Deep Politics Forum

[William Kelly]

Again Bill, you are making assumptions.

As I stated earlier in another thread, the five outcasts did not know what had been done from the "get-go".

If you are getting that from someone, then I wish you would name your source.

But if what most people believe happened, did happen, then it is illogical even on its own.

WHat do you think? MB put it to a committee vote?

I just wish all these cheap shots and smears would desist, mainly by you and Colby.

I mean, they did not like some things here. They left, they started their own forum.

These things happen.

But for people to use this as some kind of pretext to vent over that split, when they are not in real possession of all the facts, it just strikes me as personal and petty.

Hey, I just noticed the forum was down and started a thread wondering if it was hacked.

Now I'm the bad guy because others claimed it was hacked when it wasn't?

They must have known that there was more of a problem with her than with hackers.

At least they must have known more than we did.

I'm going to start a closed site soon, and I want to know what the problem are going to be keeping out those

who are not invited.

That's my interest.

In addition, my contention is that these hacking attacks are not the work of annonymous hackers, but people we know, fellow forum members or ex-members.

BK

Edited December 22, 2010 by William Kelly

[Len Colby]

LC: So Bill made a minor error, he got the big picture correct, Drago and you claimed the forum had been hacked when you knew that was not the case. If you want to be straight forward for a change, this might help recoup your lost credebility,

it is "credibility" Len.

And the only people she has lost it with is you, which really is an oxymoron. Since as I demonstrated, you have had an agenda out for those who left ever since this happened.

From my info on this, no one knew what had happened the first day. It took the founding members a while to understand what had happened. Now when they did they relayed it to certain people. (Obviously, not you.) And they wanted to keep it quiet in hopes something equitable could be worked out behind the scenes.

That apparently did not happen. And MB resurrected the site with herself in control.

Now, as Jack White noted, this could easily be called a hijacking. The difference between a hacking and a hijacking, especially at the time the forum was down, is rather minimal. Especially if you were one of the five founders on the outside looking in.

Now if you didn't understand any of the above, it was because you did not have any good sources of info, or you were spinning.

And now you want to make everything a bit worse by asking for all the inside details.

You did not demonstrate anything. Anyone who was around at the time of the schism, and that includes most of the posters and (logged on) lurkers on these threads, knows of the mutual animosity between the DPFs and me and I have it made clear in my recent posts.

But just as my bias against Dawn could distort my perception so your affinity for her alters your perception. If she at 1st thought it had been hacked by and outsider and only later found out it was really Myra she should have said that explicitly and expect she would have rather she said Myra’s actions “define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking” i.e. she was rationalizing misleading the forum. Previously in her 1st post on the subject she said “We all know exactly what did [occur] and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it.” That mirrors her statement today that “Legal constraints prevent me from detailing exactly what occurred”. Everything indicates she knew from her 1st post what was going on but for some reason decided to make misleading comments.

And I’m not the only one Bill also indicated he thought she was being deceptive, I imagine there are others.

"And now you want to make everything a bit worse by asking for all the inside details."

They are painting Myra as the villian thus they should spell out what happened. I doubt she decided to do this out of the blue.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

If Myra Bronstein HIJACKED the forum from the other founding members, I am not interested

in participating, as that would be aiding and abetting an immoral if not an illegal act...and

certainly a cowardly act contrary to the ideal of free speech. I align myself with Dawn, Charles

and others interested truth, not in selfish self-interest.

Jack

This is what it is looking like.

Thank you John for reopening this thread, and I hope that such threads are not locked again, though it would probably be wise to keep similar topics on one thread - ala this one and Gary Mack, rather than having a half dozen threads on the same subject.

As for Myra shutting down the forum she was the sole administrator of, and then reactivating it, I don't know the rational beind it.

But to say that Dawn, Charles and the others are interested in the truth, then why did they try to blame the WickiLeaks hackers when they knew for a fact it was Myra?

I don't buy the idea that these hackers can take down forums and attack web sites (like my Grand Jury and Congressonal Oversight Petitions were attacked), and this forum

was attacked and taken down, and those responsible can never be identified.

These criminals who attack web sites they disagree with or take down forums as the Ed Forum was taken town more than once, can and should be identified.

The Ed Forum was taken down more than once by the same type of attack that the WickiLeaks people used, but months before they gave the software away for free download

to anyone who wanted it. So this forum was attacked by someone or some people before the WickiLeaks software was made availabe.

I believe those who have attacked my petitions and this web site are not annonymous hackers who we'll never know, but people we already know, and are either members or

former members of the forum who can and should be identified.

Thanks again to John Simkin for maintaining this forum despite the antics of a few.

Bill Kelly

NO ONE AT DPF EVER SAID OR SUGGESTED IT WAS WIKILEAKS.

I am most disappointed in you Bill. You are spreading falsehoods and I know not why. When we are able a joint statement will be posted.

Until then please stop making false accusations. Show me WHERE anyone from DPF said it was wikileaks.

I think JIm D ASKED this question here and we could not respond for legal reasons.

I am posting this w/o consulting the other co-founders as I need to get to work.

Dawn

Thanks to Jack white and Jim DiEugenio. (If I have omitte anyone, I apologise)

So Bill made a minor error, he got the big picture correct, Drago and you claimed the forum had been hacked when you knew that was not the case. If you want to be straight forward for a change, this might help recoup your lost credebility, why don't you tell us what led to the falling out with Myra.

Wait a minute, I didn't make any minor error.

As I show in the other post, Dawn said they were proud of being a WikiLeaks mirror and wouldn't have any more comments on the hacking at EF, thus linking the two together. So I'm not the one who is making any minor errors or spreading false reports.

BK

Drago, Orlando and Dawn never indicated the hacking was Wikileaks related. I consider that a minor error

[Len Colby]

I went through this already Bill.

You still want to make the claim, like Colby, that somehow there was a giant ruse put out by Charley etc, to mask something.

If you insist on ignoring everything I wrote then fine. That is your choice.

But I would not want to linked with Colby on this board.

After all I’m the forum leper

[William Kelly]

I went through this already Bill.

You still want to make the claim, like Colby, that somehow there was a giant ruse put out by Charley etc, to mask something.

If you insist on ignoring everything I wrote then fine. That is your choice.

But I would not want to linked with Colby on this board.

I accept Dawn's most recent explanation that it was a one person coup and a hijacking of the forum.

If that's the bottom line then the other speculations are out the window, including the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob.

And I never said there was a giant ruse put out by anybody, I just questioned the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob,

which turned out not to be true.

I just don't like the idea of anyone pretending something is one way when knowing in fact it is quite another.

BK

[Ron Ecker]

I'm confused after skimming through this thread. At first I gathered that Myra had pulled off a false-flag operation, taking down the Deep Politics Forum with hackers getting blamed for it. I thought that was wonderfully ironic if true, given the subject matter of the forum. But now that is apparently not what happened? What a disappointment.

[Guest Tom Scully]

Could we discuss this topic here, instead?

http://deeppoliticsforum.com.index.htm/

I'll give the deeppoliticisforum.net crew a day to decide if they like this

alternative better as a temporary home...it has a catchy, subdomain url (disclaimer) and is already up and running as a forum. PM or email me if you want the keys to take

it over....

Bill, if you're interested, PM or email me and I will arrange to make you the admin

of the new alternative/interim forum, or whatever if the offer above expires with no

interest from the dpf.net group.

[William Kelly]

Could we discuss this topic here, instead?

http://deeppoliticsforum.com.index.htm/

I'll give the deeppoliticisforum.net crew a day to decide if they like this

alternative better as a temporary home...it has a catchy, subdomain url (disclaimer) and is already up and running as a forum. PM or email me if you want the keys to take

it over....

Bill, if you're interested, PM or email me and I will arrange to make you the admin

of the new alternative/interim forum, or whatever if the offer above expires with no

interest from the dpf.net group.

Hi Tom,

That's nice, but I'm not interested in running a forum, though I hope they keep the DPF going as I think its valuable and serves a different purpose than other forums.

Maybe PDS would be interested.

I am going to set up a closed shop, invitation only, to discuss what to put into Congressional Briefing on JFK Act and evidence to present to grand juries, but I know it will be targeted and hacked,

so I want to survey the situation and see whats the best way to go about it.

Any help appreciated.

BK

[Len Colby]

Colby is ignoring two things: when the forum went down, and the slight semantic difference between hijacking and hacking, which I tried to explain earlier.

Secondly, its not my affinity for anyone over there that colors anything I write.

Its the absence of rancor I have for them since I was not around when the divorce here took place.

DPF meltdown timeline

- Early 2008 - DPF set up with Myra as site and domain owner

- ???? - Dec 16, 2010 some sort of fight between Myra and one or all of the others starts and becomes increasingly acrimonious

- Afternoon Dec 16, 2010 – Site goes offline

- December 17, 2010 - 08:47 AM Bill starts the 1st thread, later the same day Bill, Jack and others post reports from DPF members saying it had been hacked

- December 18, 2010 – time unknown – Peter Pressland registers the .NET domain

- 7:00 AM Bill posts:

Another DPD forum co-founder and moderator says that they are gone for good, they were not hacked, and it is not about money.

Whatever it is, something is going on.

- 12:14 PM Myra updates info on the .com site registration

- 3:45 PM Dawn posts: We all know exactly what did [occur] and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it.

- 4:12 PM she posts

In fact, DPF was hacked… DPF will soon be resurrected, and will continue to expose the nefarious activities of deep political forces.

We know our friends and we know our enemies.

The founders of the Deep Politics Forum

- 4:13 PM I post:

My guess based on Bill telling us a member told him something else is going on, Dawn's cryptic post and the fact that the same message is still up is that the forum was dissolved due to a disagreement among the administrators and Drago simply lied rather than admit that. Given the immaturity and paranoia of the founders it is not hard to imagine some minor dispute leading to such an ignoble end.

- 5:01 or 6:01 PM Dawn responds to the above And there is NO "end". Sorry to ruin your fairytale. We were hacked and we will be back. Pure and simple

- 5:59 PM Dawn We will not be making any further statements on the EF about the hacking we have suffered.

==================================================

So by 7 AM the co-founder Bill was in touch with knew what had happened and almost 9 hours later Dawn said they “knew exactly what” happened but she continued to lead readers of the thread to believe the forum had been hacked by an outsider. You can play semantic tricks but she knew what the situation was and was intentionally misleading. The forum being taken down by outsiders and collapsing due to an internal fued are very different situations.

Edited December 22, 2010 by Len Colby

[Dawn Meredith]

I went through this already Bill.

You still want to make the claim, like Colby, that somehow there was a giant ruse put out by Charley etc, to mask something.

If you insist on ignoring everything I wrote then fine. That is your choice.

But I would not want to linked with Colby on this board.

I accept Dawn's most recent explanation that it was a one person coup and a hijacking of the forum.

If that's the bottom line then the other speculations are out the window, including the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob.

And I never said there was a giant ruse put out by anybody, I just questioned the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob,

which turned out not to be true.

I just don't like the idea of anyone pretending something is one way when knowing in fact it is quite another.

BK

I will post this one last time: No one pretended anything. For legal reasons we could not get into the details.

This is still the case. Why are you all having such a hard time understanding this? Myra attempted a hostile coup and we are in legal consults now. What she did was both illegal criminally and in violation of copyright law.

When we are free to speak -legally free and in other ways- a joint statement from DPF will be posted. Until then this is my final word on the matter.

Dawn

[Len Colby]

I went through this already Bill.

You still want to make the claim, like Colby, that somehow there was a giant ruse put out by Charley etc, to mask something.

If you insist on ignoring everything I wrote then fine. That is your choice.

But I would not want to linked with Colby on this board.

I accept Dawn's most recent explanation that it was a one person coup and a hijacking of the forum.

If that's the bottom line then the other speculations are out the window, including the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob.

And I never said there was a giant ruse put out by anybody, I just questioned the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob,

which turned out not to be true.

I just don't like the idea of anyone pretending something is one way when knowing in fact it is quite another.

BK

I will post this one last time: No one pretended anything. For legal reasons we could not get into the details.

This is still the case. Why are you all having such a hard time understanding this? Myra attempted a hostile coup and we are in legal consults now. What she did was both illegal criminally and in violation of copyright law.

When we are free to speak -legally free and in other ways- a joint statement from DPF will be posted. Until then this is my final word on the matter.

Dawn

So you could be misleading calling it a "pure and simple" "Hacking" but you could not say something closer to the truth like 'The Forum went ofline due to an internal dispute, for legal reasons we can not make any furthur comments at thins time'? I don't believe that was the case.

Just what sort of crimninal charges do you think she is guilty of?

Was the name Deep Politics Forum copywritten? Who holds the rights

Edited December 22, 2010 by Len Colby

[Dean Hagerman]

Just what sort of crimninal charges do you think she is guilty of?

Thats my question as well

Its a forum on the internet, you guys are going to have a real hard time trying to bring criminal charges against Myra in a court of law

Im not saying what she did was ok (I have no clue what she did or whats happening) and as a member of the DPF I would like it to survive and keep going even though I dont post that much on the DPF I still read threads on it every day

Im interested to know what Myra did

[John Simkin]

The quality of any forum is determined by its members being willing to post. It seems that Myra is currently having problems persuading members to post on the Deep Politics Forum. Therefore, I expect in time, the new forum, created by five of the original six, will provide a source of information similar to the original forum.

[Ron Ecker]

When it all gets sorted out, I hope Meryl Streep plays Myra in the movie. (Suggested title: "As Deep As It Gets.")

[Evan Burton]

The entire board seems to have been wiped of posts, with the exception of a sub-forum. There seems to be an explanation here http://www.deeppolit...cement.php?f=55

though this is one persons viewpoint.

From Myra Bronstein:

Magda and Co hacked the forum, and removed that thread with my lengthy explanation of the recent problems that was in the "So..." thread.

Here is the explanation again.

You should also be aware that Magda posts under pseudonyms, which is against the forum rules. One of her pseudonyms is Peter Tosh. I don't know them all. This is what started the recent implosion, the fact that she uses multiple aliases yet that is against forum rules, and I discovered it and confronted her.

---

Here's the full explanation of the events of the past weekend.

I think everyone here knows that our number one rule is that DPF members be treated with civility:

http://vu2027.laura....thread.php?t=58

“1. You will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, hateful, harassing, threatening,...”

However, quite a while back a moderator write a post that referred to a member as, among other things, a “xxxx” and a “poor, deranged cretin” (https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1...69fd2db2ec9205 post #18). This is an unacceptable attack whether it comes from a regular member or a staff member.

Clearly the moderator was aware of rule #1 because around the same time he posted this:

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/for...ead.php?t=2974

“John Bevilaqua and everyone else who would post here are on notice: If you wish to engage in schoolyard name-calling and bullying, go to the Education Forum -- a safe haven for enemy agents and those whose words unintentionally serve the enemy's cause. If you wish to associate yourself with the Deep Politics Forum, act with dignity, strength, honor, and commitment to cause. Or be gone.” In addition this moderator helped write the rules.

Oh hell it's obviously Charles, you can all see that at the links. Anyway, when I confronted Charles in multiple emails about the rule violation he refused to back down.

Here are three of my emails to him (and other staff members) on the rule violation:

“I see a thread wherein Charlie addresses JB with "You poor, deranged cretin." It's not ok for a moderator/co-founder to use rhetoric, such as name calling, that we don't permit members to use. It's especially bad in context when Charlie goes on to point out that he's "a co-founder of the Deep Politics Forum." It's a terrible example.

And it makes us look like hypocrites. Charlie please comply with the rules of the forum so we don't have to

moderate you. And please control your temper on the forum in the future.”

“I do*NOT*want JB banned under these circumstances because he has been conspicuiously [sic] provoked and taunted and abused. DPF has been debased by this episode Charlie, and unless it's handled well starting now and starting soon we'll look like petty hypocrites. In general, when people are banned it should not be done in anger. Anger is detrimental to a moderator.**Moderators must be fair and impassive.**If they have to count to 1000 to become impassive then they should do just that. And if they can't be impassive and fair no matter how high they count then they aren't good moderator material.”

“If someone doesn't apologize on forum to JB within 20 minutes I will post an apology. I'd prefer that co-founders look united, not fractured. But fair treatment of members is a higher priority than even that.”

Here is the Charles' email response. 'Scuse me for posting a private email to me but, again, there's simply no way to explain this without specifics:

“I have no intention of apologizing to JB. He lied about my dear friend and I did not stand for it and I shall not stand for it. I debased nothing.* How dare you say so?* How dare you threaten me with moderation?* FXXX off! <deleted by Burton>

*

I suggest that you communicate amongst yourselves regarding this notion of moderating me.* If you choose to do so, so be it.* The majority rules.* And it would be a unanimous decision. For if you choose to do so please be advised that I shall resign my "ownership" position in DPF and that I shall have nothing to do with this site ever again.**But not before I*demand the privilege of stating this fact and my reasons publicly on your pages.

Myra, don't you dare apologize in my name or you will regret it.

TIME OUT -- I just read Myra's apology and I responded to it.

TIME IN -- Decide among yourselves, and don't bother me again until you've reached that decision.”

Here is the apology that I posted to the member Charles insulted:

“John Bevilaqua,*

I apologize for the rhetoric directed at you in this thread. DPF staff members are expected to observe the same rules as members. Name calling and verbal abuse is not acceptable. As I said recently in another thread, such abuse is inconsistent with our principles at DPF.* At least I hope it is...”

In response to my apology Charles attacked me on the forum:

“This apology is not offered in my name. I apologize for nothing! And I commend you, Myra, for spreading 'em for the "man" who charged me -- your partner and alleged friend -- with using "Gestapo Tactics and McCarthyism Tactics." You are all about fairness, aren't you?”

“There you have it, Myra. You opened the sewer, and quess what spilled out? I'm just all a'twitter waiting for your next apology to this ... haircut. There. I've just given you something to apologize for. You made the choice. You get "Bevilaqua."”

In addition Charles attacked me repeatedly in email, both addressed to me and addressed to others who attempted to reason with him, for example:

“As for the Myra business: You too have been on the receiving end of her vitriol, her menopausal musings. *It all was to be tolerated just as long as the insanity was kept in-hous. When, motivated by what I must conclude was personal animus, she publicly apologized for a co-founder -- and I'm still waiting to learn if she got a majority OK to do so -- she left the reservation and opened herself to the spanking that she's needed -- and even begged for -- for so very long.”

“When Myra posted the apology she betrayed me and, by extension, the rest of us.* It was a knife in the back, and if I harbored even just a tiny bit of the paranoia that JB evinces in each of his sentences, I'd suspect that I was set up.”

*

“All should know -- beginning with her -- that I no longer trust Myra and will consider her to be harboring debilitating personal animus toward me.”

And on and on.

On the upside all other staff members supported me 100% in my attempt to make the rules apply to moderators as well as members. Here is a message from one moderator in the aftermath of Drago's “don't you dare apologize in my name or you will regret it” mail:

“Myra is, of course, quite right. *

We cannot have one rule for founders/moderators and another for members. *Abusing one's position is the sort of thing we all saw on the EF and left because of it. *And then set up our rules here to ensure it didn't happen with us. *Well, it has. *Charlie went looking for a fight, got it as he hoped, and is now crying foul. *It doesn't wash. And now he refuses to be moderated and says he intends to resign if he is. *But the fact is that he has to either voluntarily edit his post and remove all the acrimonious parts of it or be moderated by the rest of us. *He has dug in, is angry as hell and wants a fight. *

It's a very bad day for DPF. *And I have to say that I feel that Charlie has treated us all with considerable disrespect by putting us all in this position in the first place.

I think we now need now to set up a clear procedure for moderating moderators and founders. *Beginning now with Charlie but with the knowledge that we all can be, and will be, and should be, *sanctioned if we ever lose control as Charlie has done. *None of us can be above the rules we all agreed upon and set. *And which Charlie wrote.” *

From another moderator:

“Of course DPF mods/founders/staff must abide by the same rules as members....my judgement is that Charles*did*breach the undertaking that abuse of members will not be tolerated.* And many of our members, such as...do regard this as a dimension which distinguishes us from such as the Swamp.”

In spite of the rule violations and personal attacks we attempted to keep Charles on staff yet persuade him to follow the rules, and we drafted a clarified rule and email, signed by everyone--unanimous--and sent it to Charles, excerpts follow:

“A MESSAGE FROM THE FOUNDERS OF THE DEEP POLITICS FORUM

*

We have decided to*make explicit certain additional rules of engagement and behaviour on DPF.

*

Firstly,*all members, including DPF moderators and founders,*should receive*identical treatment from the DPF moderators, and abide by the agreed*rules of engagement.**

*

Secondly, our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and destroyed if appropriate, without*name calling or member abuse.* It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and*evidence are provided.* It is acceptable to*state that a particular argument*serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and*evidence are provided.*However,*since DPF is primarily*intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed*and debated,*it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance,*an agent provocateur.

…

If you agree to these core philosophies for DPF, the two contained in the draft post below which will be placed online at DPF, and the third one which will not be publicly stated but which will be an explicit agreement between us as founders, then we would ask one further thing.* This is that you edit your description of Bevilaqua*as a "xxxx" and a "deranged cretin" as it is not consistent with the new rules of engagement for DPF.”

In response Charles absolutely refused to either follow the rules or edit his objectionable post:

“So I will not edit out my description of JB as a "xxxx;" to do so would be to retreat from the truth.” He then went on to attack me some more.

At that point I offered to step down from my leadership position on the forum since Charles was drawing a line in the sand. The mods declined my offer (“Myra -*the attack on you by Charles was*unacceptable and I think a parting of the ways is now inevitable.”)

We asked Charles to step down, which he did. We allowed him to remain a member. And so that he could save face, we kept the demotion private so that, even though this happened on February 6—almost a year ago--it was never apparent that Charles was no longer on staff.

The clarified rule that Drago refused to agree to (“All members, including DPF moderators and founders, should receive identical treatment from the DPF moderators, and abide by the agreed rules of engagement.) was posted (http://vu2027.laura....thread.php?t=58) to prevent another such episode.

Charles has continued to take digs at me and attack me in email. It has never completely stopped. Yet I have put up with his harassment and hostility and allowed him to remain a member. ('Scuse the editorial aside; I'm trying not to editorialize. But his hostility campaign sucked/sucks and it was/is traumatic.)

That's the back story. Ever since then DPF staff has been trying to insure that everybody, members and staff, follow the rules.

Ok so I went out of town for a week on business. Exhausting stressful trip. Told DPF staff in advance that I'd be gone and unavailable.

Got back from the trip and looked at the forum a few hours later and saw a post by Peter Tosh that made me very nervous (http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/for...ead.php?t=5168 ). Since I didn't know anything about Peter Tosh I was concerned that he was posting something possibly litigious.

So I locked the thread and posted a notice that it was locked “pending discussion by DPF staff members on the appropriateness of posting presumably real contact info for presumably real people.”

Then I emailed the staff:

“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."”

I quickly received an explanation from Jan:

“I think*Peter*Tosh*is one of Magda's pseudonyms.”

Wow.

I didn't know that any Mods were using pseudonyms.

I was horrified because, again, it's against the rules:

“7. You agree to register on this forum with your*real name*as User Name, i.e., your first name and family name. If you feel you must use a pseudonym please discuss this with the admin prior to registration.

13. All members, including DPF moderators and founders, should receive*identical treatment*from the DPF moderators, and abide by the agreed rules of engagement.”

After discussing it via email for a few minutes it turned out that Dawn and I were unaware that Magda was using a pseudonym(s). That is, two out of four staff members didn't know. So I was pissed and ranted in email that I felt betrayed bla bla bla. Jan and Magda both explained that the alias had been in use for a long time so it was too late to complain and was common knowledge etc. I disagreed and ranted like a bixxx <removed by Burton> for a while. Then I realized (same day) that this was not an intentional act of subterfuge and I was overreacting like crazy so I apologized to everyone:

“I also apologize to you and and Magda and Dawn for being so combative and difficult in this thread. *

I don't think I have a good sense of perspective today.”

And I didn't have good perspective because I was so exhausted from the trip I'd returned from a few hours earlier.

Jan refused to accept my apology (“I'm still waiting for your apology.”) and then proclaimed ominously:

“I think today has been a carcrash [sic], and DPF will need to move forward in a new fashion.”

This was on December 5.

On December 15 Jan announced that he wanted “to allow*Charles*back into the fold, as a core member of DPF.”

I pointed out that this was the other shoe dropping after the “DPF will need to move forward in a new fashion” declaration, and a clear act of spite against me, and an act that would be totally destructive to DPF given that Drago refuses to follow forum rules, was abusive of members, and extremely abusive towards me. And I voted “no way no how” to the proposition. Everyone else promptly voted yes.

Even though Drago could never come back without my approval, I felt—and feel—that the mere suggestion of allowing him to moderate a forum he can't behave in was, as I told all the Mods:

“A transparent way of getting revenge and of accumulating opposition votes against me... in spite of the fact that Chas has treated me like sXXt <removed by Burton> and never shown the slightest remorse. *CD has refused to follow DPF rules and never shown any intention of doing so. *He is an egotist with no integrity or judgement, which makes him a deal breaker in terms of me working with him, and I think that was real clear in my NO way NO how vote. *

This was a blatant power play on [Jan's] part and a political move that shows he will bring a human wrecking ball into the fold just to spite me. *Enthusiastically bringing my enemy back without the slightest concern for me, and for the chaos he already caused in DPF, is...back stabbing.”

I pointed out that everyone went along with the power play and told them I was pulling rank and pulling the plug on DPF.

Editorial aside: I have never before pulled rank. Even though I own the forum--the domain, the software, the web hosting, the works--I insured that all decisions were made democratically by vote. But this was the final straw and a clear sign that, as Drago was told earlier “a parting of the ways is now inevitable.”

That's when I turned the forum off. After thinking about it some more and realizing I could never again trust the Mods I got dejected and dropped the database and directory structure. Then after thinking about it some more I thought that even though I wasn't willing to work with the former Mods they may decide to open a different forum. And if they do decide to do that they should have access to all of their DPF posts. So I restored the forum and sent the following email to one (now ex) Mod:

“Now that DPF is back, if you and the other former mods decide to start a*forum*or merely want access to your posts, I'll help if needed. Though you should be able to access your posts on your own since you're still members.”

That was Sunday. The difference between Thursday and Sunday was my realization that the ex-Mods should have access to their posts to copy if desired, as well as the fact that I became confident I can run the forum on my own (IF members will report offensive posts). What hasn't changed since Thursday is my determination to only work alone on such projects from now on forever-after so this kinda shXX <deleted by Burton> won't happen again.

So that's the explanation. Warts and all.

<snip of duplicate text>

Clearly they don't appreciate my whistle-blowing because they hacked into the forum an deleted this explanation, along with the entire “So...” thread. So that's what happened.

So... I'm posting it again, this time as an Announcement in the hopes that more people see it before their next hack attack. Let's see how long it's allowed to remain this time.

Myra Bronstein, DPF Admin

Edited December 22, 2010 by Evan Burton