To James Gordon

[David Von Pein]

I received this Private Message from Administrator/Moderator James Gordon this morning (February 24, 2019), with James informing me that he "insists" that I offer up a "public apology" for a remark I made on Facebook on February 18, 2019 [see the image below].

And James told me that if I do not offer up this public apology within less than 48 hours, my posting rights will be revoked. Here are James' exact words:

"I insist that you give me a public apology. I insist that by the end on Monday you create a new thread within which you formally apologise to me for what you have said and done. If that is not carried out by the end of Monday I will remove your posting rights." -- James R. Gordon; February 24, 2019 [Emphasis in original message.]

Here's the remark I made at Facebook that "came as a complete shock" to James and, incredibly, left him "speechless":

And after reviewing this forum's rules, I can now see that I was, in fact, in violation of the rule entitled "Abuse of the Education Forum and/or its Members", which states....

"Any current member who casts aspersions about the Forum and/or its membership – either from within the forum or outside the forum - may lose their posting privileges or indeed be banned."

Prior to today [2/24/19], I was not aware of that rule at all. And I'm pretty sure that this forum would probably resemble a ghost town if that rule were to be applied in every single instance where a current EF member "cast aspersions" on another member of this forum while posting at some other forum. That situation probably occurs on a regular basis at other Internet locations when this forum's members make critical or harsh remarks about other EF members.

In my opinion, that particular rule should not exist at this forum (or any other forum). I can understand having such a rule in place to keep this forum's members from "casting aspersions" on their fellow members within the posts that they make at this forum. But this forum is where that rule should begin and end. Dictating what people can say at other Internet locations is wrong, in my opinion. Some people might even argue it's a violation of their "Freedom of Speech" rights. After all, I didn't use that word -- "incompetent" -- at this forum when speaking about Mr. James R. Gordon. Therefore, what business is it of Gordon's (or anyone else) what I say at other forums (i.e., at forums that are not moderated or owned by the owners of The Education Forum)?

It's a very silly (and unfair) rule, IMHO. Are the Education Forum moderators really that sensitive that they feel they have to restrict what members can say at other Internet locations? I don't think it's fair at all. Nor do I think it's a reasonable rule for people to have to follow. You might as well call it the "Walking On Eggshells No Matter Where You Are Posting On The Internet In Order To Avoid Offending Any Other EF Member" rule.

But, since it is a rule that's currently on the books at this forum, I have to admit that I was, indeed, in violation of this forum's current rules when I posted that comment about James Gordon at Facebook.com last week. (And, for the record, I removed the harsh language in that post this morning, and changed the wording to something much softer and less offensive. Maybe Bart Kamp, who seems to like to follow me around Facebook lately, can take a look to verify that I did change it today.)

So, James R. Gordon, I do hereby officially apologize for breaking that rule (and the other "Posting By Proxy" rule too---which, as you can see in my Facebook posting, is something that I said would not happen again).

I look forward to that particular "Casting Aspersions" rule being completely eliminated in the near future. I'm not sure if other forums have adopted such a rule or not. But I'm guessing that I'm not alone when I advocate for its elimination.

Because, quite frankly, I'm of the opinion that the things that I or anyone else have to say at other Internet sites that are outside the confines and authority of this forum are none of The Education Forum's business.

And I'll bet that most of the current population of The Education Forum agrees with me on that statement.

Respectfully,
David Von Pein

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by David Von Pein

[Guest]

How can I follow you when I do not have access to the groups you post in and therefor cannot see what you post.

Also I am too busy to follow you, so don't get ahead of yourself. And that is all I am going to say about this, as it is possible you inserted that remark to me to goad me.

This is all you are going to get from me.

[David Von Pein]

27 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

How can I follow you when I do not have access to the groups you post in and therefor[e] cannot see what you post[?]

That's what I was wondering two weeks ago when you posted this (which shows a post I made on a CLOSED Facebook group which I don't think you're a member of)....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25532-then-went-outside-to-watch-the-p-parade/page/5/?tab=comments#comment-394212

But as far as this other FB post that has James Gordon "shocked" and "speechless", that post was posted at my own JFK FB group, which is a "Public" group, which can be accessed and read by everybody, with no signing up or "membership" required at all to see all the posts there.

 

Quote

Also I am too busy to follow you, so don't get ahead of yourself. And that is all I am going to say about this, as it is possible you inserted that remark to me to goad me.

This is all you are going to get from me.

Promise?!

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by David Von Pein

[James R Gordon]

David,

You have complied with my instruction - and indeed an instruction it was.

I see you have not commented that I informed you that I had “discussed” with other members that they will not insult or disrespect you on this forum. Indeed I have effectively removed one member from this forum for treating you in this fashion. And you are well aware when fellow members treat you this way because you have often commented about whether the moderators will respond to the insult.

You appear to believe that this kind of disparagement is acceptable and ought not to be criticised. As you comment “In my opinion, that particular rule [ to be courteous to fellow members ] should not exist at this forum.” Well the rule does exist, and will do, so long as I am the owner of this forum. And when I am aware it has been breached I will deal with the member. If you are unable to debate and converse with fellow member in a respectful fashion then action will be taken against you.

James Gordon. 

[David Von Pein]

40 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

You appear to believe that this kind of disparagement is acceptable and ought not to be criticised. As you comment “In my opinion, that particular rule [ to be courteous to fellow members ] should not exist at this forum.” Well the rule does exist, and will do, so long as I am the owner of this forum. And when I am aware it has been breached I will deal with the member. If you are unable to debate and converse with fellow member in a respectful fashion then action will be taken against you.

James,

As I said, I can certainly understand having the "Be Courteous" rule here at THIS FORUM, and that it must apply to the posts written by EF members at THIS FORUM. That's totally understandable that such a rule would be in place at a forum like this one. All forums have such rules in place, I'm quite sure. But I was talking about your forum rule which is, essentially, telling everyone they have to play nice-nice at ALL OTHER Internet locations whenever talking about an EF forum member. That, IMO, should not be a rule at this forum---or any forum.

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

36 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:

I see you have not commented that I informed you that I had “discussed” with other members that they will not insult or disrespect you on this forum. Indeed I have effectively removed one member from this forum for treating you in this fashion.

And I appreciate that, James. Thank you.

But note your language there --- "they will not insult or disrespect you on this forum."

Don't you think that should be where YOUR responsibility begins and ends ---- "THIS forum"?

Edited February 24, 2019 by David Von Pein

[James R Gordon]

When that rule was put inplace it was in response to ROKC.

What I find curious is that you want the rule removed - and it could be because is reason of origin no longer exists.

Where I might well have agreed to remove the rule I have no intention of doing so, so you can feel free to disparage fellow members - as and how you like - when outside this forum. It is clear that what you really think of fellow members is not described on the EF but instead displayed by you when outside this form. You want the rule removed so that you have the freedom not to be constrained by such rules of this forum when visiting other forum and therefore be able to describe them as you really feel about them.

If for no other reason than that admission - that rule will remain.

[James DiEugenio]

FWIW Jim, I think its a good rule.

I don't think members of this forum should be allowed to trash it outside the forum.

In intel parlance, this is called Blowback.

BTW Jim, from what I can see of this, he broke two rules.

Edited February 24, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[David Von Pein]

16 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

When that rule was put inplace it was in response to ROKC.

What I find curious is that you want the rule removed - and it could be because [its] reason of origin no longer exists.

The ROKC forum still exists. Why you're saying it doesn't is a mystery to me.

http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net

 

Quote

Where I might well have agreed to remove the rule I have no intention of doing so, so you can feel free to disparage fellow members - as and how you like - when outside this forum. It is clear that what you really think of fellow members is not described on the EF but instead displayed by you when outside this [forum].

Yes, most of the time that's certainly a true statement alright. But that admission I just made can't possibly come as a surprise to you, can it? If it does come as a shock to you, you must be the most naive person on the planet. (But, come to think of it, based on that over-the-top Private Message I received from you early this morning, you do seem to "shock" pretty easily.)

Also, you aren't really so incredibly naive (are you James?) that you think that every conspiracy theorist who posts at The Education Forum actually displays their true feelings for "LNers" like me and Francois Carlier and Tracy Parnell when CTers post their messages here at the EF, right? The CTers, due to having to walk on the same "moderated" eggshells that I must walk on as well when I post here, never show their true opinions of the LNers that they are conversing with....and everybody here knows it. So there's no sense pretending otherwise, is there?

And are you so naive that you think that no Education Forum CTer has ever trashed the hell out of me (or Francois or other EF LNers) at other forums around the Internet? Get real. It's happening practically every day. I've become immune to it. And I have never felt compelled to try and have any of those CTers banned from this forum as a result of their behavior on other forums. Although, as I said earlier, I really had no idea that the silly "Other Forums" rule we're discussing here was even in existence at EF until just today. But now that I know it does exist, I can guarantee you that I will never ever attempt to use that "rule" to promote the idea that a CTer at this forum should be expelled or punished in some fashion. That's an incredibly silly idea. And I've certainly got plenty of "other forum" LN-bashing ammunition that I could use if I wanted to use it, that's for sure.

Just go to that ROKC link and take a look at a few recent LN-trashing examples. (If you can stand the stench that that place emits, that is.)

Or, you can take a quick look at any of the hundreds of intense battles that I have had with several EF members, most of which I have archived at my website/blog. Such as the 130+ dogfights that I've had with James DiEugenio since 2008. (And we're not exactly patting each other on the back in any of those frays, I can tell you that.)

 

Quote

You want the rule removed so that you have the freedom not to be constrained by such rules of this forum when visiting other forum and therefore be able to describe them as you really feel about them.

If for no other reason than that admission - that rule will remain. 

James,

Make sure to remember your above words the next time you read some of the vile LNer-bashing comments that have been posted by current EF members at ROKC and DPF and Facebook and Amazon (or any other Internet locality). Okay?

 

Edited February 25, 2019 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

I am totally in understanding with Mr. Gordon here.

This is why very few, if any, ROKCers are here today.  The only one I can think of is Vanessa Loney.

Secondly, its one thing to argue with someone on this forum about certain pieces of evidence.  But there are rules one has to uphold in that arguing.

When one goes elsewhere, the rules are usually not being upheld. So one is free to vent at will--while still being a member here. 

And I also agree with the proxy rule.  Its one thing to quote from a book or an essay.  Its quite another to use yourself as a funnel to someone who has been banned.  We just had this issue come up a rather short time ago when the same person was using Jim Hargrove. 

 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Guest]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is why very few, if any, ROKCers are here today.  The only one I can think of is Vanessa Loney.

ROKCers Ed Ledoux, Terry Martin, Vanessa Looney and me are all here.

Some post more than others.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

i hate to say this but I agree with David that the obligation to be courteous should be limited to this forum. people should be free to express their opinions on other  internet platforms so long as those comments comply with the rules of that particular group. 

why should a conversation or even screaming match elsewhere be a concern to the administrator of this group so long as the conversion in EF remains civil?       

[Denis Morissette]

If you guys were moderators here and one member here was saying somewhere else that you are a **** and a **** , would you not ban him?

[David Von Pein]

8 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

If you guys were moderators here and one member here was saying somewhere else that you are a **** and a **** , would you not ban him?

I certainly wouldn't. What people say at OTHER forums should not concern the owners/moderators of THIS forum (as long as the members of this forum abide by the rules while they are posting at THIS forum).

Such restrictions on free speech OUTSIDE of these forum walls is downright ridiculous. And I think everybody here really knows---deep down---that it's "ridiculous".

 

Edited February 25, 2019 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

10 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

I hate to say this but I agree with David that the obligation to be courteous should be limited to this forum. People should be free to express their opinions on other internet platforms so long as those comments comply with the rules of that particular group. 

Why should a conversation or even screaming match elsewhere be a concern to the administrator of this group so long as the conversion in EF remains civil?  

Bingo!

Thank you, Lawrence.

 

Edited February 25, 2019 by David Von Pein