On Tue, 3 Oct 2000 08:30:18 -0400, Michael Doelle
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Not that I give a damn what's being said on scuba-l these days, but I was
>somewhat bored and looked at the archive.
>
>And then I found this:
>
>>Nick took the bull by the horns and restored a semblance
>of order (and the level of discourse has dropped in volume but also
>probably
>in useful content.) I supported Nick at the time (and paid a price for it
>in terms of abuse heaped on my head - but that is OK, I still support
>Nicks
>obligation to maintain order as he sees fit.)<
>
>Ha, ha, ha. Booting off Mike, Bjoern and myself restored order, eh? Do they
>have a different kind of reality over there in Tejas?
>
>mika, munich
The Mike there is Mike Wallace, for the newcomers, not Michael
Levy or some other generic Mikes in Scuba-L. :-)
Well said. I didn't miss that point. I was PRAISING Chuck for his
fair assessment that I violated nothing Nick and others charged
in my post in Scuba-L in question, and it wouldn't have been good
form at the time to point out what you did.
Anyone who is interested in the ISSUE, out of boredom or not, can just
follow the archives of the TWO DAYS immediately before Nick's
"Tuesday massacre", and can easily see that Nick took his OWN BULL
by the horn (or other parts of his anatomy) out of EMBARASSEMENT
that the RFD disn't work the way he and Hugh expected it to work.
That the dissent was completely orderly by those who spoke out
AGAINST censorship was unmistakable.
It was Nick who did the DISRUPTION, exemplified by the acts you pointed
out, that caused swift and immediate reaction from the MAJORITY of
active Scuba-Lers at the time, to exit in protest.
There WERE some disruptive conducts by Scuba-Lers -- but only AFTER
Nick's unilateral and ill-thought-out "strike" rule, in protest of
NICK's DISRUPTIVE behavior!
You don't have to take my word for it -- I am just making it easy for
you, giving the proper CONTEXT of what Nick did or didn't do.
READ THE ARCHIVES first hand, and see for yourself.
-- Bob.
|
