Remember Nick Simicich's "May 23 Massacre" in Scuba-L that caused
the VOLUNTARY EXODUS from Scuba-L to Scuba-SE?

Nick has done it again!  Since many of you are still CURRENT members
of Scuba-L, and others are former members of Scuba-L, I want to
hear from anyone who cares to comment on Nick's action and my
claim about his "abuse" as Owner of a LISTSERV List.  Since this
is NOT Scuba-L, please send all comments, PRO or CON, to either
Scuba-L (where I am barred from posting, even to defend myself
against Nick's or anyone else's false accusations), or to me
PRIVATELY, to [log in to unmask]

Nick has censored ALL my present (and future) posts to Scuba-L, for
reason of a piece of SATIRE I posted (with humor).  Nick's FALSE
ACCUSATIONS about me having violated any Scuba-L Guideline can
easily be seen in the Scuba-L webpage archives!!

Below is the email I sent to Nick this morning.  I received a
reply from him which only repeated his unsupported accusations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 13:25:20 -0400
To: Nick Simicich <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Robert F. Ling" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Unwarranted censorship and abuse of Scuba-L Ownership
X-Apparently-From: [log in to unmask]

At 11:07 AM 9/9/2002 -0400, Nick Simicich wrote:
> I've already erased all of your attempted posts, so I can't send
> them back. The basic guideline that you violated? They were not
> about scuba.

You made FALSE allegations about my posts and you ERASED them all
so that before anyone besides yourself can decide whether you were
wrong or not.   This is outrageous!   There was absolutely and
positively NO violation of ANY Scuba-L Guidelines in those attempted
posts of mine!

*****  THAT IS AN ABUSE of your Ownership of Scuba-L at Brown.edu


> None of your posts to scuba-l yesterday or today have been about
> scuba. Your first post was a personal attack on me and the way I
> run the list.

That post is in the public domain. Item #13635 in the "archive
search" of http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/scuba-l.html

(or the first post in the thread "Twin sets for sale" under the
archives heading "September 2002, Week 2".

That was an obvious SATIRE.  To point out that the Guidelines you
post regularly was violated repeatedly and IGNORED by you. Was that
an "attack" on you?   By pointing out that no through humor and
satire the state of affairs of Scuba-L and the fact that no one was
paying any attention to the Scuba-L Guidelines?

I was VERY careful that my posts did NOT violate any of the
Guidelines, and that I made NO personal attack on ANYONE, save
pointing out how they violated the Guidelines.


> Thus you are being reviewed. The only reason you got another
> unreviewed post in after that first one was computer trouble at
> my end and the fact that I do not spend every waking moment at
> the keyboard.

> If you want to post about scuba, feel free. I will review and
> approve them if appropriate. If you want to post about scuba-l,
> it has all been said before, and it is not welcome.

If you want to REVIEW anything, why don't you go through the
LISTSERV Scuba-L archives and see HOW MANY TIMES there were posts
that were entirely NON-SCUBA -- including some posted by YOURSELF,
and ask youself why I was the one you singled out to apply
unilaterally this "rule" of yours which is NOT stated in the
Guidelines.

Nick, there is NOTHING in the Guidelines that says a "non-scuba"
 post is to be barred from Scuba-L. You posted many such YOURSELF.
OTHERS posted plenty such.  You (correctly) took no action. You
chose this action to apply a NONEXISTENT rule and applied to me.

*****  THAT IS ANOTHER ABUSE of your Ownership of Scuba-L at Brown.edu



> As to putting others on review, frankly, I think that there is
> no need, even though they attacked you

Based on your own prejudice, and unfair, unjust, and uneven application
of the same Guidelines to EVERYONE.  This is nothing new. That's
why most of the FORMER contributing members to Scuba-L had left in
protest of Nick Simicich's dictatorship and abuse.

*****  THAT IS ANOTHER ABUSE of your Ownership of Scuba-L at Brown.edu


> since they were responding to your initial attack,
> and once you quit stirring the pot, things will calm down..anyway,

The FALSEHOOD of your allegation is in the public domain!!!

Daniel Crawford attacked me TWICE, without me having mentioned him
or implied him in my post in which (item #13659 in the archives)
he wrote,

>Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 18:07:16 -0400
>From: "Daniel L. Crawford" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Twin set for sale.....
>
>Why don't you just crawl back under your rock for another year or two,
>
>asshole.


>M Allen did the same, in Item #13633.
>Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2002 21:27:39 -0500
>From: M Allen <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Twin set for sale.....
>
>> >Question. Would it be appropriate to call someone "asshole"
>> >on this list? > >-- Bob.
>
>In your case Bob I vote yes, since I think your only stopping back
>by to cause problems.  Go away little Mullet.


Your NOT taking any action against THEM on the obvious violations
while censoring MY posts which had NO violation of any Scuba-L
Guidelines whatsoever, and in all subsequent posts of mine, are
clear evidence of

***** NICK SIMICICH'S  ABUSE of his Ownership Role of Scuba-L at Brown.edu


> I've issued a general warning.

Which was as inapproparite as your present reply -- and that's why
I am documenting YOUR ABUSES for the record -- for ANYONE (whom I
consider appropriate to show), so that THEY may examine what remains
of the posted records you haven't erased!

> The review is for you, by the way, not for a particular ID at
> yahoo, and should be considered permanent. If you change IDs,
> please notify  me so that I can put your new ID on review.

For what justifiable reason?   Under what Guideline of Scuba-L?
If I do not violate (have not violated) any of the existing Scuba-L
Guideline, what grounds do you have to act in such a matter?
This is still another

***** NICK SIMICICH'S  ABUSE of his Ownership Role of Scuba-L at Brown.edu

-- Bob.


On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Robert F. Ling wrote:

> Nick,
>
> I received the following message about my post:
>
>  > Your message dated Sun, 8 Sep 2002 23:34:06 -0400 with  subject
> "Re: Ron Lee is violating Scuba-L  Guidelines (was Re: Bob is being
> hypocritical )"  has been  submitted  to  the  moderator  of the
> SCUBA-L list:  Nick  Simicich <[log in to unmask]>.
>
> -----------------------------------------

Note:  Ron Lee attacked me for what I posted in rec.scuba, which was
NOT subject to Scuba-L Guidelines.  Wayne correctly pointed out this
fact.  My post, concurring with Wayne, and another post of expressing
the same before I saw Wayne's post, were both censored and were
erased by Nick before anyone could see how WRONG Nick was!!


> Please send me back the post you censored, without
> just cause, and advise me precisely WHICH GUIDELINES
> of Scuba-L the post violated.
>
> I was pointing out the violation of Scuba-L Guidelines
> by OTHERS, especially when they call me an "asshole"
> and was very careful in ALL MY POSTINGS that I did not
> violate ANY of the Scuba-L Guidelines myself.
>
>
> Please do the same about the other two posts of mine,
> including the one in reply to YOUR post.
>
> -- Bob.