John Bevilaqua's Misstatements

[Don Jeffries]

I was alerted today to the fact that John Bevilaqua had posted some derogatory things about me on the Deep Politics Forum. After reading them, I just wanted to say that whatever little credibility he has is gone. This guy just completely made up things about me, which says a lot about the assassination theories he's constantly pushing in his posts.

John B. stated that "Mr. Jeffries is a rather well known author of science fiction books for the elementary and junior high school age groups." Although I'm flattered he thinks I'm "well known," I've only had one novel published thus far (hope to have a second one published soon), and they are for adults (and older teens), not "elementary and junior high school age groups." He also declared that my posts on this forum are "almost always intermingled with strong doses of science fiction, his favorite genre." Huh? What is he talking about here? Nothing grounded in reality, that's for sure.

Finally, John makes up a real whopper. According to him, "And his co-moderators all reviewed this posting in its entirely and decided, by a majority vote, that it should be published due to its relevance, appropriateness and its accuracy. His was the only dissenting vote. Mr. Jeffries has since returned to his specialty, science fiction, and has decided to defer for the moment, at least, further postings on JFK forums which blend fact and fiction in almost equal doses."

I would submit that someone who would invent such lies about another forum member is not fit to be a member here.

[Evan Burton]

According to him, "And his co-moderators all reviewed this posting in its entirely and decided, by a majority vote, that it should be published due to its relevance, appropriateness and its accuracy. His was the only dissenting vote..."

I disagree. IF John B was under moderation at the time (of which I am unsure), the post was approved because it did not break any Forum rules... not because accuracy, etc. We moderators do not judge on the rightness or wrongness of a post; for a member under moderation we simply ensure it does not break Forum rules.

I can say for certain there was no "vote" taken regards John B's post; most times a mod will approve a post on their own initiative if it does not violate any Forum rules.... and was Don even a mod in Jan 2009?

[Bernice Moore]

Good for you Don for taking him to task...but consider where it comes from...as you mention

''which says a lot about the assassination theories he's constantly pushing in his posts. ''you must have disagreed with him in the past i am thinking i have also and felt his wrathful ruffles...i paid no attention to him ignorig his type is the worse possible hurt you can hand them...and i have not and will not discuss anything since nor in the future with him,....this all should be imo a give and take and anyone who must have it all one sided and must get mean in doing so... is not worth the effort just some thoughts..thank you for your many good posts in the past and looking forward to more in the future...best .....ps and now from Evan's post you have learnt even more..distortions...b..

Edited February 26, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Evan Burton]

I should ask other mods to chime in, and say if they "voted" approval of the post.

[John Simkin]

According to him, "And his co-moderators all reviewed this posting in its entirely and decided, by a majority vote, that it should be published due to its relevance, appropriateness and its accuracy. His was the only dissenting vote..."

I disagree. IF John B was under moderation at the time (of which I am unsure), the post was approved because it did not break any Forum rules... not because accuracy, etc. We moderators do not judge on the rightness or wrongness of a post; for a member under moderation we simply ensure it does not break Forum rules.

I can say for certain there was no "vote" taken regards John B's post; most times a mod will approve a post on their own initiative if it does not violate any Forum rules.... and was Don even a mod in Jan 2009?

Moderators only vote on whether members should be placed on moderation. It would take too much time to debate whether individual posts should be allowed through.

[Guest]

had posted some derogatory things about me on the Deep Politics Forum.

Rudeness and 'making things up' are enshrined in the DPF mission statement as I understand it