[continued from previous message]   
      
   > Yes it does.  I lived in an Orthodox Jewish community for over 25 years   
   > (and am still connected with it).  Orthodox Jews will not accept a   
   > Reform conversion, and will only accept a Conservative conversion if it   
   > is done in strict accordance with the Orthodox Laws.  I know this very   
   > well because I spent over half a year trying to find a Conservative   
   > Rabbi who could perform a conversion that the Orthodox community would   
   > consider "Halacal" (legitimate/in keeping with Orthodox Law).  Pick's   
   > Rabbi was Reform -- and not just Reform, but way out in left field   
   > Reform.  No Orthodox or Conservative Jew would even consider it a   
   > legitimate form of Judaism.   
   >   
   >   
   >> The Jews gave Jesus the stink eye as well.   
   >   
   > Jesus was a Jew and his followers were all Jews.  So it is wrong to say   
   > that the Jews did not support him.  A large group of Jews believed him   
   > to be the Messiah.  These Jews became "Christians" after his death.   
   >   
   > The Jews who did not believe him to be the Messiah considered him either   
   > a prophet or a poser -- depending on their point of view.   
   >   
   > His teachings (at least as presented a century or more after his death)   
   > conflicted with the Laws of the Torah (the Old Testament), and so were   
   > never accepted by Orthodox, Conservative or Reform Jews.   
   >   
   > Nobody gave him the stink eye.  The Romans crucified him because he   
   > refused to accept Caesar as a god, and was suspected of inciting the   
   > Jews to rebel against Roman rule.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> His self-conversion would not have been accepted by anyone outside of   
   >>> the Sun Myung Moon, Jim Jones, Charles Manson set.   
   >>   
   >> Again, Scheimmer said it looks legitimate.   
   >   
   > And, again, I'm sure that the letter itself was a real letter from the   
   > "Rabbi" in question.   
   >   
   > It just would not have been accepted as a legitimate form of conversion   
   > by 99.9% of the Jewish people.   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>>>>>>> I attempted to engage Pickering in several conversations regarding his   
   >>>>>>>> posts, but he either ignored them, or spat back some angry, and   
   >>>>>>>> impolite, remarks.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> You two were in the middle of a flame war, what did you expect?   
   >   
   > Wrong.  This was before the flame war.  My initial posts to Pickles were   
   > friendly attempts to draw him into a conversation.   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>>>>>> Similarly anyone who engages in deep scholarship on a subject cannot be   
   >>>>>>> expected to appreciate having a total ignoramus on the subject trying   
   to   
   >>>>>>> explain it to him. So while I don't condone his impoliteness, I can   
   >>>>>>> fully understand it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You nailed it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There is a world of difference between scholarship, and monomaniacal   
   >>>>> obsession.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Since you're not stranger to obsession I suppose you're speaking from   
   >>>> personal experience, Pendragon.   
   >>>   
   >>> Even I've never carried my pet obsessions even 1/4 so far.   
   >>   
   >> That would be for a qualified observer to decide.   
   >   
   > No.  One would simply have to site an example that was as extreme as   
   > Pick's.   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>>>>>>> Since I didn't relish the idea of getting into a   
   >>>>>>>> flamewar with another nutjob   
   >>   
   >> You and Senetto seemed to think it wouldn't take much to run Stephan   
   >> Pickering off, though, so you went for it.   
   >   
   > I didn't expect him to leave.  I just enjoyed making him dance.  (I have   
   > sadistic tendencies.)   
   >   
   >   
   >> (he reminded me of the 50s group's nutter,   
   >>>>>>>> "PhillyGuy"),   
   >> I'm not familiar with him.   
   >   
   > He was a 45-year old virgin from Philadelphia.  I only had to hint that   
   > he was gay and he would fly off the deep end, calling me a Nazi, Satan,   
   > and every other evil name or adjective he could think of.   
   >   
   > When I copied his "PhillyGuy" address (by changing the lowercase ells   
   > for ones) he freaked out, accused me of stealing his identity, and   
   > literally killed off his PhillyGuy identity.  He then went through a   
   > series of Usernames which I proceeded to provoke him into killing off.   
   > I had a lot of fun with PhillyGuy.   
   >   
   >   
   >> I do know that everyone on the 1950s music newsgroup seems to hate you.   
   >>   
   >> Why is that, Pendragon/Scarlotti?   
   >   
   > The 50s group for the most part hates 50s pop, and champions 50s R&B.   
   > When I first joined the group, someone anonymously asked "Who is the   
   > Father of Rock and Roll?  Bill Haley or Elvis?  This thread got tons of   
   > responses, all championing R&B artists from the late 40s through the   
   > early 50 (before the term "rock and roll" had even been coined).  I said   
   > that Pat Boone had a rock hit six months before Elvis (which is true),   
   > but that if we were talking about the "father" (that is, the immediate   
   > predecessor) of rock and I, I'd have to say that it was Johnnie Ray.   
   >   
   > Well the shit hit the fan en masse.   
   >   
   > The regulars called me all sorts of names, including "racist" (which did   
   > not sit well with me).  I called them a few choice names in return, and   
   > the war was on!   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> I took to ignoring his posts.  Since he only posted once   
   >>>>>>>> or twice a week, ignoring him required little to no effort.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Is this why you left the 1950s newsgroup?   
   >>>   
   >>> I left it because I had gotten all I could from it.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> And all the regulars there hate you.   
   >   
   > Not all of them.  But the majority did.   
   >   
   > I'd been at war with them for 10 years.  It's to be expected.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> I had learned more than enough historical information to write my music   
   >>> book, and wanted to get started on it.   
   >>   
   >> Bruce and Diane still go ballistic at the mention of your name.   
   >   
   > I don't doubt it.  Diane moreso than Bruce.   
   >   
   >> What really happened on the 1950s music newsgroup?   
   >   
   > As noted above, one of my very first posts offended them to the core.   
   > It was all downhill from there.   
   >   
   > Johnnie Ray is considered to be the father of rock and roll by many   
   > music historians (including Jonny Whiteside, who wrote a bio of Ray   
   > called "Cry"), and musicians like Tony Bennett.  They could have simply   
   > accepted that as one of the many possible responses to the anonymous   
   > question, but they had to start accusing me of being a racist because,   
   > God forbid that anyone nominate a white man as the father of Rock n'   
   > Roll!   
   >   
   >>> Usenet groups are a huge time-suck.  Just look at the number of posts   
   >>> we're wasting our time on here.  This is why I'll be leaving again soon.   
   >>   
   >> Good riddance, of course.   
   >>   
   >>>>>>> You handled that well, IMO. "Skip and ignore" the posts and posters   
   >>>>>>> you don't like; as long as they stay out of your face, everyone wins.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Definitely a good policy.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Unfortunately, skip and ignore doesn't work   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It works if you stick with it   
   >>>   
   >>> No,   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Yes it does.   
   >>   
   >>> it doesn't.   
   >>   
   >> I don't agree.   
   >>   
   >>> I skipped and ignored this > group entirely for   
   >>> over a year, and came back to find it as cluttered with your   
   >>   
   >> Oh, I'll be posting here for as long as I'm able.   
   >   
   > No shit, Sherlock.  That's why it doesn't work.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> If you don't like that then perhaps you're better off moving along.   
   >>   
   >>>>>>>> At some point Jim and Pickering got into a flamewar regarding   
   Ginsberg.   
   >>   
   >> Yes, Senetto almost seems to have a grudge against Allen Ginsberg.   
   >>   
   >> Jealousy?   
   >   
   > Just a healthy dislike of pedophiles.   
   >   
   >>>>>>>> don't recall who started it.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Senetto at that point was attacking everything Pickering was posting.   
   >>>   
   >>> And Pickles was attacking everything Jim posted.   
   >>   
   >> Yes it was an all out flame war by that point.   
   >>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)