Myra Bronstein
-
Posts
1,883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Myra Bronstein
-
-
You also have my email to you, whichh states basically the same thing. I have sent this to my atty. as well, an expert in patent/copyright law.
Things that are said in confidence are expected to remain that way. I refer you to the "ps" in my email to you, of which no one is aware but the people to whom it pertains. I removed it from those to whom I resent the email; I expect the same from you John.
Thank you, and nice to see the forum back up.
Dawn
Was this an attempt of blackmail on your part? I have no idea what you and Andy communicated by email.
Blackmail?????? Not at all, it was a totally sincere email. That what was said to me via email in confidence remained so, and it was not just about a former member. I thought you were cc'd on the emails but I may be misremembering. At any rate I have not ever discussed it. All I meant was exactly what I said: that private mail should remain so. Period.
Dawn
Blackmail quite often is "totally sincere", threatening to take to sue someone can be considered blackmail. More hypocracy from the DPFers they are proud mirror Wikileaks which makes all sorts of confidential documents public but threaten legal action when their internal e-mails are posted here.
Was it ever indicated the e-mails were confidential?
No Len.
No confidentiality/proprietary/etc designations in general.
No stated DPF policy of privileged communications.
Just normal ol' email.
I'd have to look back at each and every mail sent over the span of 2.5 years (thousands probably) to be sure there wasn't the occasional exception, but I certainly don't remember such designations.
-
But Dawn, you quote a private email here in a 12/24 post:
http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5656-Recent-Events
How does that fit in with your philosophy that "private mail should remain so. Period."?
They should redub themselves the Deeply Hypocritical Forum. Three of its moderators have objected to Myra posting the contents of their private e-mail but as Myra points out they did the very same thing. Drago is especially double faced because he stated explicitly that “The recipient of correspondence -- electronic or otherwise -- is within his or her rights to share it.” Lest I be accused of quoting him out of context se a more complete version with a link to the original below
4Should PMs Be Made Public? Whose call? Writer or Recipient?Charles Drago
Posted 16 November 2007 - 04:06 PM
I think this is a simple call.
The recipient of correspondence -- electronic or otherwise -- is within his or her rights to share it.
The writer of correspondence should send his or her message with this fact clearly in mind.
A simple request for confidentiality by a writer to a correspondent is not a sufficient basis for the expectation of confidentiality. Only a written agreement to such a term by the correspondent in advance of receipt of the material in question should suffice.
[…]
Thought it might be a good idea to make a screen capture of this latest unearthed gem.
-
But Dawn, you quote a private email here in a 12/24 post:
http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5656-Recent-Events
How does that fit in with your philosophy that "private mail should remain so. Period."?
They should redub themselves the Deeply Hypocritical Forum. Three of its moderators have objected to Myra posting the contents of their private e-mail but as Myra points out they did the very same thing. Drago is especially double faced because he stated explicitly that “The recipient of correspondence -- electronic or otherwise -- is within his or her rights to share it.” Lest I be accused of quoting him out of context se a more complete version with a link to the original below
4Should PMs Be Made Public? Whose call? Writer or Recipient?Charles Drago
Posted 16 November 2007 - 04:06 PM
I think this is a simple call.
The recipient of correspondence -- electronic or otherwise -- is within his or her rights to share it.
The writer of correspondence should send his or her message with this fact clearly in mind.
A simple request for confidentiality by a writer to a correspondent is not a sufficient basis for the expectation of confidentiality. Only a written agreement to such a term by the correspondent in advance of receipt of the material in question should suffice.
[…]
Thank you Len. I totally missed that because I rarely read Drago's posts.
I think I can offer some perspective on the larger issue of threatening to sue for posting of private emails while posting private emails from a glass house.
In addition to having two sets of rules and standards, one set for themselves and one set for everyone else, I think they feel safe throwing stones from their new safe haven in Iceland. (Magda said as much when she first suggested moving DPF to a server in Iceland, but I'll save those email quotes for my own website.)
On 6/29/10 Magda emailed me and (I'm paraphrasing) said she was thinking of hosting DPF in Iceland because they just changed the law to make it a media haven. She specifically mentioned (I'm paraphrasing
) that there will be no libel and total freedom of expression and transparency. No censorship.She sold it to me by pointing out that (paraphrasing again) many places now including Australia and US under free trade laws boycotts are becoming illegal. Same for union action. That's why hosting in Iceland would be good she says, to avoid all that.
Given the high-minded objectives that were presented I was intrigued and researched the law Magda referred to, the Iceland Modern Media Initiative (IMMI). Then I endorsed it and DPF staff voted unanimously (as was required for a significant change) to move the website to Iceland.
I completed the transfer of DPF to Iceland on 8/19/10. And soon after that Magda was using her freedom of expression, and secret 'Peter Tosh' alias, to post harassment/hit lists of alleged Nazis on DPF with full names, phone numbers, email addresses, and street addresses -- but with no proof of her allegations. Guess freedom of expression is more important than transparency to her.
So I'll provide the transparency. They're throwing stones from their safe haven in Iceland, at EF which presumably is not hosted in Iceland, and at me.
However, because I learned so much from this recent experience, and from Magda's visionary strategizing, I opted to host one of my new websites - http://deeppoliticsforum.info – in Iceland as well.
Now I can fight fire with fire. Or ice with ice. Or in the case of Icelandic volcanoes both.
It should be interesting seeing how IMMI holds up.
-
You also have my email to you, whichh states basically the same thing. I have sent this to my atty. as well, an expert in patent/copyright law.
Things that are said in confidence are expected to remain that way. I refer you to the "ps" in my email to you, of which no one is aware but the people to whom it pertains. I removed it from those to whom I resent the email; I expect the same from you John.
Thank you, and nice to see the forum back up.
Dawn
Was this an attempt of blackmail on your part? I have no idea what you and Andy communicated by email.
Blackmail?????? Not at all, it was a totally sincere email. That what was said to me via email in confidence remained so, and it was not just about a former member. I thought you were cc'd on the emails but I may be misremembering. At any rate I have not ever discussed it. All I meant was exactly what I said: that private mail should remain so. Period.
Dawn
But Dawn, you quote a private email here in a 12/24 post:
http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5656-Recent-Events
How does that fit in with your philosophy that "private mail should remain so. Period."?
Dawn,
Why is it that you fail to see wrongdoing when the latest crop of DPF staff members--including you--does something?
In your stated view "private mail should remain so. Period."
Yet you were the first person to publish a private email, from me to you et al, on DPF.
Once you did that I assumed you folks would have no problem with me doing the same thing.
Why is it acceptable when you post private email in a public forum but unacceptable when I subsequently post private email in a public forum?
Why is it acceptable when Magda breaks official DPF rules and uses at least one pseudonym for 2.5 years on DPF without the knowledge of 2/3 of her colleagues?
Yet the overwhelming majority of DPF applicants were denied permission (by Magda and all of us) to use a pseudonym?
Why is it acceptable when Magda defies vote results to un-ban Evan and Len and Andy from DPF, and lies to her colleagues, including you, about that fact?
Why is it acceptable for Magda to promote the disgraced and fired Drago from member status to Moderator status before the vote was even concluded?
Why is it acceptable for your crew to pull the plug on DPF.com after I restored it, while preparing DPF.net in parallel, then frame me for it?
Why is it acceptable when Drago breaks official DPF rules and calls members names on the forum?
Yet when a DPF member engages in name calling you object?
Just wondering.
Myra
-
John,
I'll be happy to remove any post that you conclude puts you in an uncomfortable position.
My recent posts are just a subset of the larger body of evidence anyway, and that is being assembled at My link [deeppoliticsforum.info].
Notice they don't dispute the legitimacy of the emails however. In fact they indirectly confirm that the emails are 100% authentic.
And they had absolutely no moral qualms when their admin Magda Hassan posted--under a pseudonym unknown to 2/3 of her colleagues--hundreds of names and addresses, phone numbers, email address, etc. of presumably real people labeled as "Fascists" and "Nazis."
Just let me know which posts to remove and I'll do so.
Then Drago can threaten me instead.
I'm accustomed to that because he's been doing it for years.
Myra
It seems to me that they are deeply embarrassed by what they have said to you in the past. I doubt very much if they have any legal case against the Forum but it will probably be a good idea to delete the emails.
John,
I edited my posts and replaced all quotes from others to me in email with the following:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
I did leave context.
And I did leave email I sent to others.
And I left quotes from public forums, cached or live.
If you receive additional letters from "Anyone, Esq." and/or you feel I need to do further editing please let me know.
Thank you,
Myra
-
You also have my email to you, whichh states basically the same thing. I have sent this to my atty. as well, an expert in patent/copyright law.
Things that are said in confidence are expected to remain that way. I refer you to the "ps" in my email to you, of which no one is aware but the people to whom it pertains. I removed it from those to whom I resent the email; I expect the same from you John.
Thank you, and nice to see the forum back up.
Dawn
Was this an attempt of blackmail on your part? I have no idea what you and Andy communicated by email.
Blackmail?????? Not at all, it was a totally sincere email. That what was said to me via email in confidence remained so, and it was not just about a former member. I thought you were cc'd on the emails but I may be misremembering. At any rate I have not ever discussed it. All I meant was exactly what I said: that private mail should remain so. Period.
Dawn
But Dawn, you quote a private email here in a 12/24 post:
http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5656-Recent-Events
How does that fit in with your philosophy that "private mail should remain so. Period."?
-
John,
I'll be happy to remove any post that you conclude puts you in an uncomfortable position.
My recent posts are just a subset of the larger body of evidence anyway, and that is being assembled at My link [deeppoliticsforum.info].
Notice they don't dispute the legitimacy of the emails however. In fact they indirectly confirm that the emails are 100% authentic.
And they had absolutely no moral qualms when their admin Magda Hassan posted--under a pseudonym unknown to 2/3 of her colleagues--hundreds of names and addresses, phone numbers, email address, etc. of presumably real people labeled as "Fascists" and "Nazis."
Just let me know which posts to remove and I'll do so.
Then Drago can threaten me instead.
I'm accustomed to that because he's been doing it for years.
Myra
It seems to me that they are deeply embarrassed by what they have said to you in the past. I doubt very much if they have any legal case against the Forum but it will probably be a good idea to delete the emails.
John,
I'll edit my posts to remove quotes from email and refer readers instead to http://deeppoliticsforum.info where the same material remains, with much more coming.
Then they'll have no middleman to demonize, just me.
Thanks,
Myra
-
I have had these two emails from Jan Klimkowski and Charles R. Drago. Do members think we should delete these postings?
To John Simkin
Myra Bronstein has published details of private and confidential emails at the Education Forum.
This is to inform you that the Education Forum does not have permission to publish details of my private email correpondence, and I hereby request you to remove all such emails, and alleged excerpts of emails, immediately.
Jan Klimkowski
Dear Mr. Simkin,
Please cease and desist from publishing my private-emails. You are doing so without my permission on the Spartacus site, of which you are a co-owner.
Be advised that, should the practice continue, I shall seek all remedies available to me under international and other relevant statutes.
Further, you do not have my permission to publish copyrighted material owned by me. Again, should you do so, I shall seek legal remedies.
Sincerely,
Charles R. Drago
cc:
Dennis J. McCarten, Esq.
John,
I'll be happy to remove any post that you conclude puts you in an uncomfortable position.
My recent posts are just a subset of the larger body of evidence anyway, and that is being assembled at My link [deeppoliticsforum.info].
Notice they don't dispute the legitimacy of the emails however. In fact they indirectly confirm that the emails are 100% authentic.
And they had absolutely no moral qualms when their admin Magda Hassan posted--under a pseudonym unknown to 2/3 of her colleagues--hundreds of names and addresses, phone numbers, email address, etc. of presumably real people labeled as "Fascists" and "Nazis."
Just let me know which posts to remove and I'll do so.
Then Drago can threaten me instead.
I'm accustomed to that because he's been doing it for years.
Myra
-
Thought you might find this interesting Evan. I discovered it while sifting thru my email to refresh my memory on the February problems “DPF Classic” had getting Drago to follow rules.
DPF founders/staff were discussing whether or not anyone should be preventing from registering and/or banned from DPF early on.
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
Magda ignored the votes, just as she ignored the rules about use of pseudonyms, on a technicality.
The other staff members (including me at first) didn't know to specifically ask about banning IP vs banning email address so
she just kept banning whoever she wanted in spite of the vote to un-ban, while assuring all that “the IP is not banned.”
Turned out that's her style, as I saw subsequently.
-
I see Drago is at it again:
I'm assembling the complete record of Drago's antics that got him fired from DPF staff at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
It will also have a factual account of the DPF Coup.
It's a work in progress.
-
I see Drago is at it again:
I'm quoting it here so there will be a record after DPF scrubs it:
"Originally Posted by Robert Morrow
Charles Dragoo,
When I first started posting at Deep Politics, you accused me of being Robert D. Morrow, author of First Hand Knowledge.
I thought that was *interesting* because of the fact that Robert D. Morrow DIED in the late 1990's ... and I, Robert P. Morrow, was in my mother's womb in November, 1963. Do you watch a lot of "Crossing Over" with John Edward?: http://www.johnedward.net/
So, who is an "agent of disinformation:" you or Phil Nelson? Maybe you ought to post something interesting and informative instead of running around throwing popcorn at people.
Because, I have not seen it.
Sincerely,
Robert Morrow
"Mother's womb"???
There goes my spore theory.
What you cannot see is commonly referred to as reality.
Go away, little man. Go back to Facebook and your soft porn proclivities.
And leave the adults to our work.
Charles Drago
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum"
-
...
"I think Peter Tosh is one of Magda's pseudonyms."
Here is the form letter DPF Admin Magda Hassan wrote on October 10 for people who applied for membership on DPF and asked for permission to use a pseudonym.
On December 4 I learned that Magda had been posting on DPF under pseudonyms including 'Peter Tosh' for years.
[Emphasis mine.]
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
-
So all the mods were using a single fake name to make posts under?
No matter how you try to defend doing that its still wrong
If the post you want to make is to dangerous to make under your own name then dont make it at all
I post under my real name on every forum, and if I post something intense then I have to take the heat for it
I would never hide behind a fake user name
Dean, to clarify, all DPF staff posted under, what they said were, their real names. I certainly posted 100% under my real name and have never used an alias at EF or at DPF.
In addition to posting under their real names at least one staff member--Magda Hassan--posted under pseudonyms according to Jan Klimkowski.
I learned this fact on December 4 when I noticed a post on DPF listing supposedly REAL NAMES and ADDRESSES of neo-nazis. It was posted by a "Peter Tosh." I was concerned about the potential libel issues of listing supposed neo-nazis on DPF, so I locked the post and added a note that I wanted to discuss it with the other mods.
I emailed Jan, Magda, Dawn (the only other mods at the time) with the following:
"WTF is this? "Know your fascists" posted by Peter Tosh--URGENT
Myra Bronstein to Magda, Jan, Dawn
Dec 4
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5168
Is this "fascist list" acceptable on DPF?
It has names and addresses of (presumably) real people.
And the author--"Peter Tosh"--has long been suspect 'cause of his "name."
Then I sent a second email to Magda, Jan, Dawn under the same "WTF..." subject line:
"I locked the thread until we have a chance to discuss it, and posted a short vague message, both under "The Moderators" login. Hope that's ok. Nothing will actually be done/irreversible until we discuss and vote.
I think the thread should remain, the posts should be edited to remove the names, and Peter Tosh should be warned and maybe banned."
After a few minutes Jan sent the following email:
"I think Peter Tosh is one of Magda's pseudonyms."
...As such it might have violated some countries’ privacy laws and of course as you suspected probably opened the forum up to libel claims if any of the hundreds of people listed were not (or claimed not to be) neo-Nazis. One also has to consider the legal ramifications of posting material obtained by hacking. I also wonder what the purpose was of posting this info, the only one I can think of is to encourage harassment of people on the list.
The list Magda posted with full names and addresses of supposed Nazis is much like the lists posted online by anti-abortion groups.
Those lists had names and addresses of doctors who did abortions.
The purpose of posting the abortion provider lists is clear. And many people got the clear message.
Doctors were shot to death in their homes and staff members were killed in the bombing of clinics.
Even if the purpose of posting the Nazi list on DPF was not to put those named in the cross hairs, what gives someone like Magda the right to post such a list?
And what evidence did she provide that those named are really Nazis?
None.
She gave no proof.
What if you are on that list and labeling of you as a Nazi are false?
What impact will that have on your life?
What will your neighbors think and do?
What will your employer do?
What gives someone like Magda the right to post a Nazi hit list with names and addresses of people, without the knowledge of her colleagues, and under a pseudonym?
On December 4, after I sent my “WTF is this?” email to the other Mods, Magda admitted doing it:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
Yet Ms. Out And Proud hid behind a pseudonym.
How much more hypocritical can someone get?
This is not a rhetorical question. I'll answer it.
DPF used to use web hosts in the US.
June 29, Magda and I were talking about a domain name I bought and she sent me an email saying:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
Because of Magda's suggestion and reasoning that Iceland would afford protection for discussion about boycotts and union actions I researched the subject, decided it was a good idea, DPF staff voted on moving the forum to Iceland, the vote was unanimous (as required) that we do so, and we did so.
August 20 I completed the move of DPF from US servers to servers in Iceland.
And it didn't take long after that for Magda to post her Nazi hit list.
When she proposed the idea of moving DPF to Iceland for “total freedom of expression and transparency,” posting hit lists of people was not among the reasons she listed. If she had given any hint that posting hit lists was an objective of hers I would never have agreed to it.
Her posting of the "Know your fascists" list under an assumed name unknown to half her colleagues was a shameful thing to do.
Not that Jan or Dawn seemed to mind.
-
The posts I read happened in Feb. of this year -- and the fallout is now? I don't understand. Evan or someone, can you explain this to me?
I wonder what will happen to Myra now.
Everyone makes a mistake sometimes. Something like this could serve as an example to everyone. But reinstate Myra on some level. She was your colleague. Don't all turn against her. Is this life and death? Kennedy has already been shot and killed. Why such infighting?
Kathy C
Kathleen,
While I realize your motives are kind please don't speak for me or negotiate for me.
As I said earlier in this thread:
"To be very clear, I'm ok with being locked out.
I will not partner with The Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight on DPF or any other endeavor.
I will not be a member of a forum that is run like DPF.
And, whenever possible, I will not associate with people who demonstrate so little integrity."
I chose my associates based on their principles.
That makes me incompatible with the current DPF staff members who compromise their principles for their associates.
-
Look, I'm not involved here...but since the DPF'ers are filling up the EF with their complaints against one another, it has become a matter that has an effect on me.
Looks to me like the kids in the sandbox couldn't get along, so Myra took her bucket and shovel and left. Then Myra came back and took the sandbox. After which the other kids started up another sandbox. The kids in the other sandbox can't stop flinging sand at Myra, and Myra can't stop flinging sand back.
Who's right? Who's wrong? Why should I care...other than, by flinging sand at one another, the entire sandbox crew is beginning to get sand in MY eyes. I suggest that, since you each have your own sandbox now, you trash each other THERE and leave the EF out of it.
Just my opinion...your mileage may vary, objects in mirror may be closer than they appear, void where prohibited, and alcohol may intensify any side effects.
Actually no other sandbox exists but there's certainly no reason why you should care Mark. I agree.
If EF Admins and Mods tell me to stop posting on this subject I'll stop.
Until then I'll respond to questions from anyone and to allegations from DPF staff.
ONE sandbox is www.deppoliticsforum.com ...the other sandbox is www.deeppoliticsforum.net . So there ARE indeed TWO sandboxes now.
Oh, gotcha.
I was just thinking outside the box.
-
Look, I'm not involved here...but since the DPF'ers are filling up the EF with their complaints against one another, it has become a matter that has an effect on me.
Looks to me like the kids in the sandbox couldn't get along, so Myra took her bucket and shovel and left. Then Myra came back and took the sandbox. After which the other kids started up another sandbox. The kids in the other sandbox can't stop flinging sand at Myra, and Myra can't stop flinging sand back.
Who's right? Who's wrong? Why should I care...other than, by flinging sand at one another, the entire sandbox crew is beginning to get sand in MY eyes. I suggest that, since you each have your own sandbox now, you trash each other THERE and leave the EF out of it.
Just my opinion...your mileage may vary, objects in mirror may be closer than they appear, void where prohibited, and alcohol may intensify any side effects.
Actually no other sandbox exists but there's certainly no reason why you should care Mark. I agree.
If EF Admins and Mods tell me to stop posting on this subject I'll stop.
Until then I'll respond to questions from anyone and to allegations from DPF staff.
-
Myra,
...but it is still unclear if you knew about Magda’s pseudonym if that e-mail you replied to of course proves nothing because Jan who forwarded it said later he ‘thought’ (i.e. he wasn’t sure) it was her and Dawn who also received it said she had no idea. Based on my experience with them I'll give you benefit of the doubt.
Len
Here is cherry-picked evidence that I locked the forum (eventually unlocked by me) after discovering the 'Peter Tosh' "Know your fascists" post on DPF that gave real names and addresses of presumably real people.
This is an an email to the forum contact from a DPF member.
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
I immediately forwarded the email to Jan/Magda/Dawn:
Myra >
> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Myra Bronstein... wrote:
> Input from [Firsname], FYI.
> We need to discuss this thread asap.
>
> Myra
> [input from member was attached.]
-
Myra,
...but it is still unclear if you knew about Magda’s pseudonym if that e-mail you replied to of course proves nothing because Jan who forwarded it said later he ‘thought’ (i.e. he wasn’t sure) it was her and Dawn who also received it said she had no idea. Based on my experience with them I'll give you benefit of the doubt.
Len
I just cherry-picked another email thread from December 4 to flesh this out further.
To put it in context, as I said here http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17126&st=75, post #87:
"In addition to posting under their real names at least one staff member--Magda Hassan--posted under pseudonyms according to Jan Klimkowski.
I learned this fact on December 4 when I noticed a post on DPF listing supposedly REAL NAMES and ADDRESSES of neo-nazis. It was posted by a "Peter Tosh."
I was concerned about the potential libel issues of listing supposed neo-nazis on DPF, so I locked the post and added a note that I wanted to discuss it with the other mods and emailed Jan, Magda, Dawn with the following:
DECEMBER 4--
Myra> "WTF is this? "Know your fascists" posted by Peter Tosh--URGENT
Jan> "I think Peter Tosh is one of Magda's pseudonyms."
Now here's the email exchange I just found, that occurred after Jan's disclosure that Peter Tosh is one of Magda's pseudonyms:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
Myra>
> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Myra Bronstein... wrote:
> Wait a minute, you have a pseudonym that you're using on the forum and I didn't know about it?!
> Is it really necessary to tell you that pseudonyms are not allowed? Plus the fact that you have misled a fellow staff member.
> And what do you mean "Be out and proud like us"? YOU are hiding behind a pseudonym!
>
> I object to this and I feel that it violates both the rules of the forum as well as my trust. [Emphasis in original.]
> I think you should either put the posts under your real name or remove them... Maggie.
> If you don't do that then I will remove them and ban the Peter Tosh pseudonym that is breaking the most basic forum rules.
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
To summarize:
-This is the fourth time on December 5 that Dawn said in email that she didn't know about Magda's 'Peter Tosh' pseudonym.
-I didn't know about Magda's 'Peter Tosh' pseudonym either.
-The hypocrisy of the "Out and Proud" crowd bothered me then and bothers me now.
-Apparently Magda, Jan, Dawn see no irony in boasting that fascists should "Be out and proud like us" while hiding behind a pseudonym.
-Use of pseudonyms on the DPF forum was against the rules.
-DPF staff were expected to follow the same rules as DPF members (and this was explicitly stated in rule #13, aka 'The Drago Rule").
-All emails I'm posting are authentic, else I would be attacked over it by the "Out and Proud" crowd.
-
From what you said it could easily be deduced that to ban someone you needed unanimity. But for other decisions you did not.
Are you really saying that for every administrative decision you needed six votes?
By eliminating Drago's friendship with George and JB's comments about it, you deprive the reader of why CD got so angry in the first place and tried to provoke JB. ANd by leaving out what JB said specifically, you deprive the reader of any idea of why he should be banned.
I mean to use one exaggerated parallel. When Truman fired MacArthur, George Marshall was on the fence about it. Truman then gave him the letters in which MacArthur made some notably negative comments about him in public and then proposed bombing CHina. Marshall read them and told Harry, "You should have fired him a year ago."
As I said, this is not the same of course. But by cutting off both factors, you reduce CD to a caricature. WHich, I am sure you know, is what some people here want to see.
Jim: It was always a majority rule. The email she posted was Madga's attempt at trying to reason with MB. Humor her if you will.
I had known about the Peter Tosh name back in 08, but had forgotten. And Myra knows this. She is cherry picking her emails. She is desperate. To say WE hacked DPF is absurd. She has admitted she pulled the plug.
I will not be responding further to her or Colby. Fitting that they are fast friends now.
Her attempt to destroy DPF only backfired. We will be better than ever and no more bitchy emails all time.
As to my freaking job, MB and Colby always resport to THAT. I have done the same thing for over twenty five years. Successfully.
Some people change jobs and towns like other's change shoes. Ya gotta wonder about that.
Dawn
We now know the rules of Rules of Engagement:
1.0--All evidence presented by Myra, even forum threads visible in Google cache, will be dismissed as “cherry picking her emails.”
1.1--Email evidence supporting the existence of the requirement for unanimity in significant DPF decisions, presented by Myra, and sent by Magda on December 16, 2010 will be dismissed as attempts to “humor her.”
1.2—Both pieces of email evidence supporting the existence of the requirement for unanimity in significant DPF decisions, sent by Magda and written by Jan, on February 16, 2010 will be ignored.
2.0--All three statements emailed by Dawn on December 4, 2010 stating she was unaware that Magda was using pseudonyms on DPF (e.g., “I didnot realize Magda was using other names”) will be explained away by Dawn as follows: “I had known about the Peter Tosh name back in 08, but had forgotten.”
3.0—Dawn (and presumably all current DPF staff members) will not provide any evidence of any kind for any reason to support their allegations.
3.1—In lieu of evidence supporting their allegations, The “Custodians” of DPF will make frequent ad hominem attacks against Myra to distract from things that matter.
3.1.1—The following are among the areas to be used in ad hominem attacks against Myra by The “Custodians” of DPF:
3.1.1.1—Myra has relocated from one city to another.
3.1.1.2—Myra is currently posting on EF.
3.1.1.3—Myra is desperate.
4.0—When Myra posts on EF it is clear evidence of her advanced state of moral decay.
5.0—When Dawn posts on EF it means that has friends here and enjoys certain posts and therefore decided to post occasionally but in no way diminishes her absolute moral superiority.
6.0—Everything that has ever happened is clear evidence of Myra's advanced state of moral decay.
6.1—Even things that have not happened provide clear evidence of Myra's advanced state of moral decay.
7.0—The “Custodians” of DPF are free to post long misleading inaccurate attacks against Myra on EF using a proxy.
7.1—The “Custodians” of DPF are free to remove long misleading inaccurate attacks against Myra from EF using a proxy, without allowing time for close inspection and/or response.
8.0—DPF reserves the right to come back and be better than ever.
8.1.1—DPF will be “better than ever” by being more homogenous than ever.
8.1.1.1—DPF will be more homogenous than ever by neutralizing any staff member who dares to insist that staff members comply with forum rules.
9.0—Dawn's gotta wonder why some people change shoes.
9.1—Dawn might have smelly feet.
10.1—DPF staff may and will violate these rules, and/or any rules, for any reason at any time, because rules don't apply to DPF staff.
10.1.2—DPF members must comply with all rules at all times because rules only apply to DPF members.
10.1.3—Any person who dares to expose violations of these rules, and/or any rules, by DPF staff will be insulted, bullied, intimidated, smeared and threatened.
-
By the way, in spite of the direction this thread has taken this is not all about Drago. In fact, as I mentioned straight away, the original coup was perpetrated by Jan, Magda, Charles, David, and Dawn. My back story focused on Drago because it was essential to understanding why the conniving of former colleagues to re-install him as a Mod was so outrageous and unacceptable. He had already demonstrated that he could not be trusted in a position of authority, that he would not respect rules all were subject to, and that his temper clouded his judgment.
So the treachery of the ol' gang was as much against DPF members as it was against me. They clearly don't care how abusive Drago is. A DPF member deserves better than a Mod who intentionally goads him into reacting, then crows that he “got him to explode,” and bans him from the forum.
Restoring him to Moderator status behind my back was an act of spite for daring to object to Magda's breach of the real name rule. I believe it was a concerted effort to bully me out of applying rules to staff. Well I don't appreciate being bullied. I don't appreciate scare tactics like their repeated vague references to lawyers. I don't appreciate the collusion and scheming and mechanizations that went into their little caper.
And I don't appreciate their posting and removal of a pack of lies and hyperbole on EF. I can only conclude that it was orchestrated as a smear and run, to trash me yet give me nothing tangible to respond to. This from the group that is trying to claim the moral high ground.
-
From what you said it could easily be deduced that to ban someone you needed unanimity. But for other decisions you did not.
...
Correct. There was MUCH discussion about this. We concluded that for major administrative decisions (like changes in staff or banning a member) unanimity was required. Likewise, when any Mod/Admin posted under "The Moderator" login, i.e., using the 'collective voice of DPF' unanimity was required.
From what you said it could easily be deduced that to ban someone you needed unanimity. But for other decisions you did not.
Are you really saying that for every administrative decision you needed six votes?
...
No, that would be impractical and paralyzing.
That's why I, for example, felt comfortable locking the post by the "Peter Tosh" entity--a totally reversible action that I eventually did reverse--on December 4 until I had a chance to consult with my fellow Mods and assured them “Nothing will actually be done/irreversible until we discuss and vote.”
...
By eliminating Drago's friendship with George and JB's comments about it, you deprive the reader of why CD got so angry in the first place and tried to provoke JB. ANd by leaving out what JB said specifically, you deprive the reader of any idea of why he should be banned.
I mean to use one exaggerated parallel. When Truman fired MacArthur, George Marshall was on the fence about it. Truman then gave him the letters in which MacArthur made some notably negative comments about him in public and then proposed bombing CHina. Marshall read them and told Harry, "You should have fired him a year ago."
As I said, this is not the same of course. But by cutting off both factors, you reduce CD to a caricature. WHich, I am sure you know, is what some people here want to see.
Jim, I gave relevant excerpts from the JB/CD exchange. And, once I learned that the entire exchange was readable via Google cache, I edited the account and added the link to it. I am not depriving the reader of anything. Quite the opposite, I am making it easy for people to see what JB said and what CD said by adding the link. It's as easy as that. Click on the link and read all you want.
That's why your “exaggerated parallel” is not apt. Maybe if Truman gave Marshall a hyperlink to the entire conversation the letters were culled from so that all parties were quoted in context, then it might be apt.
I also can't help what “some people here want to see.” That is not my doing.
Bottom line, if Drago want's to seem like more than a caricature he can achieve that by responding instead of hiding. There are many ways he could respond even if he is banned from EF, but so far I haven't seen any attempt from him to do so. Perhaps he can post via Dawn Meredith, possibly through Jim Fetzer, maybe EF mods would even make an exception and let him post for a limited time. It's up to him to speak up if he has something to say. But, as David Guyatt noted, Drago “enjoys the victim role as much as the tyrants.”
-
Two points, in this long excerpt, CD actually says a majority vote is required. So there is the proof.
Secondly, is it not unfair to CD to eliminate from the discussion:
1.) The fact of his close friendship with the late George Evica? Just what went into that while George was alive and is now dead, and
2.) Exactly what JB's comments were about CD's dead friend.
Jim,
Are you actually saying that CD's comment in the midst of an email argument wherein he was being fired from DPF is "proof" of official DPF policy?
No, that is not proof.
But if you still consider email to be "proof" then here is email from Magda, specifically on the Drago vote in question [Emphasis mine]:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
And here is an older email from Jan and Magda (co-written), to Dawn, explaining why (since Dawn had been out of town when the hammer fell) Drago was fired [Emphasis mine]:
On edit 1/02/11, Myra:
Email quotes are being removed so that EF will not be targeted by current DPF staff members.
The full body of evidence is being assembled at http://deeppoliticsforum.info.
Regarding the unfairness of eliminating CD from the discussion, I have no control over that and am not eliminating anyone from any discussion. If he wants to post here yet is banned (which may be the case), I'm sure one of his minions will be happy to post for him.
And regarding: "Exactly what JB's comments were about CD's dead friend." I think we've established that the entire exchange can be read via Google cache (as Evan pointed out). Just search google for "Deep Politics Forum deranged cretin" and you'll have the context you asked about.
However, if you are suggesting that Drago or anyone is justified in breaking DPF rules if someone insults a friend then I disagree. That is not justification.
-
The most shocking part of Myra's explanation is the part about Drago and Bevilacqua not always seeing eye to eye. Shocking!
Myra's point is surely correct. You cannot have moderators posting abusive comments about other members on the forum. I can understand her frustration when she was outvoted, but that is the way democracy works.
That's not how the DPF democracy was supposed to work. When deciding something as substantial as a staff change (e.g., firing Drago from the moderation team or inviting David Guyatt back into the team) a unanimous vote was always required. For 2.5 years. No exception. Until Jan posed the vote to bring Drago back from purgatory. Even though I voted "no way no how" it was clear that he'd be coming back anyway.
It was the pre-coup.
They ignore rules when the rules hinder them from doing what they want: dusting off the abusive Drago, using pseudonyms, whatever.
If that was the case, you were clearly in the right.
This is <wrong> and Myra knows it It was ALWAYS a majority vote from day one. MB tried to unilaterally change the rule on 12/16. Just before she pulled the plug-her words- on DPF.
She's in good company now. I'm sure she will begin picking fights with you all over here very soon. Her nasty temper is legendary.
Dawn, why don't you offer evidence when you make such claims?
You are an attorney Dawn.
Are you truly unaware of the value of evidence?
Or do you lack evidence?
I am in the process of responding to the post by DPF's remaining members, and I am providing evidence as part of my response.
When people see evidence they can make an informed decision about the events being discussed.
It's kind of like a courtroom Dawn, with a jury.
If you have evidence that supports your allegations, by all means post it.
Also, from a logical standpoint why do you say "She's in good company now."
Presumably you are referring to the EF, and you are in the very same company since you opt to post here at the EF.
Dawn.
Mere logic MB. If we had a "must be unanimous" rule then you could have disappeared CD with your vote.
Alas, becasue it is and always has been majority rule, your only option was to "pull the plug". Thereby showing your true colors.
Goodbye forever. I have ZERO left to say to you, ever.
Dawn> "...it is and always has been majority rule..."
That's demonstrably false Counselor.
In fact Magda emailed the following to all of us, including you, after I found out that Drago was promoted to Moderator in spite of the non-unanimous vote. Apparently she didn't realize that I discovered Drago was promoted behind my back.
> "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:43 PM, magda... wrote:
> As you said this requires an unanimous vote so I don't even this this should
> be a bloody issue.
You guys need to get your stories straight.
-
Drago's comments are still available in the Google cache.
...
Thank you Evan.
Now that I have Google cache to reference I can see an even more granular timeline of events, and of course more detail.
Before I just had email to work with, and memory--which can be faulty.
This latest mysterious disappearance of the DPF forum only benefits those whose accounts vary from the facts.
So, in other words, it does not benefit me.
I'll have to poke around in the cache and see what else I can find.
) that there will be no libel and total freedom of expression and transparency. No censorship.
Deep Politics Forum
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Well that's just it. They're going to go after anyone in my orbit.
And I'm unwilling to have John in the line of fire, so I was happy to remove the email quotes (which are on, or will soon be on, my website anyway).
The tough talkin' guys can come after me and bluster instead of harassing people because of their proximity to me.