Text 41526, 170 rader
Skriven 2006-10-18 22:39:42 av Jeff Smith (1:14/0)
  Kommentar till text 41504 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: DUD-file
================
Hello Michiel.

18 Oct 06 23:28, you wrote to me:

 MV> Hello Jeff!

 MV> On Tuesday October 17 2006 11:34, you wrote to me:

 MV>>> Than no more need to be said. No is no. End of story

 JS>>>>   My point was that it would be only reasonable to answer the
 JS>>>> simple question.

 MV>>> Asking a "reasonable" question that one can hardly refuse to
 MV>>> answer is a standard opening ploy of Jehova's Witnesses....

 JS>>      You have a thing for them don't ya?

 MV> Jehova's Wittmeses are a prime example od people trying to impose
 MV> their ways on others. And yes, I have a problem woth that....


     You mean like YOU are trying to do to everyone in Fidonet? That's
what people mean when they say "Talk about the pot calling the kettle
black". You complain about others doing the same thing that you do
yourself. Isn't there a word for people like that?


 JS>>>>       What about those that had to find different feeds for the
 JS>>>> Fidonews?

 MV>>> They are now alerted that they were using an unreliable feed. A
 MV>>> private distribution system that has rules that conflict with
 MV>>> FidoNet policy and that can be abused at whim. I say that is
 MV>>> good that people were made aware of that.

 JS>>      The distribution system is just as reliable as it ever was.

 MV> Then a flaw that has been there for a long time is now exposed.


     Hardly Michiel. Grasping at straws again I see.


 MV>>> It was not my action that got them involved. It was Janis who
 MV>>> "removed it from distribution". Talk to her.


 JS>>     <chuckle> Talk to Shannon, talk to Janis, talk to this
 JS>> person, talk to that person. You can't even entertain the thought
 JS>> of owning up to your own actions.

 MV> It was Janis that send the DUD file, not me. Why is that so hard to
 MV> understand?


     Who caused Janis to feel that that action was nessesary????


 JS>>  Are you one of those "Well, thet made me do it" type of people?
 JS>> It's always someone elses fault that you do what you do.

 MV> Twist it anyway, you want, it was Janis who send the DUD file. It was
 MV> *her* filegate. It was *her* made up rules that she ways were
 MV> violated.


     No twisting needed. Your doing just fine all by yourself. Janis
reacted to you. Without YOUR action her reaction wouldn't have happened.
Is it that you don't understand or that you don't WANT to understand?



 MV>>> Cause and effect go back a LONG way down the chain. Too far down
 MV>>> to exactly spot what was the prime cause. Maybe it goes back as
 MV>>> far as Z1 forcing P4 down the throat of Z2 before I even joined
 MV>>> Fidonet.

 JS>>>> Your article was the cause.

 MV>>> No it was not. It was Janis who removed an issue of FidoNews
 MV>>> from distribution. Not me.


       Did Janis remove the Fidonews issue because of the copyrighted
article that you wrote? Why in your opinion did she remove the Fidonews
issue?


 JS>>      Who caused her to have to make that decision?

 MV> Her own interpretation of het own self imposed file gate rules did
 MV> that.

 JS>>  Her action was in reaction to yours. Same cause and effect
 JS>> concept Michiel.

 MV> Nobody told her she had to react that way. No *FidoNet* rule says so.
 MV> Those were here own self adopted rules. The responsibility for sending
 MV> that DUD file is hers and only hers.

     She made her decision based on your action. All your attempts at
blaming others and denying responsibility can not change that.

 MV>>> You may not realise it but *you* have made yourself part of the
 MV>>> problem as well. By jumping in without knowing the history you
 MV>>> dug up a couple of old bones. You didn't know, but you could
 MV>>> have known that asking for the resignation of Björn would
 MV>>> trigger a new round in the zone war. You are now part of it,
 MV>>> like it or not.

 JS>>      The truth of the matter is that I have asked Björn to act as
 JS>> moderator. His replacement is a last resort solution. My
 JS>> expressed opinion is based on Björn as moderator and not on you
 JS>> or your copyright games.

 MV> Dooes not matter what brought you to it. You jumped into an exsiting
 MV> conflict and that made you part of it. And by chosing the "solution"
 MV> of replacing Björn you automatically took sides.


     I can accept that. I see a number of possible solutions and will
continue to work toward the best solution.

 JS>>>>>>  Is there a positive goal to the actions that you are taking?

 MVDV>>>>> It did have the positive effect that people are starting to
 MVDV>>>>> think about the effects of copyrights on the snooze instead
 MVDV>>>>> of simply ignoring them...

 JS>>>>        Yup.... Some positive effect there Michiel.

 MV>>> Why only see the negative side of it? Think positive.

 JS>>      Because that is the effect that your actions have had. Take
 JS>> off the blinders Michiel and take in some reality for a change.

 MV> You take off the blinders and see that it was not me who send the DUD
 MV> file. It was Janis.


     Did she write the copyrighted article? Who did that? Who wanted to
limit the distribution of that copyrighted article? Everyone but you can
see and knows the answer to those questions. I think you really do too
but can't bring yourself to admit it.


 MV>>> I repeat: the best thing would be if everyone dropped this
 MV>>> "replace Björn" nonsense and accepted the situation as it is.

 JS>>      That will depend soley on whether Björn chooses to start
 JS>> acting as a moderator here. That is the only way I see it being
 JS>> dropped.

 MV> So you are determined to get your way. Then the fight will continue.
 MV> :-(


     That all depends on Björn.


 MV> Cheers, Michiel

 MV> --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060315
 MV>  * Origin: http://www.vlist.eu (2:280/5555)

Jeff

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - MN USA (1:14/0)