Paul Trejo Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 (edited) David von Pein is a flawed genius. What gives David von Pein his impetus is the superfluity of idiotic posts in the JFK CT world. Since there is no theoretical limit to how dumb JFK CTers can be, it seems that DVP will have enough fuel for a lifetime. HOWEVER -- the fact remains (IMHO) that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy. So, DVP operates within a blunder. Nevertheless, as long as DVP is motivated by nonsense in the JFK CT community, he will remain motivated a long, long time. The CIA-did-it CT is riddled with errors. The Mafia-did-it CT has more. The LBJ-did-it CT has even more. There is no end to the nonsense. The Dallas Radical Right did it, people. Until you come around to this fact of history (according to Harry Dean, Jeff Caufield and me) then you will always have DVP to show up your nonsense. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited August 7, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Thanks for this thread @Jim Hargrove . I was considering starting one exactly like it. If DVP is allowed to continue this practice, as apparently he is, I think this thread should be a sticky to warn others. I know I would have thought twice about joining this forum and ever posting here had I known I would be unwittingly creating content for an entirely different website without my knowledge or permission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 (edited) I agree. From my understanding, EF has a copyright for the stuff posted here. Would they not have to extend copyright for reprinting at DVP's? And if they did that, would they not have to ask the posters' permission? I do not think fair use would cover it. Fair use only involves using short snippets from a book, a play or film. DVP uses huge quantities of material from this site to transplant to his own site. In fact, I would argue that is the main reason he is here. I might have an attorney look at this for me. Edited August 23, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: DVP uses huge quantities of material from this site to transplant to his own site. In fact, I would argue that is the main reason he is here. You don't have to argue that point, Jim. I've already argued it for you.... "I'm not staying and posting here merely because I want my previous posts to remain available here at this site (I archive almost all of my EF discussions at my own website anyway)....but I'd like to stay here because I want to continue to add future discussions to my website archives too. I've been able to add several interesting new Education Forum discussions to my site in just the last two months. And I wouldn't have been able to do it without the participation of this forum's members (both CTers and LNers alike). So, in short, I like this forum. I disagree with nearly everything that's uttered by the "CTers" in this place. (And I'm sure that comes as no big shock to you.) But, just the same, I like being able to post here and share my views." -- DVP; February 25, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Also.... Repeating this key point I made early in this thread.... "I like to archive my writings in a place where I know they'll be safe. Plus, I don't like the idea of taking hours (sometimes) to write an article or an Internet post and then having it virtually vanish from sight overnight (as almost all Internet forum posts do). That is to say, they get buried under a sea of other things in a very short period of time. And who is going to take the time to dig deep into the bowels of a forum's archives for 5-year-old posts or 10-year-old discussions? I sure don't. What a huge waste of time and energy it would be to continually post in such a fashion, particularly in an Internet world where forums can come and go about as fast as a start-up airline. Take Bob Harris' now-defunct forum, for example, with all of those posts now gone into the dustbin of cyberspace. (And I thought Bob had a pretty good forum, too. Too bad all that work was wiped out when he decided it wasn't worth the effort.) Ergo, I archive my material on my own site, where I have many articles indexed on the main page for easy access." -- DVP; September 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 No need to delude yourself any longer. Not many care what you yack about in the first place any way 😁😝😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said: No need to delude yourself any longer. Not many care what you yack about in the first place any way 😁😝😂 Exactly. So, given the fact that I am nothing but a useless and lowly "LNer" in their eyes, I'm wondering why any of the CTers here give a damn what I do at my own website? Oh, wait.....I know the answer to that one. I answered it myself in this very thread three years ago. And nobody here can possibly deny I'm speaking the truth here.... "Jim Hargrove started this ridiculous thread merely because of my status as a Lone Nutter -- and for NO other possible reason. To prove I'm right, just ask yourself this question ---- Do you think Hargrove would have even considered (for even a brief instant) starting up a thread like this one if it was Jim DiEugenio or John Armstrong or Mark Lane or Greg Parker or Jon Tidd who had copied posts written by other people to their websites? (And, of course, DiEugenio and Parker HAVE done just that--many times--in the past. What person who owns a "JFK" website HASN'T?) I rest my case." -- DVP; February 20, 2016 Edited August 23, 2019 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted August 23, 2019 Author Share Posted August 23, 2019 (edited) Quote No, Mr. Von Pein, I started this thread because you posted three links to the imaginary conversations on your website in your post #105 on my "John Armstrong blasts the mail order rifle 'evidence'" thread. I followed those links that you posted, read a bit of your material... and was appalled! The links to your website I put at the top of this thread are the very same links you first posted in the John Armstrong rifle evidence thread. And that's why I started this thread. --Jim Hargrove February 21, 2016 Quote DONALD DUCK SAID: Man, this David Von Pein guy really quacks me up! MICKEY MOUSE SAID: These DVP imaginary conversations are really ducked up! Quote Mr. Von Pein is a man with a GREAT imagination! He takes all kinds of things many of us post here, shuffles them up into whatever order appeals to him, and then reassembles them into imaginary conversations on his website, always, I'm guessing, proving whatever point he wishes to make about how great the Warren Commission was. -- Jim Hargrove, Feb. 20, 2016 A perfect example of how Mr. Von Pein's imaginary conversations promote his own viewpoint and distort the truth was offered in this very thread by Sandy Larsen on 2/24/2016. To read Sandy's post, CLICK HERE. Edited August 23, 2019 by Jim Hargrove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 39 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said: A perfect example of how Mr. Von Pein's imaginary conversations promote his own viewpoint and distort the truth was offered in this very thread by Sandy Larsen on 2/24/2016. To read Sandy's post, CLICK HERE. And to read my rebuttal to Sandy's post, go here.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22690-warning-to-forum-members-please-read-this/page/8/?tab=comments#comment-326501 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 The only appropriate response to Von Pein is derision, ridicule, fact-shaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) There are two issues here. The legal one about copyright, and the ethical one about distortion and giving oneself the last word in an argument you already lost. The idea that I was the only one taken aback by this is simply false. Lee Farley was outraged by it. To transpose an original Q and A argument and then misrepresent that argument to an innocent bystander , well, kind of unethical. But to do it to the extent DVP does it is, well, unprecedented. I wonder if there is a legal remedy to this? Edited August 24, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: There are two issues here. The legal one about copyright, and the ethical one about distortion and giving oneself the last word in an argument you already lost. The idea that I was the only one taken aback by this is simply false. (With DVP that provikes a Lee Farley was outraged by it. To transpose an original Q and A argument and then misrepresent that argument to an innocent bystander , well, kind of unethical. But to do it to the extent DVP does it is, well, unprecedented. I wonder if there is a legal remedy to this? It definitely is unethical to take a debate and move it into a non debate format, in the way that DVD does this. What makes it more unethical is that this forum is a not-for-profit space. DVP moves these truncated debates into a for-profit format. Edited August 24, 2019 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 45 minutes ago, Michael Clark said: DVP moves these truncated debates into a for-profit format. Incorrect. There's not a single ad on my "JFK Archives" site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: It definitely is unethical to take a debate and move it into a non debate format, in the way that [DVP] does this. As I explained earlier, it's merely an attempt to archive MY OWN POSTS AND COMMENTS at my OWN site. What is so "unethical" about that? And since forums like this one are seemingly always on the verge of collapse, the best way to make sure my thousands of EF posts are not lost forever when this JFK forum eventually does collapse and fold up (which it probably will because James Gordon isn't going to pay the bills any longer) is to copy my posts (and the associated comments by other posters which make MY posts coherent) to my own site, which is a blog site that does not require financial aid to maintain. And I shall stress this important point yet again as well --- I always provide a direct link (if it's available) to the complete forum discussion(s) at the bottom of every one of the pages on my site. So the complete and unedited discussion is always easily accessible on my webpages. Edited August 24, 2019 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now