[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Mr. Tracy L. Ford

who gives a crap?  who has time for this nonsense???

quit wasting everyone's time with this nonsense!!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Erstwhile" <thedigs2001@yahoo.ca>
To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 1:34 AM
Subject: Mr. Tracy L. Ford

> Hi I've never posted here before but have been lurking
> for years. This is off-topic but highly relevant if
> you want to know what kind of person you are posting
> with in the form of Mr. Tracy L. Ford.
> I noticed that Mr. Ford had posted somebody's private
> email even though it was specifically indicated in
> this email that the writer was sending it privately
> because he felt its tone was inappropriate for the
> list. Anyone who has been on the net from the
> beginning knows the conventions (what Mr. Ford did is
> a BIG no-no), and also knows that it is the tradition
> to "self-police" ... i.e. one netizen informs the
> other of the infraction, hopefully avoiding personal
> insults in the process. This is what I did, not only
> because this has been a netizen's duty since The
> Beginning, but because I felt a certain amount of
> sympathy for Kris -- a relatively new poster, whose
> image on this list may now be shaped by this
> unintended post. Mr. Ford's reply to me was rather
> impolite, and when I sent a response saying so, he
> began to get abusive. Admittedly, in the ensuing
> exchange, I did some posturing of my own, but I only
> engaged in this once I realised how hostile this
> person is, and I wanted to force his hand.
> I am now posting our entire correspondence, because I
> dared him to give me permission to post it and he
> agreed. I am doing this specifically to publicly
> embarrass Mr. Ford, in the hopes that this may serve
> as a disincentive for him (or anyone else) to
> privately abuse anyone via email, or to indulge his
> obvious penchant for bad behaviour when he thinks no
> one else is going to hear about it. So here it is --
> this is a complete and accurate record of our
> correspondence in its entirety, except for Mr. Ford's
> use of profanity, which I have attempted to disguise
> from any automatic censors by inserting a tilde (^).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erstwhile [mailto:thedigs2001@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 3:40 AM
> To: dino.hunter@cox.net
> Subject: you made a boo-boo
> >>I'm just a lurker on the DML, but when you posted
> MariusRomanus's (Kris's) private email to you publicly
> on the list, you made a big mistake. He did not
> "forget" to post it to the list, he specifically
> mentioned in the text that he chose not to. It was not
> for you to make the decision for him. This is a
> serious breach of one of the most basic net rules. You
> don't post private mail publicly without permission.
> Maybe Kris won't mind, but that's not the point. What
> you did was wrong. Hopefully, you just didn't read
> carefully enough to notice that this was no omission
> on his part it was intentional ...
> I do enjoy reading your opinions on the DML ... thanks
> for that at least.
> Paul Laroquod.<<
> Thanks for pointing out my mistake! What are you the
> Net Ethics Police? 
> Ok, I misinterpreted what he wrote, I don't need that
> to be told to me. 
> Next time keep that to yourself!
> Tracy L. Ford
> P. O. Box 1171
> Poway Ca  92074
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erstwhile [mailto:thedigs2001@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:34 PM
> To: Tracy L. Ford
> Subject: Re: Net Ethich Police ( you made a boo-boo)
> >>Good netizens always take it upon themselves to
> point
> out this kind of behaviour, and it has been this way
> ever since the earliest days, although not everyone
> does it as politely as I did. I even gave you the
> benefit of the doubt, assuming in my letter that it
> could have been an accident. ,<<
> Yea, after a paragraph admonishing me!
> >>Your reply to me
> unfortunately did not meet the same standards of
> diplomacy, which perhaps indicates something about you
> that explains how you could be so careless in the
> first place.<<
> Diplomacy would have been this;
> I hope you understand that what you did was
> unfortunate and should not 
> have been posted. I hope both you and Kris have taken
> the opportunity to 
> discuss this and that things have worked out between
> you two.
> Not 2 frigen paragraphs.
> >>It is your ungracious reply to my entirely polite
> notification (which even included some praise for
> you), rather than your initial accident, which has now
> caused my respect for you as a poster to suffer.<<
> Ungracious reply? You claim to be doing this in good
> intent but come 
> across like a noisy busy buddy who can't keep their
> mouth to themselves. You 
> take it onto yourself to (I'm going to say something
> the way someone else on 
> list said and didn't know what the (**& they were
> saying) to put your 
> thoughts onto someone else and make a judgment on what
> went on when you don't 
> have a clue.
> >>Sincerely,
> Paul Laroquod.
> P.S. I have now seen on the list that Kris did NOT
> appreciate your actions. I hope you at least have the
> decency to apologise to him/her.<<
> This is a matter between Kris and me and is none of
> your (**& business.
> Tracy L. Ford
> P. O. Box 1171
> Poway Ca  92074
> [ Editorial comment ... this is about the point that I
> realised that this is an unreasonable person and I
> decided to see just how far his abuse could go ... in
> other words, I roped him  --Paul. ]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erstwhile [mailto:thedigs2001@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 4:13 PM
> To: Tracy L. Ford
> Subject: RE: Net Ethich Police ( you made a boo-boo)
> >>Ah yes. The eternal refuge of the transgressor ...
> the
> claim that it is none of my business. <<
> Well, it is none of your business whether or not Kris
> and I have made 
> amends
> or not. Just because I ACCENDANTLY posted it onto the
> list doesn't make 
> it
> by any means your or anyone else's business.
> >>You are dead wrong. As a netizen, this kind of thing
> in a public
> forum IS my business.<<
> Oh GOD, modern technology and now everyone is a
> netizen, sh^t what is 
> this world coming too?
> >> If you knew anything about the
> net, you would know that these are the rules, and
> self-policing (one citizen informing another) is also
> the generally accepted way of enforcing them.<<
> Ok, where can I find the RULES of the net? Is the
> Government involved?
> Companies? You?
> >>Yourcriticism of me as a 'busybody' is
> inconsequential
> since it is in direct contradiction to the accepted
> practice on the net, with which my actions are in
> complete agreement.<<
> You are a busy body, no one told you to write what you
> did, you just 
> did.
> >>I sincerely hope that one day you will discover that
> protecting your 
> pride with hostility is self-defeating.<<
> I'm not protecting my pride you SH^T, you don't know
> anything about me. 
> I couldn't give a sh^t about it. I think you have no
> business in what 
> I've done.
> >>By the way, disguising obviously intended profanity
> with bleep-marks does not make such language therefore
> polite or justified.<<
> Ok, you b^stard, you busybody f^cking good for nothing
> sh^t...Ok, I'll 
> stop.
> >>It seems increasingly obvious that you cannot stand
> to be corrected 
> and that you interpret such correction as
> a personal insult even when no personal insult is
> included and your 
> instinct is to respond with anger.<<
> Again you don't know me. I don't mind at all being
> corrected or shown 
> were I've gone wrong. I make corrections all the time,
> especially in
> paleontology. If you've ever read my articles in
> Prehistoric Times 
> you'll see that I do make corrections when shown when
> I was wrong. It is YOU I 
> find offensive and YOU that I am quick to anger about
> when what you did was
> totally unnecessary.
> >>If you compare our two correspondances you will see
> that yours are 
> full of hostility whereas mine contain
> absolutely none. All of the vitriol and anger are on
> your side, and yet 
> ... you are the one who crossed the initial line. You
> are very lucky that
> I am not like you or else I would post
> our entire exchange on the list, and it would reflect
> very poorly on 
> you regardless of your long posting history. <<
> Again, what I did was an accident and
> misinterpretation on my part, you
> F^CK.
> >>If the ideaof such a thing embarrasses you, then it
> should be obvious 
> to you that you have behaved badly and continue to do
> so.<<
> I'm not embarrassed at all.
> >>Go ahead and send me some more insults and personal
> attacks. Go nuts, 
> get it all out, maybe you'll feel
> better but it won't make your actions any more valid,
> it won't make my
> correction any less valid, and there
> will be no further response from me.<<
> Really, is that a promise?
> >> I have done my duty in correcting you and in
> explaining why your
> responses have been inappropriate, but your
> unwillingness to accept any responsibility and rather
> to try to invent 
> some transgression on my part, are
> starting to make you look suspiciously like a waste of
> time. Let the 
> next netizen you offend continue this argument.<<
> Yea, another busy body, great, thanks that's all I
> need. I hope your
> correction to me has boosted your ego and self worth.
> You remind me of 
> the kid in class that will correct all the other kids
> because it make him 
> feel big about himself, keep your nose out from me.
> >>Paul Laroquod.<<
> Tracy L. Ford
> P. O. Box 1171
> Poway Ca  92074
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erstwhile [mailto:thedigs2001@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:14 PM
> To: Tracy L. Ford
> Subject: RE: Net Ethich Police ( you made a boo-boo)
> >>I'm not embarrassed at all.<<
> Oh well in that case I hereby relinquish any claim to
> privacy of this communication ... you are free to post
> it anywhere.
> Do I have your permission to do the same?
> I am calling your bluff, sir. Now ante up or shut up.
> Paul Laroquod.
> From: Tracy L. Ford
> To: Erstwhile
> Subject: RE: Net Ethich Police ( you made a boo-boo)
> >>Oh well in that case I hereby relinquish any claim
> to
> privacy of this communication ... you are free to post
> it anywhere.<<
> Why would I want to let anyone know how your really
> are?
> >>Do I have your permission to do the same? I am
> calling your bluff, sir.
> Now ante up or shut up.<<
> Ok, go ahead. But not the one's we've already done or
> else you'd be 
> doing the same thing I did since it was all off list.
> That and all the others 
> I've had with just Kris are no one else's business. If
> I were the kind of 
> person you CALIM I am I would have posted all this on
> the list, but I'm not.
> >>Paul Laroquod.<<
> I knew it I knew it, you just couldn't not reply and
> you said you 
> would.
> Tracy L. Ford
> P. O. Box 1171
> Poway Ca  92074
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erstwhile [mailto:thedigs2001@yahoo.ca]
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 6:44 PM
> To: Tracy L. Ford
> Subject: RE: Net Ethich Police ( you made a boo-boo)
> >>"Ok, go ahead. But not the one's we've already done
> or
> else you'd be doing the same thing I did since it was
> all off list."
> Not if I had your permission it wouldn't. And you
> obviously aren't willing to give it, which means your
> claims that you are unashamed of your conduct are
> plainly not credible. Face it, I've got your number
> here. Once I realised how hostile and anger-driven you
> are, I played a little game of rope-a-dope with you
> and you got roped. We both know how it would look if
> our entire exchange were posted. Nothing further you
> can say can change what is now HARD EVIDENCE of your
> own feelings of embarrassment if your behaviour toward
> me were to be made public, EXCEPT to give me
> permission to post our entire discussion. In fact, I
> dare you to give it. I certainly have nothing to hide.
>   8 )
> Infuriating, aren't I? You shouldn't have
> insulted me just for pointing out your mistake. That
> was your second mistake.
> Have a nice anger-driven hostile life ... you probably
> will get roped like this pretty often since you walked
> right into it.
> Paul Laroquod.<<
> Called
> Tracy L. Ford
> P. O. Box 1171
> Poway Ca  92074
> [ Mr. Ford's answer, if the poker analogy is to be
> extended, would indicate that he agreed to have all of
> this posted publicly. But much as I was itching to
> expose this guy right away, I obviously take
> netiquette very seriously, so I wanted to make sure of
> it, especially in light of the fact that Mr. Ford's
> communication (in casual email at least I am
> expressing no opinion as to his professional writing)
> has not been a model of clarity ('keep your nose out
> from me', &c)... ]
> > Called
> > 
> Unless you notify me otherwise I am taking this to
> mean that I have permission to post our entire
> communication.
> Paul Laroquod.
> People who are willing to spew abuse via private email
> when they think there will be no public consequences
> are my pet peeve ... they deserve to have their
> vitriol see the light of day. Fortunately in this case
> Mr. Ford himself has given me an opportunity to make
> this so ... I have to at least give him credit for
> ultimately standing behind his claim that he is not
> embarrassed at his behaviour after pounding his chest
> so savagely (and I must say I did not expect him to
> agree to this), but I don't think he realises yet how
> poorly his words reflect upon him, or else he wouldn't
> have relinquished his privacy and possibly damaged his
> public reputation, apparently just to avoid losing
> face before a total stranger.
> And with that ends what will probably be my only post
> to this list. I normally just read the archives. I
> only subscribed in order to post this and will
> unsubscribe probably pretty soon since I don't
> generally like getting lists by email. So let me take
> this opportunity to say this is still a fascinating
> list and I hope the few remaining scientific
> heavyweights around here stay for a long time to come.
> If anybody here has a problem with me for posting this
> or for getting a little manipulative on Mr. Ford near
> the end, that's fine I accept that criticism after all
> I am human too and the ridiculous implication that I
> was wrong to point out a serious breach of netiquette
> did get my dander up a little. Usually I hate to see
> personal arguments on the list, but I feel I have done
> the right thing overall. People are abusive over email
> for two basic reasons ... because (a) they lack a
> basic respect for other human beings that is
> independent of personal acquaintance with them, and
> (b) they don't believe that their behaviour will ever
> reflect on them. Mr. Ford gave me a rare opportunity
> to bring his chickens home to roost. I had to do it.
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> Find, Connect, Date! http://personals.yahoo.ca