• KLAHN 101

    From Earl Croasmun@1:124/311 to Jeff Binkley on Tue Jan 18 09:25:42 2011
    Since I would have no reason to check the list before *RENEWING*
    my echos

    Notice that he now falls back to weasel-wording. He already said that he CHECKS the list before sending in a listing. That led him into a deadend.
    He is careful not to say that he DID NOT check the list, but to merely say that he HAD NO REASON to do so.

    A renewal is the easiest thing in the world. You go to your
    previously-sent e-mail to the echolist, and you send it again. He did not
    do that in November. When he tried to ban two people, he suddenly realized that he had never listed ALL-POLITICS and he tried to grab it.

    His intent is all the more obvious when you look and see that he had
    renewed "all politics" and "debate" just 27 days earlier. Just those two!
    They were good for the next six months. But on November 12 he suddenly
    tried to list ALL-POLITICS for the first time, with no accompanying renewal
    of "debate." I had listed it more than TEN MONTHS earlier, and if he had checked ANY ONE of those lists he would have KNOWN that fact. Just a few
    days ago he said he checks the list before trying to list an echo, and now
    he has to backtrack so far as to pretend that he hadn't checked the list
    for ten months! He doesn't want to say that, though, so he weasels with
    talk about whether or not he had a "reason" to do it.


    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)
  • From Jeff Binkley@1:226/600 to Earl Croasmun on Tue Jan 18 19:25:00 2011



    Since I would have no reason to check the list before *RENEWING*
    my echos

    Notice that he now falls back to weasel-wording. He already said
    that he CHECKS the list before sending in a listing. That led him
    into a deadend. He is careful not to say that he DID NOT check the
    list, but to merely say that he HAD NO REASON to do so.

    A renewal is the easiest thing in the world. You go to your EC>previously-sent e-mail to the echolist, and you send it again. He
    did not do that in November. When he tried to ban two people, he EC>suddenly realized that he had never listed ALL-POLITICS and he tried
    to grab it.

    His intent is all the more obvious when you look and see that he had EC>renewed "all politics" and "debate" just 27 days earlier. Just those EC>two! They were good for the next six months. But on November 12 he EC>suddenly tried to list ALL-POLITICS for the first time, with no EC>accompanying renewal of "debate." I had listed it more than TEN
    MONTHS earlier, and if he had checked ANY ONE of those lists he would EC>have KNOWN that fact. Just a few days ago he said he checks the list EC>before trying to list an echo, and now he has to backtrack so far as
    to pretend that he hadn't checked the list for ten months! He
    doesn't want to say that, though, so he weasels with talk about
    whether or not he had a "reason" to do it.

    All leftists eventually turn to word parsing and changing the
    definitions in order to try and win an argument.


    Jeff

    CMPQwk 1.42-21 9999
    Stop the Democrat party oil embargo ....

    --- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10
    * Origin: (1:226/600)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to ALL on Thu Jan 20 22:50:22 2011


    Since I would have no reason to check the list before *RENEWING*
    my echos

    Notice that he now falls back to weasel-wording. He

    Notice how Earl falls back to distortion and deception. Straight
    out, I do not check my echos to see how they are listed before
    renewing the listing.

    already said that he CHECKS the list before sending in a
    listing.

    Yes. I have done that in every case where I listed a new echo. I
    do *NOT* do that if I have good reason to believe I already have
    the echo listed. Is Earl actually fool enough to try to claim I
    meant I recheck the echolist every single time I relist an echo?

    That led him into a deadend. CHECKS the list
    before sending in a listing. That led him into a deadend.


    No, it did not. It just gave Earl another excuse to twist and
    deceive.

    Ok, readers... either Earl knows a lot less than he wants you to
    think he does, or he is counting on your ignorance to get away
    with that.

    When you renew an echo you do not send in a listing, you send in
    an update. Officially, an moderator update. Shortened to
    Mod Upd.

    Just so you know a bit about how it works.

    He is careful not to say that he DID NOT check the list,
    but to merely say that he HAD NO REASON to do so.

    Which is why I did not do it. Now, that's said straight out.

    Hey, all readers... I have been at this long enough to know, if
    you try to list an already listed echo without the correct
    password, it won't work.

    So, had I checked the echo list and found I did not have the
    echo listed I would have known submitting an update would not
    work.

    A renewal is the easiest thing in the world. You go to your previously-sent e-mail to the echolist, and you send it
    again. He did not do that in November. When he tried to
    ban two people, he suddenly realized that he had never
    listed ALL-POLITICS and he tried to grab it.

    Uh, that is a lie. He did not even offer that as speculation, he
    said it as if it were a fact. That makes it a lie.

    I have used two different email services, and two different BBSs
    and 4 different passwords for renewing All Politics in the two
    years I have had it listed. In several cases I typed it all in
    rather than reusing an old update, for the simple reason I did
    not have an old msg available on that service.

    BFD. As I said, I have been at this for quite a few years. I
    know you can't update an echo if you don't have the correct
    password. I have enough copies of those msgs for the Debate
    echo, when I used a password for another echo.

    Earl truly thinks you are all fools or as corrupt as he is if he
    thinks you are buying his deception. Or is he right?

    His intent is all the more obvious when you look and see
    that he had renewed "all politics" and "debate" just 27
    days earlier. Just those two! They were good for the next
    six months. But on November 12 he suddenly tried to list
    ALL-POLITICS for the first time, with no accompanying
    renewal of "debate." I had listed it more than TEN MONTHS
    earlier, and if he had checked ANY ONE of those lists he
    would have KNOWN that fact.

    Well, you could say I gave him credit for enough integrity to
    not poach another person's echo. However, giving Earl credit for
    integrity would be way out of line.

    Just a few days ago he said he
    checks the list before trying to list an echo, and now he

    Yes, to list an echo originally, not to renew a listing.

    has to backtrack so far as to pretend that he hadn't
    checked the list for ten months! He doesn't want to say
    that, though, so he weasels with talk about whether or not
    he had a "reason" to do it.

    Earl will take any sliver of an opening to deceive. Since anyone
    who reads the echolist home page knows you get a notice if
    someone tries to list your echo, either Earl knows a lot less
    than he likes to pretend, or Earl is just assuming you can be
    easily deceived.



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to JEFF BINKLEY on Thu Jan 20 22:55:34 2011

    ...

    All leftists eventually turn to word parsing and changing
    the definitions in order to try and win an argument.

    You just called Earl a leftist, since that's his speciality.

    ...

    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From Bob Ackley@1:300/3 to ALL on Fri Jan 21 06:50:14 2011
    Replying to a message of BOB KLAHN to ALL:

    Since I would have no reason to check the list before *RENEWING*
    my echos

    Notice that he now falls back to weasel-wording. He

    Notice how Earl falls back to distortion and deception. Straight
    out, I do not check my echos to see how they are listed before
    renewing the listing.

    already said that he CHECKS the list before sending in a
    listing.

    Yes. I have done that in every case where I listed a new echo. I do *NOT* do that if I have good reason to believe I already have the
    echo listed. Is Earl actually fool enough to try to claim I meant I recheck the echolist every single time I relist an echo?

    That led him into a deadend. CHECKS the list
    before sending in a listing. That led him into a deadend.


    No, it did not. It just gave Earl another excuse to twist and
    deceive.

    Ok, readers... either Earl knows a lot less than he wants you to
    think he does, or he is counting on your ignorance to get away with
    that.

    When you renew an echo you do not send in a listing, you send in an update. Officially, an moderator update. Shortened to Mod Upd.

    Just so you know a bit about how it works.

    He is careful not to say that he DID NOT check the list,
    but to merely say that he HAD NO REASON to do so.

    Which is why I did not do it. Now, that's said straight out.

    Hey, all readers... I have been at this long enough to know, if
    you try to list an already listed echo without the correct
    password, it won't work.

    So, had I checked the echo list and found I did not have the
    echo listed I would have known submitting an update would not
    work.

    A renewal is the easiest thing in the world. You go to your
    previously-sent e-mail to the echolist, and you send it
    again. He did not do that in November. When he tried to
    ban two people, he suddenly realized that he had never
    listed ALL-POLITICS and he tried to grab it.

    Uh, that is a lie. He did not even offer that as speculation, he
    said it as if it were a fact. That makes it a lie.

    I have used two different email services, and two different BBSs and
    4 different passwords for renewing All Politics in the two years I
    have had it listed. In several cases I typed it all in rather than reusing an old update, for the simple reason I did not have an old
    msg available on that service.

    BFD. As I said, I have been at this for quite a few years. I
    know you can't update an echo if you don't have the correct
    password. I have enough copies of those msgs for the Debate
    echo, when I used a password for another echo.

    Earl truly thinks you are all fools or as corrupt as he is if he
    thinks you are buying his deception. Or is he right?

    His intent is all the more obvious when you look and see
    that he had renewed "all politics" and "debate" just 27
    days earlier. Just those two! They were good for the next
    six months. But on November 12 he suddenly tried to list
    ALL-POLITICS for the first time, with no accompanying
    renewal of "debate." I had listed it more than TEN MONTHS
    earlier, and if he had checked ANY ONE of those lists he
    would have KNOWN that fact.

    Well, you could say I gave him credit for enough integrity to
    not poach another person's echo. However, giving Earl credit for integrity would be way out of line.

    Just a few days ago he said he
    checks the list before trying to list an echo, and now he

    Yes, to list an echo originally, not to renew a listing.

    has to backtrack so far as to pretend that he hadn't
    checked the list for ten months! He doesn't want to say
    that, though, so he weasels with talk about whether or not
    he had a "reason" to do it.

    Earl will take any sliver of an opening to deceive. Since anyone who reads the echolist home page knows you get a notice if someone tries
    to list your echo, either Earl knows a lot less than he likes to
    pretend, or Earl is just assuming you can be easily deceived.

    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    The ;receding was brought to you by Bob Klahn, the most dishonest poster in Fidonet.
    Draw your own concludions.

    --- FleetStreet 1.19+
    * Origin: Bob's Boneyard, Emerson, Iowa (1:300/3)
  • From Bob Ackley@1:300/3 to BOB KLAHN on Fri Jan 21 06:58:26 2011
    Replying to a message of BOB KLAHN to JEFF BINKLEY:

    All leftists eventually turn to word parsing and changing
    the definitions in order to try and win an argument.

    You just called Earl a leftist, since that's his speciality.

    Why do you continue to attribute to others the behaviors that you specialize in? You've
    been mis-stating and misrepresenting other people's posts for years. I have the archives
    to prove it.

    --- FleetStreet 1.19+
    * Origin: Bob's Boneyard, Emerson, Iowa (1:300/3)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to BOB KLAHN on Fri Jan 21 11:07:49 2011

    20 Jan 11 22:50, BOB KLAHN wrote to ALL:

    Ok, readers... either Earl knows a lot less than he wants you to
    think he does, or he is counting on your ignorance to get away
    with that.

    Really? I hadn't noticed.

    When you renew an echo you do not send in a listing, you send in
    an update. Officially, an moderator update. Shortened to
    Mod Upd.

    Wrong. Updating an echolisting can be done either way. Some moderators do
    it the hard way and some have learned to update with the shortened
    version. In either case, the subject of your update will be; Mod Upd.

    Just so you know a bit about how it works.

    I think I've been updating echoes long enough to know the procedure, in
    and out.

    OTH, I've quit using the Echolist to list my echoes, as the echolist
    keeper has turned out to be a crook. He's like you, listing echoes in
    hopes that people will recognize him as the moderator. He tried that shit
    with the HAM echo and got his ass kicked for it.

    Hey, all readers... I have been at this long enough to know, if
    you try to list an already listed echo without the correct
    password, it won't work.

    No shit, little beaver. Where'd you get your first clue, attempting to
    hijack someone's echo?

    So, had I checked the echo list and found I did not have the
    echo listed I would have known submitting an update would not
    work.

    Actually, an echolisting may not take affect and you'll have to do it
    again so that jerks like you don't hijack the echo. Checking the echolist
    echo for a notice of renewal is a smart thing to do. Checking the echolist might be too late, as someone like you could come along and hijack it
    while your update has been lost by the robot, or his master.

    Fact is that Earl got a message from the list stating that YOU tried to
    list it. That's what is known among legitimate moderators as a hijack
    attempt. You're not the first dickhead who's done that.

    A renewal is the easiest thing in the world. You go to your
    previously-sent e-mail to the echolist, and you send it
    again. He did not do that in November. When he tried to
    ban two people, he suddenly realized that he had never
    listed ALL-POLITICS and he tried to grab it.

    Uh, that is a lie. He did not even offer that as speculation, he
    said it as if it were a fact. That makes it a lie.

    Obviously, unless you have a history of being the moderator, you can't ban anyone from an echo without proof of moderatorship. The sysops who run the echomail distribution systems won't recognize you as the moderator without echolist proof or a long history as the moderator of said echo.

    I have used two different email services, and two different BBSs
    and 4 different passwords for renewing All Politics in the two
    years I have had it listed.

    You're that unstable, eh...

    In several cases I typed it all in rather than reusing an old update,
    for the simple reason I did not have an old msg available on that
    service.

    Bullshit. If you've had all this experience that you claim as a moderator
    and you've been updating echoes, you would be keeping a file on your
    system that would be easy enough to import to email and send it off.
    Unless you're dumber than a stump.

    Here's a sample, in case you can't figure it out.

    FROM xxxx22@yahoo.com
    TAG POL-INC
    TITL Politically Incorrect

    PASS xxx+xxxxxx
    MOD Roy Witt, 1:10/22, xsyp22@yahoo.com
    MOD Dale Ross, 1:379/1,
    DESC Tired of the same old 2 party system? If so, you are welcome
    DESC here along with all the other political parties, including
    DESC those "major 2". There are no favored politics in this Echo.
    DESC All are free game, or, to paraphrase Abbie Hoffman, 'After
    DESC a little tenderizing, those sacred cows make best hamburgers.'
    DESC Please read the rules file or request them upon entering
    DESC the Echo
    REST /REA /RUL
    ORIG 1:10/22
    DIST Private Distribution. (Zones 1-6)
    GROUP FIDO
    LANG American English, English
    RUL POL_INC.RUL
    -+-

    I'm sure you could remember all of that to make your updates. However,
    this is how to do a shortened version.


    FROM rex2@san.rr.com
    TAG CWL
    MOD Norm Bowden, 3:770/245, normb@paradise.net.nz
    PASS #$%CWL@#
    -+-

    Even that will be hard to type from memory, especially if you don't bother
    to update your echo for six months (most moderators update every month).

    BFD. As I said, I have been at this for quite a few years. I
    know you can't update an echo if you don't have the correct
    password. I have enough copies of those msgs for the Debate
    echo, when I used a password for another echo.

    See above, Dumbass.

    Earl truly thinks you are all fools or as corrupt as he is if he
    thinks you are buying his deception. Or is he right?

    None of the above. You're the fool, attempting to justify your hijack
    attempts when everyone knows you're a liar and are so full of shit it
    runs out of your mouth.

    Well, you could say I gave him credit for enough integrity to
    not poach another person's echo. However, giving Earl credit for
    integrity would be way out of line.

    As if you ever had any to give.

    R\%/itt

    Fox News was not used as a source for information in this message!

    --- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000-10
    * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:387/22)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to BOB KLAHN on Fri Jan 21 11:08:21 2011

    20 Jan 11 22:55, BOB KLAHN wrote to JEFF BINKLEY:


    All leftists eventually turn to word parsing and changing
    the definitions in order to try and win an argument.

    You just called Earl a leftist, since that's his speciality.

    Most of the time, leftists like you attempt to draw attention to someone
    else for their own misdeeds.

    R\%/itt

    Fox News was not used as a source for information in this message!

    --- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000-10
    * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:387/22)
  • From Earl Croasmun@1:124/311 to All on Sat Jan 22 16:22:36 2011
    The Sunday deadline for this thread hasn't arrived yet, but Bob has fully
    run it into the ground. All of the facts are intact. He never listed the ALL-POLITICS echo. In November he tried to ban two people. Suddenly he
    sends an renewal for "all politics," which he had renewed less that four
    weeks earlier, plus an attempt to grab ALL-POLITICS.

    The only new thing he adds is the suggestion that he never, ever looked at
    an echolist for TEN MONTHS to find out that I was the moderator.
    Unbelievable. And other than that, he is left with nothing but instinctive insult-attempts.


    On 1/20/2011 10:55 PM, Bob Klahn wrote to All:

    anyone
    who reads the echolist home page knows you get a notice if
    someone tries to list your echo

    It is called a "hijack warning," and it only goes out if the hijack fails.
    He has tried and failed several times. I have never tried. Those are the documented facts. The rest is just empty bluster from Klahn.

    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
    * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:124/311)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to BOB ACKLEY on Mon Jan 24 13:26:42 2011
    Replying to a message of BOB KLAHN to JEFF BINKLEY:

    All leftists eventually turn to word parsing and changing
    the definitions in order to try and win an argument.

    You just called Earl a leftist, since that's his speciality.

    Why do you continue to attribute to others the behaviors
    that you specialize in? You've

    Since I don't, you are doing exactly what you accuse me of.

    been mis-stating and misrepresenting other people's posts
    for years. I have the archives
    to prove it.

    Post some. I do turn others personal attacks around, and will do
    so gladly, and not only admit it, but proclaim it. I also show
    how what others post may have a different meaning than they
    intend, and I do draw conclusions from what others post that may
    differ from what the intend. All these are legitimate responses.

    I do *NOT* change the legitimate meaning of a clear statement.

    I have no problem showing how a statement from someone may link
    to another meaning completely. That I stand by.

    My archives include attacks by right wingers on you.



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... Tagline theft is the sincerest form of flattery.
    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to BOB ACKLEY on Mon Jan 24 18:58:20 2011

    ...

    The ;receding was brought to you by Bob Klahn, the most
    dishonest poster in Fidonet.
    Draw your own concludions.

    Everyone please note, Bob A has never yet shown a single bit of
    dishonesty on my part.

    And he won't even attempt to answer the challenge:

    Can you deny that the echo was unlisted and dead before I
    revived it?

    Can you deny that I revived it?

    Can you deny that *YOU* accepted me as the legitimate moderator
    of the echo?

    Can you show any evidence of any condition at that time by which
    anyone could rationally claim I was not accepted by *EVERY*
    poster as the legitimate moderator of the echo.

    Can you show anyone making a claim that I was not the legitimate
    moderator of the echo before Ross started his little coup?

    In view of the above, can you make any case whatsoever that I
    was in anyway dishonest in claiming to be the moderator of the
    echo?



    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)
  • From BOB KLAHN@1:123/140 to EARL CROASMUN on Mon Jan 24 19:11:32 2011
    The Sunday deadline for this thread hasn't arrived yet, but
    Bob has fully run it into the ground. All of the facts are
    intact. He never listed the ALL-POLITICS echo. In

    ...

    It is called a "hijack warning," and it only goes out if
    the hijack fails. He has tried and failed several times. I
    have never tried. Those are the documented facts. The
    rest is just empty bluster from Klahn.

    Earl lied.

    It may be called a hijack warning in general, but officially it
    is no such thing. If you try to relist your echo and get the
    password wrong you get the same message. Even if there in no one
    contesting the echo. If you change a password, and update with
    an old message, or type in the update by hand and misspell the
    password, you get the exact same message.

    Earl claims he never tried. In fact, he did try to hijack All
    Politics, when the robot had a problem. I have the emails
    between myself and Thom about this. The echo was listed in my
    name after I submitted proof I had updated it. Oh, and Earl had
    not listed any version of all politics before that point. Check
    the echolists of the time to confirm this.


    Can you deny that the echo was unlisted and dead before I
    revived it?

    Can you deny that I revived it?

    Can you deny that *YOU* accepted me as the legitimate moderator
    of the echo?

    Can you show any evidence of any condition at that time by which
    anyone could rationally claim I was not accepted by *EVERY*
    poster as the legitimate moderator of the echo.

    Can you show anyone making a claim that I was not the legitimate
    moderator of the echo before Ross started his little coup?

    In view of the above, can you make any case whatsoever that I
    was in anyway dishonest in claiming to be the moderator of the
    echo?


    BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

    ... Republicans-united by feelings of Victimhood, and obsessed with Revenge. --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)