From: tony_becky_mikey@verizon.net   
      
   Paul,   
     I see that you have no real argument here other than you do NOT agree with   
   him and his writing.. The "arselicking   
   ..." crap type lines are the poutings of a child who wants too much   
   attention....  If you could use some more constructive terms, people might   
   give you half a chance.  But, as long as you keep up the BS, you get what   
   you get.. Hope you enjoy your time here in the other group.. If you just   
   learned to play nice with others, who knows what you might accomplish..   
      
   OFW,   
      
   Tony Miller   
   Monroe, Wa   
      
   "Paul Harper"  wrote in message   
   news:9fbub2hqrk9cl1aookm11jl354elfp098k@4ax.com...   
   > On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 02:22:04 GMT, "tony_becky_mikey_verizon_news"   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >>  Guess you MIGHT have seen the trouble your BS has caused in the   
   >> moderated   
   >>B5 group...   
   >   
   > You read so little of it that you have to *guess*?   
   >   
   >>Now, just one man to another,   
   >   
   > A meaningless term, much like "as a parent..."   
   >   
   >>you may want to think next time before you   
   >>start to make personal attacks on JMS, since it would seem there is a   
   >>roomful of his supporters, and VERY few people supporting you in the   
   >>on-going thread.   
   >   
   > Well, a couple of points raised there:   
   >   
   > 1) The time to tell the emperor that he's naked is when he's   
   > listening, not on a different continent where he doesn't hear a word   
   > that's being said. Anything and everything said here and in just about   
   > all other groups and fora is ignored by him (though in the short term   
   > I have no doubt this is getting back to him, probably accompanied by a   
   > scathing commentary). When he's got far too many arselicking   
   > sycophants around him queuing up to give him a reacharound it is   
   > healthy for there to be at least one dissenting voice that says "you   
   > are not a cultural icon", "that comic story was shit", "you are NOT on   
   > the "A" list" and the like.   
   >   
   > 2) The threads surrounding Straczynski's hissy fit contain a   
   > significant portion of people what asked what the problem was. They   
   > didn't know. They didn't notice. They, in other words, saw nothing   
   > wrong at all until their false god made them see it. Clearly, if I was   
   > attacking Straczynski then it must have been a masterpiece of subtlety   
   > and stealth. Even the usual suspects like Jones and Kennedy didn't say   
   > a damn thing. Guess I'm really good at this sort of thing, huh? (Mind   
   > you, Jones and Kennedy couldn't string together a lucid argument for   
   > parachutes after falling off a cliff, so in their cases it's   
   > unsurprising really...)   
   >   
   > 3) For a newsgroup that is supposed to worship the very faeces he   
   > shits, there was actually remarkably little support for him, too. I   
   > guess he must, like me, have got a lot of support "in email".   
   >   
   > 4) While a lot of people who bothered posting anything said "that's a   
   > shame, good luck and goodbye" or words to that effect - which must   
   > have disappointed him no end that they were so ready to write him off   
   > - others said that they were leaving too if he was. Which is exactly   
   > the same as saying to every other poster on that group "you're not   
   > worth reading or talking to". Which even to my jaded eyes seems a   
   > little impolite.   
   >   
   >>If you want to respond to this, in an adult, civilized manner, please do   
   >>so,   
   >>I just thought I'd let you know that you REALLY caused a situation in the   
   >>moderated group, and to see if you see what you caused means anything to   
   >>you..   
   >   
   > Of course it means something:   
   >   
   > It means that the truth about the way JMS tries to run the group under   
   > his own arbitrary rules has become public.   
   >   
   > It means that the lies about him trying to get me banned earlier in   
   > the year has become public.   
   >   
   > It means now everyone knows why the group is there - for the solid   
   > worship of Straczynski and for all his money-making schemes. It is, in   
   > short, now little more than a QVC channel for B5 franchise material.   
   >   
   > Does it mean anything to *me*? Nah, not really. I means I shan't be   
   > able to chat on that group to a few people that I have come to like   
   > and respect over there, at least using this name, anyway.   
   >   
   > Beyond that?  Well, if it's given Straczynski any pause whatsoever to   
   > think about the way he presents himself and the way he so blatantly   
   > uses people then it's achieved something. But I doubt his fragile ego   
   > will allow him the luxury of humility.   
   >   
   > That's not in the script.   
   >   
   > Paul.   
   > --   
   > . Bill Maher: "Tulips aren't flowers, they're gay onions"   
   > . A .sig is all well and good, but it's no substitute for a personality   
   > . Is there a moron carrot above?  Have you replied to it?  Are you sure?   
   > . EMail: Unless invited to, don't; it's likely to be automatically   
   > deleted.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)