Jump to content
The Education Forum

WARNING to Forum Members: Please Read This!


Jim Hargrove
 Share

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

He may have earned respect for his debate skills, but his website, as attested here, is a stab in the back to everyone that did not appreciate his self-promotion and pernicious proclivities.

I have merely copied the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS I have put on the table here over to my own site (for the reasons stated). The arguments that I have archived at my site are NO DIFFERENT than they are here. For some reason, the CTers here seem to think otherwise. But they're wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 436
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

15 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

I have merely copied the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS I have put on the table here over to my own site (for the reasons stated). The arguments that I have archived at my site are NO DIFFERENT than they are here. For some reason, the CTers here seem to think otherwise. But they're wrong.

You made a choice. You chose your trophy wall over being welcome.

You said “too bad” to those who don’t want to be mounted on your wall.

I can’t imagine making that decision. However I like to think that I am incorruptible.

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

You made a choice. You chose your trophy wall over being welcome.

You must be joking with that "being welcome" stuff. That's a real laugh.

You think the majority of CTers here have put out the welcome mat for me (or any LNer) at any time in the past, eh? Such as this "welcome" I got from Mr. Kamp earlier this year....

"Go home Von Pein. You have no right to be in here sharing your dross." -- Bart Kamp; February 9, 2019
 

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

I am very sorry that this has happened. I am of an earlier "generation" of LN researchers and I got away from Internet debating about the time you were getting in. Back in the day I debated more frequently-I even remember debating Cliff back then (yes he was singing the same tune) and Gary Aguilar, Lisa Pease and others. Now I am more of an "interjector" I guess you could say-I just speak up if I see something blatant in my particular areas of interest. I find that debating on Internet forums takes a great deal of time and I am more jealous of that time as I get older. 

Your debates over the years have been memorable and you have shown amazing debating skill and a depth of knowledge that is only rivaled by McAdams and a few others. Unlike many who use the cozy confines of certain forums to promote various theories that really go nowhere, you have co-authored a fine book (and few here can say that). Of course, I know you will still be around the Internet and your outstanding website will endure as one of the great resources and will continue to be praised by both sides. Best wishes and thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is so ridiculous for him to say that if he was a CTer we would not be doing this.

Because no one does what he does, period.  If I am wrong, please show me how.

This is how bizarre this guy is.  He goes through the trouble of generally not reviewing books or films but actually transposing dialogues that he loses into a form where he appears to win.  And with me, its over 130 chapters.

Who the heck does that? Just him  as far as I know.  Who else is that solipsistically obsessed?

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

David,

I am very sorry that this has happened. I am of an earlier "generation" of LN researchers and I got away from Internet debating about the time you were getting in. Back in the day I debated more frequently-I even remember debating Cliff back then (yes he was singing the same tune) and Gary Aguilar, Lisa Pease and others. Now I am more of an "interjector" I guess you could say-I just speak up if I see something blatant in my particular areas of interest. I find that debating on Internet forums takes a great deal of time and I am more jealous of that time as I get older. 

Your debates over the years have been memorable and you have shown amazing debating skill and a depth of knowledge that is only rivaled by McAdams and a few others. Unlike many who use the cozy confines of certain forums to promote various theories that really go nowhere, you have co-authored a fine book (and few here can say that). Of course, I know you will still be around the Internet and your outstanding website will endure as one of the great resources and will continue to be praised by both sides. Best wishes and thanks. 

Thank you very much, Tracy. I appreciate those words of support.

I have no desire to leave this forum at all, and I do not consider myself to be a "thief" in the slightest way. In fact, I had never even considered the notion that the act of copying to my website the already-published words of various posts that are freely available on the Internet would be frowned upon so vigorously by anyone. I just never gave that idea a single solitary thought. I truly didn't think it was any kind of a "problem" at all (and I really still don't, particularly since I have never once intentionally misquoted anyone on any of the pages on my website).

I guess I was being too naive, huh?

But, as I said before, you can bet your last greenback that none of this turmoil would exist in the first place if I had the words "Conspiracy Believer" printed next to my name. I don't think there's even a shred of a doubt about that fact. This is all about "CTers" lashing out against an "LNer" --- and everybody here knows it.

 

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I agree. I wish our resident LN attorney Lance would weigh in with a legal opinion on this mess.

Or David could stop being defensive and try to find a compromise with Jim and others.  People resolve differences all the time.  I for one want a true debate here calling out fake research or theories.  Having said that, Jim and others are concerned with their work appearing on his website.  I do not understand why that is so difficult to comprehend.  It is a simple matter of all sides talking and reaching a compromise 

Edited by Cory Santos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cory Santos said:

Or David could stop being defensive and try to find a compromise between Jim and others.  People resolve differences all the time.  I for one want a true debate here calling out fake research or theories.  Having said that, Jim and others are concerned with their work appearing on his website.  I do not understand why that is so difficult to comprehend.  It is a simple matter of all sides talking amd reaching a compromise 

I suspect the problem Cory is that solution would result in essentially a "gutting" of much of his website content. I believe it is more important for David to preserve that content than it is his place on this site-but that is just a supposition on my part. As he points out, forums come and go and his site might be the only place to read those debates at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

As he points out, forums come and go and his site might be the only place to read those debates at some point.

Exactly.

Repeating what I said earlier in this thread (on page 3, in Feb. 2016)....

---quote on---

"The stuff I save on my site is mainly (as I said in my 2014 post above) for the purpose of archiving MY OWN words and MY OWN Kennedy arguments. And what better place to archive one's own material than at their own site (or blog)?

Why on Earth would people want to use up hundreds of hours of their time to write up posts for an Internet forum, only to run the high risk that those posts will vanish into nothingness in just a short time? One year? Two years? Who knows? All Lancer Forum posts are now gone forever, except for perhaps a few that are recoverable via the Wayback Machine at Archive.org.

IMO, it's just dumb to take that risk. So, I archive my own material at my site. And if "my material" is in the form of a REPLY to a conspiracy theorist on a JFK forum, then (of course) it makes sense to bring the CTer's words that I'm replying to along for the ride too.

And since I'm an "LNer", I naturally am going to think I have outlasted or defeated the CTer I'm battling. Just as you, Jimmy, undoubtedly think YOU have won every single war you've ever waged online. Right? (Have you ever admitted that you've been "defeated" by a lowly LNer like me? Of course you haven't.)"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I suspect the problem Cory is that solution would result in essentially a "gutting" of much of his website content. I believe it is more important for David to preserve that content than it is his place on this site-but that is just a supposition on my part. As he points out, forums come and go and his site might be the only place to read those debates at some point.

So there are ways to accomplish that.  The problem is he is not TALKING to Jim or anyone.  When I put my two cents in, lol, he suggested I was wrong.  Feel free to google my experience.  So, why bother trying to help?  It is to bad because some conspiracy research which is garbage will not be called out.  I think if a conspiracy person did this it really would not make a difference.  The issues I see from these posts are does Jim care about his work appearing on someones website? If so, is the work edited or unfairly presented?  Simple issues.  

Edited by Cory Santos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that this forum has some fantastic content and writing, some of it from brilliant minds. I think an anbsulutley successful website could be made from selecting portions of it. I think it would be completely legal and not imoral to do so (I’m no lawyer). I also fear that the contents of this site could be lost. But,  I would not even think of doing what you do simply because other people would not like me for having done it.  I KNOW that I would be marginalized by the community and I would EXPECT to be unwelcome, or banned.

I don’t understand why you don’t get it, David. I actually think you are feigning your astonishment. I have to think that you have wondered, for years, how stupid we must be to put up with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...