
Read: "Alan Olsen exercised his authority in his own personal fiefdom, the "PDX Cypherpunks list."
Are you saying he doesn't have that right? If it's his list, he can do whatever the hell he likes with it.
On the contrary, I have no interest in dealing with this sleazy character in email. He was the one who chose a national list to do his flaming and baiting, and I think he deserves full "credit."
In other words, you are not interested in resolving any problem you have with Alan, you just to make a lot of noise in public in an attempt to "embarrass" him. Go play on some other list where this kind of thing is appreciated.
The following is the last I will say publically on the matter.
You're going to take your bat and ball and "go thwait home!" You hear your mommy calling, Alan.
This list periodically devolves into this childishness. I'm glad Alan is not going to say any more. I award Alan 20 Reputation Points for being mature enough to walk away (delayed long enough to see whether he does)