[OPE-L:7183] Re: Re: fundamentalism

From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@stanford.edu)
Date: Wed May 15 2002 - 23:01:58 EDT

>Re Rakesh's [7l79]:
>>  It's a subtle but dishonest trick. I feel sorry for you. <snip>
>>  This is a dishonest and untrue and irrelevant and petty criticism <snip>
>>  the entire nuisance  post that you did write.  <snip> This was
>>  all simply mean spirited. <snip>
>All of the above (and the rest that was deleted) and all of [7l75-76]
>was really about the following paragraph:

No it wasn't. I meant what I said--your criticism of Kliman was  out 
of line: it was false, petty and mean spirited. In fact it was a 
flame, and I recommend that you be reprimanded by list coordinators.

   You also doctored your own quote in order to mislead us about what 
you had said. What this means is that you cannot be trusted, and you 
most certainly should not be allowed to be a moderator. I recommend 
again that you submit your resignation.

And anyone who has followed my exchanges with Kliman on pen-l knows 
that I don't like or trust him, either. So I am not saying this out 
of a party line, but out of disgust at how both you and Kliman have 
proceeded (Kliman told me to retract my complaint that he had made a 
legal threat when in fact he did have his lawyer contact RRPE in 
response to some comments made by Gil--to me a legal threat is of 
course implied in having your lawyer make phone calls, but Kliman 
told me to retract without admitting that this is what he had done).

This list needs a fresh start, you need to submit your resignation. 
We have Fred, Allin and Alfredo to moderate the list. Perhaps a TSS 
person can be added.

>>  It is of course possible that you do not understand what you yourself
>>  write and imply. For my purposes you had already proven to me in the
>>  exchange about slavery that you do not in fact abide by the rules of
>>  rational argumentation. This only cements the case.
>And I have no intention of debating the issue with you again given
>what you have written.

Debating which issue?

>In solidarity, Jerry
>>  Given your ethics and heart condition, you should excuse yourself.
>Now who is being petty and mean spirited?  Do you really think that
>others on the list can't see through this ploy?  [these are rhetorical
>questions -- no need to answer.]

What ploy? There is nothing to see through. I am expressing myself 
clearly. Anyone who stoops to such petty criticism should not be 
moderator. And it is in fact unfair for you to submit such ad hominem 
criticism since your victim would be worried that a response in kind 
could pose a physical threat to you. You have already told us that 
your past spat with Freeman led to heart palpitations. You are not 
fair minded enough to be moderator, and you are not healthy enough to 
be a moderator who provkes by ire by himself  stooping to petty ad 
hominem criticism.  It is time for you to step down.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:07 EDT