On Fri, 9 Mar 2001 08:58:53 -0500, Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>David Strike wrote:
>
>Not a word about Bob's waffling on the topic listed in the subject, chosing
>rather to initiate a personal attack.

Strike can answer for himself very well.

However, since you have made FALSE statements both about the HISTORY
and about MY role in it and ME, I'll only address those specific
ERRORS or yours, which are readily VARIFIABLE in the Scuba-L
archives.

Of course, it'll be cold day in hell before YOU (Lee Bell) will
check up any archives that makes a liar out of him, but the OTHERS
may, if they choose to.

< Ad hominem attack against Strike snipped >


Lee> Go back and read the threads containing my activities during
Lee> the period so that you understand what you are talking about
Lee> a bit better.

That's exactly what I suggest to you, Lee!  Because it would
unequivocally showed that you DID NOT base your LIE below on
HISTORY recorded in the archives, but purely on your own
self-serving FAULTY recollection.

Lee> In fact, I and others were doing pretty well.

Claiming credit of others to yourself, perhaps?

Lee> There was a vote going on and it was swinging heavily against
Lee> censorship.  Nick was backing off on his position and the
Lee> forces against Bob and for censorship were in retreat.

The archives will SHOW that I was in the midst of all of this.
I also kept Nick in check in his "creative counting" of votes,
to try to change the tally of an "overwhelming majority" against
him to something to suit himself.

FACT:  The LATEST TALLY (prior to Nick's Scuba-L massacre and the
       mass exodus) remained an overwhelming majority AGAINST
       Nick.  With names of voters on both side.

Lee> Then Bob returned from Cozumel.  I specifically asked Bob to let
Lee> us handle it because we were prevailing and there was nothing he
Lee> could do that would help.

How about checking the LATEST TALLY I mentioned above?

Lee, you told Strike to check the archives.  But are you SURE you
know how or willing to do?  This piece of self-serving statement of
yours is patently FALSE.

For Lee, the OFFENDER in the flamewars (but chalked up all the blame
to ME) to let HIM and others handle a lynching mob on me?

Get a grip!

>He could only turn the heat up, making things worse.  That's not
>Bob's way and I knew it wasn't before I asked.  So, he did what he what he
>had to do.  He jumped in to defend himself.  Policy or not, it was not the
>most effective option.  The rest is history.

Yes, and HISTORY showed that Nick was SOUNDLY defeated in the votes
tallied, and Lee tried to change history by his self-serving
statements which can easily be negated and PROVEN false in the
archives.

For MOST of the readers who was in the midst of the Scuba-L
massacre by Nick, they don't even NEED to consult the archives
to know that Lee's recollection of history is very much flawed.


>
Lee> BTW,  I took your suggestion about reviewing the entire OOA ascent
Lee> thread and am ready to make good on my promise to be back.

I heard THAT kind of talk many, many times, about checking out
the archives on what I said were LIES made by you.  You never
delivered.

Lee> Sorry it took so long.

Lee> If it does not turn out as you had hoped, remember, you asked
Lee> for it.

Is that the same as telling me that you would "rub my nose in it"
because you check out Viv's post, and NEVER checkedd it out to
admit that you were WRONG?

That was in August 2000, Lee.

Tend to your BACKLOGS first.  It would take but a few MINUTES.
Then you can start with new promises.

Next on line is your promise on March 5 to check out your FALSE
allegation that I lied, an allegation that arose from your own
FAULTY recollection of what is clearly in the archives.

Why don't you follow Christian's advice, and mine in reply to
Christian:

         STFU!
or
         "shut the f*** up"

The choice is yourself.   ;-)

-- Bob.



>Lee