Text 31936, 182 rader
Skriven 2016-03-23 20:19:56 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
  Kommentar till text 31928 av Earl Croasmun (1:261/38.0)
Ärende: Note
============
Hello Earl,

 >>>> "Mr. Cassell requested a feed cut for Mr. Richardson.  Then
 >>>> Richardson sent me an email telling me pretty much to stick the
 >>>> bbs up my ass!"
 >>>> - Ed Koon to Björn Felten, Fidonews echo, 5/29/2015

 >>> Sounds like a pretty good reason for him to stop letting someone use his
 >>> computer.

 >> Show me the nasty email/netmail that Ed Koon claims that Tim sent
 >> him.


 EC> Only two people have seen it, as far as I know, and both confirm that it
did
 EC> exist. Ed's account is above.

What you have above is a "claim" - nothing more.
I asked for proof.  If it exists.
You just admitted that it does not exist.

 EC> Tim's account does not contradict it.

Tim denies he wrote any kind of nasty email/netmail to Ed.
When challenged, Ed was not able to support/substantiate his
own claim.  IOW, Ed lied about claiming that Tim had sent him
a nasty email/netmail.  And you are also lying - by claiming
that Tim's account does not contradict what Ed claimed.

 EC> He said he did not "cuss" in it, but that he accused Ed of being bullied
 EC> into cutting his access.

What part of "Mr. Cassell requested a feed cut for Mr. Richardson"
do you not understand?  That quote was by Ed Koon.  Mr. Cassell is
not the moderator of this echo.  Mr. Cassell is not the sysop of
docsplace.  So what the fuck is he?  You tell me.  But that's okay.
Doesn't matter.  Mr. Cassell has no authority to ask or to order
Ed Koon to cut the access for anybody, especially in regards to
this echo.

Ed Koon made a claim, unsupported and unsubstantiated - "then
Richardson sent me an email telling me to pretty much to stick
the bbs up my ass!"  When challenged to produce that nasty
email/netmail, Ed Koon was unable to do so.  IOW, Ed Koon lied.

 EC> The two versions are consistent.

Show me the nasty email/netmail you and Ed claim exists.
Ed couldn't do it.  But maybe you can.  Second chance, Earl.
You've already missed chance #1.

 EC> The cut came after a simple request from a sysop to a user: "Tim, please
do
 EC> not post in FidoNews."

Ed Koon can whine all he wants.  He is not the moderator of this echo.
And neither is Ross Cassell.  So get over it.

 EC> That was followed by another 25 or so posts in the echo.

You seem to have a problem with that.  Why is that, Earl?

 EC> Seems like pretty easy grounds for cutting write access, even without the
 EC> e-mail.

You're all wet.

This is a public echo.  The moderator (Björn Felten) invites
all (sysop and non-sysop) who wish to participate to do so.

 >> When challenged, Ed Koon was not able to do so.

 EC> You "challenged" him? That's pretty funny. A hint: when people ignore you,
 EC> that doesn't necessarily mean that they are "unable" to respond to you.
 EC> They might just want to avoid petty, pointless irritations.

Show me the email/netmail.  If you can.

 >> When challenged, Ed Koon was unable to
 >> substantiate/support his claim.  In other words, ED KOON LIED!

 EC> An interesting definition: you think that when someone cannot substantiate
a
 EC> claim, that makes the claim a "lie."

Ed made the claim.  Ed was unable to support/substantiate his claim.
That makes his claim to have been false.  A fabrication.  Something
other than the truth.  IOW, a lie.

 EC> Tim indicated a while back that he had deleted or lost the e-mail, so HE
 EC> cannot substantiate his version.

Tim does not deny having a conversation (via email/netmail) with Ed.
What Tim denies is the claim that he had sent Ed a nasty email/netmail.
Ed made the original claim, and was unable to support/substantiate
that claim.  You echoed that claim, but also were unable to support/
substantiate that claim.  That tells me that you and Ed made it all
up.

 EC> I have no problem with that.

Why should you?  After all, you have access, and Tim does not.
Even though it was Ed who lied, and not Tim.

 EC> I am willing to accept Tim's account and Ed's account.

Both of them cannot be telling the truth.  And Ed was not able
to support/substantiate his own claim.

 EC> But by your definition, YOU should be saying that "Tim lied."

Everybody lies.  But some are more truthful than others.

 EC> And when you say that Ed was "unable" to produce the message, you are
 EC> obviously incapable to substantiating that.

Ed made the claim.  Guilt by accusation does not work for me.
If you come up with a story, you had best be able to back it up.
Otherwise, I will not believe you.  Kind of like the guy who
stood by Jesus' side and wondered if he was dead or alive.  Had
to poke him with a spear to find out for myself ...

 EC> He may not have seen your "challenge."

Oh, he read it.  No doubt about that.

 EC> He might have laughed at it.

Or got himself smashed.

 EC> He might have ignored it.

Definitely not.

 EC> Which means that, again by YOUR definition, YOU lied.

He did not only go off on me, but he also got off on others.
That is what makes Ed such a funny guy.  Not really sure if he
was drunk or sober when he wrote those words, but either way
he sure was funny as hell.  :)

 >>>> It should also be noted that Ed Koon
 >>>> does not have control of his own board (if he did, he could
 >>>> have told Ross to take a hike).

 >>> It should be noted that he DOES, and on various occasions he HAS.

 >> Ed Koon chose to suck Ross Cassell's dick.  His choice.

 EC> You said the same thing with regard to Wayne Chirnside's access.

Wayne didn't mind, as she had completed her study by then.

 EC> You were wrong then too.

I don't suck anybody's cock.  Not for pay, and not for pleasure.
But hey.  Whatever floats your boat.  If that's your thing, have
at it.

 EC> A sysop made a polite request to a guest.

Ed Koon made a claim (unsupported and unsubstantiated) that
Ross Cassell made a request.  A request that Ross Cassell had
no legitimate authority to make.

 EC> The request was violated.

Ross Cassell's "request" (if such a "request" had in fact been made)
should have been ignored.  But Ed Koon chose to listen to his master,
rather than listen to those who have supported him and his board.

 EC> Write access to the echo was cut.

Complete read/write access was cut - to all echoes - according to
Tim Richardson.  And he should know, as he was the one affected by
Ed's action.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
 * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)