The coup is nearly complete...

[Jack White]

...as the forums have become worthless.

[Evan Burton]

No, anyone can post... as long as they abide by the rules. Both you and Jim can still post. Duane can post under moderation. Steven Gaal can post.

I think your trouble is you dislike anyone pointing out your mistakes. For instance, as soon as John Dolva disagreed with your assessments, you became belligerent towards him. It's quite typical behaviour from you.

Now more people are pointing out your glaring errors, and so you - again as usual - throw accusations at other people as an excuse for you to not face your critics or admit your errors.

[Len Colby]

Exactly there are a few threads without replies from you guys for several days. The coup is that you don't have any good answers, it must be your lack of "Jewish conections".

[David G. Healy]

No, anyone can post... as long as they abide by the rules. Both you and Jim can still post. Duane can post under moderation. Steven Gaal can post.

I think your trouble is you dislike anyone pointing out your mistakes. For instance, as soon as John Dolva disagreed with your assessments, you became belligerent towards him. It's quite typical behaviour from you.

Now more people are pointing out your glaring errors, and so you - again as usual - throw accusations at other people as an excuse for you to not face your critics or admit your errors.

translation: Lone Nuts and trolls spend too much time chasing after Jack White's JFK/NASA/9-11 photo research, after 20 years they're getting tired, give them a break....

Keep'em busy Jack!

[Greg Burnham]

Sheesh Evan--that's a bit harsh...to put it mildly. I would expect a much more neutral attitude from you (as a moderator) than you display. Don't misunderstand, I know you are entitled to your opinion and have a right to express it. But, as a moderator it seems inappropriate to me that you would insert your opinion in any type of authoritarian manner. As a moderator one might best avoid confrontations with those with whom one disagrees--after all, by virtue of your position ALONE and NOT necessarily by THE MERITS OF YOUR ARGUMENTS--you will always "win" such encounters. It just seems such a hollow and meaningless victory...a pity.

No, anyone can post... as long as they abide by the rules. Both you and Jim can still post. Duane can post under moderation. Steven Gaal can post.

I think your trouble is you dislike anyone pointing out your mistakes. For instance, as soon as John Dolva disagreed with your assessments, you became belligerent towards him. It's quite typical behaviour from you.

Now more people are pointing out your glaring errors, and so you - again as usual - throw accusations at other people as an excuse for you to not face your critics or admit your errors.

[Evan Burton]

Greg - it's my opinion. There are no "authoritarian" demands, etc.

I don't automatically "win" arguments because I am a mod; I hope that I convince others that I am right by virtue of my arguments and evidence.

Furthermore, just because I am a mod does not mean I cannot have an opinion; it does not mean I cannot argue my belief with as much passion as any other member.

I point out traits which Jack has displayed, and there are numerous examples of this throughout the Forum. I am happy to present that evidence to back up my opinion, and that is how I hope to "win" arguments: with facts and reasoned arguments.

[Greg Burnham]

Greg - it's my opinion. There are no "authoritarian" demands, etc.

Not authoritarian demands--just "authoritarianisms" in general. But, that's just "my opinion" too.

I don't automatically "win" arguments because I am a mod; I hope that I convince others that I am right by virtue of my arguments and evidence.

Not so far.

Furthermore, just because I am a mod does not mean I cannot have an opinion; it does not mean I cannot argue my belief with as much passion as any other member.

See my opening comment in which I acknowledged the obvious...

I point out traits which Jack has displayed, and there are numerous examples of this throughout the Forum.

That is your opinion, and it is also a possible violation of forum rules! Why not stick to the arguments, the evidence, and the assertions--and avoid resorting to expressions of vitriolic bloviations that are tantamount to ad hominem fallacious babbling? There are "numerous examples" of this throughout the forum, as well, IMHO.

I am happy to present that evidence to back up my opinion, and that is how I hope to "win" arguments: with facts and reasoned arguments.

Sorry, but you sound just like Craig Lamson who claims similar intents but rarely, if ever, delivers. That is just my opinion...no offense intended.

[Evan Burton]

I am happy to present that evidence to back up my opinion, and that is how I hope to "win" arguments: with facts and reasoned arguments.

Sorry, but you sound just like Craig Lamson who claims similar intents but rarely, if ever, delivers. That is just my opinion...no offense intended.

I am still happy to present that evidence - why don't call me out on it?

[Craig Lamson]

Sorry, but you sound just like Craig Lamson who claims similar intents but rarely, if ever, delivers. That is just my opinion...no offense intended.

Oh I deliver. It's just too bad the subject matter is generally way over your head.

Of course you have now made a claim that you will be required to back up wiht fact...like postes wher you can show I didn't deliver. Which begs the question...can YOU deliver?

Bring it on Greg.