[Deb]

Phew Caryl where to start in reply to all this.... slightly blinded by words here, but trying to make sense of it and to work out which bits to reply to.

Just to put the record straight here, I also am a bit peed at a thread on Kasim getting hijacked by all of this, Sue and Vicki had sorted this out, you once again have fueled it by posting in defense of Vicki, and before you say it, Yes I have also for Sue, but i'm really sick to the back teeth of letting it all go by. so many threads have been hijacked in this way. Whats started off with two people maybe having a slight problem has often turned into ww3 (and no thats not belittling the war before you put more words in my mouth)

We don't all have as much time as others to put everything into exactly the right words. So sometimes what I'm thinking or trying to say, may come out slightly different. Which you seem to pick up on.

Back to the responses from you...

caryl wrote :
The reason given is that:
the list is a relaxed place to be where we can have fun at times, share experiences and thoughts, and sometimes comfort each other when we're down, and to have this atmosphere we need to be able to speak freely without fear of being attacked or of having what we say being posted elsewhere around the internet.

The same goes for here Caryl, even though its not written, I know for a fact that people feel the same way here about you, in response to them, me included.

caryl wrote :
I am going to include one opinion rather than fact here. This does not to me seem to bear any resemblance to the actions of ~~~~~~'s crack killer SS in Nazi Germany, and I think to suggest this is a lamentable thing to do. To bandy such terms about is imo to trivialise a shameful time in history, and is incredibly insensitive given the number of German people in this forum.

Don't even go there with trying to make every German in this forum think I'm geting at them, because I'm pretty confident that they know I'm not, I personally know many of them and they are the most genuine. nicest people I know, and have became very good friends of mine. For your information by SS I actually meant "Secret Squirrel"

caryl wrote:
I have no idea what you mean when you compare this to "the same said people tipping Meat off when anything slightly negatives said about Meat." Who are these "people"? I can only respond for myself, but I have never "tipped" Meat off about something being said on a private mailing list about him.

What I meant was: Vicki tipped Meat off about posts about Columbus thread.
You tipped meat off about the bootleg thread.

I know for a fact that very many people here, feel very uncomfortable about this, to have to feel that everything they post may get taken out of context and to get Meat pointed in their direction is no different to how you feel about what you say being pointed to someone else.

Just noticed you say you've never tipped Meat off about something said on a private mailing list, which could be taken to mean you have on here, I really don't think keep saying the ROL and here or anywhere else are different, just because you have people sign the confidentiality act, doesnt mean its ok to do it there but not here. Does R have to make this private to get the respect that the ROL wants? It should just be ok to have an unwritten rule for this.

caryl wrote:As to your comment "... saying the things about Caryl that she has Sue on the ROL in the past few days", perhaps rather than make veiled suggestions you would care to say exactly what "things" I am supposed to have said? The ROL archives show that I have made only 5 posts about this issue, and in only two of them have I referred to Sue, and then I have only referred to her actions and not her person.

Well as you ask what exactly here goes......

These are a couple of extracts from things been posted by yourself:

Secondly it was Sue Williams who, when she took my 9/11 card from this non-public mailing list and shoved it on her worldwide website posting the link in the UK forum to invite people to comment negatively on it, said:
The picture can be viewed at [...] but please note it is on MY server not the MLUKFC server so the copyright breech is not due to MLUKFC.
From this it would seem that Sue Williams, whilst she may not be able to spell "breach" of copyright consistently, is not above doing it herself for spite, whereas Vicki gave full acknowledgement to her source and passed the information on for the purest of intentions.

Picking on Sues spelling is pretty away from the point also dont you think, If we all did that everytime Meat posted you'd be continually on his back. Also to say Sue was doing it for spite wasnt just fact either.

My question therefore is, who here has informed Sue Williams of Vicki's innocent posting on our ROL mailing list so that the former can publicly criticise and attempt to incite disapprobation of Vicki and ROL? For as far as I am concerned you are not welcome in this small group, the rest of whom treat each other with love and respect, support each other and deserve better than having someone sneak off and break the confidentiality rules of our friendly ROL family list.

Why does that have to be the reason for someone telling Sue? Where has Sue tried to publicily critisise and incite disapprobation of Vicki and the ROL?

And to Vicki I say, I am so sorry my friend that you of all people, whose motives are the best, who only tries to freely share information which will be of interest about our beloved Meat, and who clearly acknowledged your source and so imo were guilty of no copyright violations, should be subjected to this kind of mean-spirited attack. Believe me, as one who was subjected to a disgraceful and sustained attack last year in the UK forum I know just how hurtful it is.

No one has said Vicki doesnt have the best motives, Sue was annoyed over one thing, it's all being blown way out of proportion.

Nothing will happen to Vicki, apart from being hurt by this nasty spitefulness, which of course is bad enough as she of all people does
nothing to deserve it! . All the talk of copyright is smoke blowing .. to say your material is copyright is not alone sufficient in law to protect
it. You have to register copyright, and keep registering updates, which is a
costly business. I know you will not have been responsible. But I see no
reason why we should tolerate this tittle tattling from the list, and we won't.

Once again, where was Sue nasty and spiteful???? There is no need for these type of comments on this. This isn't just fact. Who's tittle tattling? Me? Sue? not sure who you mean here, but who ever I dont see it as tittle tattling. And what ever anyones said ovwer here has been said openly, unlike this i'm reffering to here.


back to replying to your post on here:

Caryl wrote: No-one has been "stoned" on our list, nor has anybody's "good reputation" been dragged through the mud, ever. This week people have merely expressed their view on specific actions taken by two people, one whose name is not known. Common courtesy, respect, fairness, and dignity are precisely what we ask from people who join

I disagree, you have tried to drag Sues reputation through the mud, with how you worded all of the above i have quoted. How you said it isnt just views.


I'm struggling a bit to understand your final point, and at a loss to understand why you bring the OIFC into this .. if you're suggesting that I say or encourage anyone to say anything derogatory about the OIFC on the ROL list you can, to quote a famous song, stop right there

I said:
Also seems unfair that basically anyone on the ROL can say what they want about anyone here, the OIFC or anyone else, while anything anyone says here gets picked to pieces with a fine tooth comb, by the same people insisting their comments not to be repeated.

I wasnt bringing the OIFC into this, what I was saying is. That The ROL if they agree to confidentiality, can say anything about anyone, on the MLUKFC, The OIFC, The MOTS, The Mickey Mouse fanclub, or anywhere else for that matter. While the people on the forsaid lists cant say anything back. Does that make more sense?


You also say about freedom of speech, well Sue also has the freedom of speech in saying what she did, If you agree with it is another thing. But I fail to see why you have to continually jump on eevrything someone says and have an opinion. As someone once said, let things go. Then these long off topic threads wouldnt happen. Just an observation but the vast majority of threads that have gone this way have usually happened because you've done this. And i'm afraid to have to be the one to say it, but you do get peoples backs up with this. it makes them react and not always in the nicest way, just as It makes you react when something was said about Vicki.

Finally I fail to see the moral difference about being able to say things on the ROL and expect people who dont agree or find it offensive not to repeat it. yet Its ok to do it here. Hopefully Sue's name can take a break for a while, as I'm sure to be taking over in the firing line

Deb