len where did your new voting thread go ?

[Bernice Moore]

it contained this quote from your post, i included in my reply to you..re peter's posts..''.Andy seems to have done this without even offering an explanation to John after the fact let alone having consulted him beforehand.''

b..

Edited March 21, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Len Colby]

One of the powers that be seems to have made it disappear.They must have been logged on as invisible.

[Len Colby]

Perhaps the Winston Smither of the thread can explain why exactly it was unacceptable. I now have free space in my PM box

[Bernice Moore]

One of the powers that be seems to have made it disappear.They must have been logged on as invisible.

I was in the process of voting and got an error returned that files were missing.

Feels like I'm stuck in the middle of a chapter of 'Nineteen-Eighty-Four' at the minute...

Lee exactly, first you see it then you don't i didn't think my eyes were quite that bad,seems they are not...

len ''One of the powers that be seems to have made it disappear.They must have been logged on as invisible.''imo that's a shame,that was not right. there's that invisible wand again...b

Edited March 21, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Guest Gary Loughran]

I made the topic invisible, and posted a message to other mods and admins. If they feel it should be made visible then so be it.

I cannot believe any good will come of this type topic being repeatedly posted under various guises, especially not one based on Len's fake concerns. I will not be convinced that Len has Peter's, a man he detests, best wishes at heart. I believe this is purely an attempt at agitation.

However, I suppose, if the consensus is for more soap opera, under whatever flag of convenience, then so be it. Be warned no good will come of it!

We are trying to get Peter's posts back, as I'm sure you read on my post on the DPF.

[Mark Knight]

I made the topic invisible, and posted a message to other mods and admins. If they feel it should be made visible then so be it.

I cannot believe any good will come of this type topic being repeatedly posted under various guises, especially not one based on Len's fake concerns. I will not be convinced that Len has Peter's, a man he detests, best wishes at heart. I believe this is purely an attempt at agitation.

However, I suppose, if the consensus is for more soap opera, under whatever flag of convenience, then so be it. Be warned no good will come of it!

We are trying to get Peter's posts back, as I'm sure you read on my post on the DPF.

Since it is against forum policy to question the motives of other posters, I will avoid doing so...but Gary, you expressed the issue quite well.

The other issue that comes to mind is that apparently some here have the idea that this forum is a democracy; it is decidedly NOT. I would characterize it as a benign dictatorship, and I wish to suggest that is a GOOD thing, 99% of the time.

And I appreciate all efforts to get Peter's posts back, as they create some historical perspective on the forum.

[Len Colby]

I made the topic invisible, and posted a message to other mods and admins. If they feel it should be made visible then so be it.

I cannot believe any good will come of this type topic being repeatedly posted under various guises, especially not one based on Len's fake concerns. I will not be convinced that Len has Peter's, a man he detests, best wishes at heart. I believe this is purely an attempt at agitation.

Your ‘thinking’ exemplified above is so simplistic that I assume your obvious biases overtook your better judgment. It’s true for good reason I detest Peter and to a lesser extent pity him as an obviously anguished individual. But one doesn’t have to like someone to defend their rights. I hate ‘hate groups’ like the Klan and Nazis but believe they have the same free speech rights as everyone else, in fact I was proud to have met David Goldberger, the Jewish lawyer who defended the right of neo-Nazis to march through a town with many Holocaust survivors. But my primary concern was not even for Peter, though I hope getting his posts restored will bring him some piece of mind but for the ‘historical record’ and even self interest because Andy’s ill advised move erased many of MY posts as well. As I pointed out on several occasions all the threads he started disappeared as well, as I wrote on March 14:

“Still unanswered is why ALL of Peter's posts here have been deleted. This was done in such away that all the threads he started, along with all the posts by other members on them have been rabbit holed as well. This is an [un]justifiable erasure of a significant part of the forum's history.”

I hoped and urged that the new thread would not end up becoming a revival of the acrimony seen on the other. Since in this case my position was the same as that of Peter and his allies I saw no reason for it to have done so, Bernice who is obviously a friend of his and who in the past (IIRC) has been hostile to me seems not to have interpreted it the same way you did. The one point that seemed to unite Peter’s champions and critics was calling for his posts and threads to be restored. What I expected was that the vote would be unanimously or at least overwhelmingly in favor and this would put pressure on Andy, who has yet to explain this move (even to John apparently), to do the right thing.

We are trying to get Peter's posts back, as I'm sure you read on my post on the DPF.

Amazing that such an important announcement was not made by an administrator, and not even made by a moderator here, or even well explained by an EF moderator in a post on the DPF. Yes I read that, which like the above was reminiscent of the so vague as to be meaningless attempted reassurances issued by customer service reps worldwide (which no one believes), “We are doing everything we can to solve your problem” You wrote:

“Mistakes have been made, certainly, in the deletion of your record, to which end everyone is trying to right. There is no easy solution to that problem however the will is there to right that.”

I can only see three possible scenarios:

1. Restoring Peter’s posts and threads depends only on Andy deciding to do so.

2. They have been permanently deleted and there is no way to restore them

3. Restoring them is possible but complicated technically.

Your vague comments here and there hint at the latter but based on Don and John’s comments the former seems more likely. On March 14 John wrote, “I assume that Andy Walker will eventually explain why he did this.” And on March 18 over at the DPF Don wrote “It may be possible for him to get his old posts back, and some of us are encouraging that to happen. Hopefully it will.” Am I correct in assuming their comments reflect reality more accurately than yours?

If the situation is still as Don expressed (and I assume most members here presumed) and someone needs to be ‘encouraged’ to do so, and if as you claim you are trying to get his posts back you should have welcomed rather than censored and censured by efforts.

As for you posts concerning Peter over at the DPF I read each of them and considered them laudable. You rightfully pointed out to him he violated the rules he was supposed to enforce. Unfortunately in your post above you were guilty of the same thing. From Rule (iv) “Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned…The word “xxxx” is banned from use on the forum.” The latter has been interpreted as forbidding accusing members of being dishonest. Yet you violated both (as Mark recognized) when you wrote:

"I cannot believe any good will come of this type topic being repeatedly posted under various guises, especially not one based on Len's fake concerns. I will not be convinced that Len has Peter's, a man he detests, best wishes at heart. I believe this is purely an attempt at agitation."

Mark wrote:

Since it is against forum policy to question the motives of other posters, I will avoid doing so...but Gary, you expressed the issue quite well.

Mark did you actually see the thread?

[Guest Tom Scully]

Gary,

Can you make this thread invisible, as well, or move it out of the "JFK Assassination Debate"? It's a big forum. Why are these "protest" threads, always posted in this section of it?

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Gary,

Can you make this thread invisible, as well, or move it out of the "JFK Assassination Debate"? It's a big forum. Why are these "protest" threads, always posted in this section of it?

Because this is where the traffic goes Tom.