Roger Kuhlman

[Semjase]

To all:

I am rather surprised at Neil apparently condoning the use of hate mail and
threat by this roger person.  I do not consider threatening or hate mail as a
private matter and anyone subjecting someone to such atrocity should not expect
the matter to remain private.  What roger does is not legal or moral and can
only be condemned.

S.


>Subject: RE: Roger Kuhlman
>From: Christine.Morigi at studiosusa.com  (Morigi, Christine)
>Date: Tue, 28 September 1999 08:18 PM EDT
>Message-id: <A57F34E5A084D211A6880008C7A4B17695E391 at SUSAEX01>
>
>Neil wrote:
>
>>>This is the public internet. Free Speech reigns. Isn't it amazing how
>those who are so passionate in their abhorence of regulation suddenly
>become proponents when they are involved personally.<<
>
>I see no correlation between free speech posting on this list and the
>situation that Jacob describes - personal and repeated attacks to his
>private email.  As for accusing him of dissembling, you are making that
>accusation about one of most honest people you could ever hope to know.
>When we participate in a forum such as this, we all run the risk that some
>email stalker will single us out to vent their sick frustrations.  I don't
>see how it's inappropriate to make members of the list aware of the problem.
>I doubt that anyone would make this accusation if it were being done to
>someone who shares their agenda.  And speaking of agendas, it is possible
>for people who love butterflies just as sincerely not to agree with
>your's...  I have personally challenged some inflamatory statements made on
>this list, simply by asking for some science?  I'm really not sure why that
>is so threatening, although I find it interesting that rarely does someone
>respond.  Isn't it the science of butterflies that we are all interested in?
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Neil at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK [mailto:Neil at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 3:14 PM
>To: Leps-l at lists.yale.edu
>Subject: Re: Roger Kuhlman
>
>
>In message <199909281829.LAA05236 at eagle.sac.verio.net> "Jacob Groth" writes:
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>
>
>I have to admit to being sceptical of Mr Groth's motives in posting this.
>He is new to Leps-l but is very familiar to me from DPLEX-L
>as a known anti-conservationist.
>
>The message could easily have been sent to the list administrator privately.
> Roger's email address has been removed from the messages. If others
>had it a quiet word of advice might be all that is needed.
> Please contact me privately Roger. I don't think you have got the hang
>of how this works.
>
>It looks suspiciously like an attempt just to discredit the opposition.
> 
>> To the list administrator,
>> 
>> I have asked Roger Kuhlman repeatedly to stop sending me private hate
>> messages.  I told him that I would be happy to have discussions with him
>in
>> a cordial way without personal attacks.  But, he has continued to send
>> defaming messages to me on my private e-mail.  Already 2 messages have
>come
>> in today.  Is there anything the administrator can do to control him or
>> remove him from the list if he continues?
>
>No. He may not be on the list at all.
>I don't think you know that leps-l is gated to
>sci.bio.entomology.lepidoptera
>
>> I have sent him a message
>> stating that if he continues I will post his personal attacks on me to the
>> list.
>
>Posting personal email to lists without consent is considered to be a gross
>breach of netiquette. OK we have a guy who cares passionately for
>butterflies
>I can understand that. He then sees someone dissembling. He gets angry.
>Wrong reaction, but he is human. Provoking him by posting his private
>messages to the net is not going to help.
>
>This is the public internet. Free Speech reigns. Isn't it amazing how
>those who are so passionate in their abhorence of regulation suddenly
>become proponents when they are involved personally.
>
>If you post here you risk getting flamed personally. You will also
>get spam. There is no cure for that either. 
>
>Roger shouldn't be posting his messages to you, but then you should
>not be posting them to the list. Two wrongs do not make a right.
>
>
>> But, I don't want to "infect" the list with this type of behavior so
>> I am seeking any other method.  Please advise.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Jacob
>> 
>
>-- 
>Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
>"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
>butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
>National Nature Reserve
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Neil at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK [mailto:Neil at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 3:14 PM
>To: Leps-l at lists.yale.edu
>Subject: Re: Roger Kuhlman
>
>
>In message <199909281829.LAA05236 at eagle.sac.verio.net> "Jacob Groth" writes:
>> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>
>
>I have to admit to being sceptical of Mr Groth's motives in posting this.
>He is new to Leps-l but is very familiar to me from DPLEX-L
>as a known anti-conservationist.
>
>The message could easily have been sent to the list administrator privately.
> Roger's email address has been removed from the messages. If others
>had it a quiet word of advice might be all that is needed.
> Please contact me privately Roger. I don't think you have got the hang
>of how this works.
>
>It looks suspiciously like an attempt just to discredit the opposition.
> 
>> To the list administrator,
>> 
>> I have asked Roger Kuhlman repeatedly to stop sending me private hate
>> messages.  I told him that I would be happy to have discussions with him
>in
>> a cordial way without personal attacks.  But, he has continued to send
>> defaming messages to me on my private e-mail.  Already 2 messages have
>come
>> in today.  Is there anything the administrator can do to control him or
>> remove him from the list if he continues?
>
>No. He may not be on the list at all.
>I don't think you know that leps-l is gated to
>sci.bio.entomology.lepidoptera
>
>> I have sent him a message
>> stating that if he continues I will post his personal attacks on me to the
>> list.
>
>Posting personal email to lists without consent is considered to be a gross
>breach of netiquette. OK we have a guy who cares passionately for
>butterflies
>I can understand that. He then sees someone dissembling. He gets angry.
>Wrong reaction, but he is human. Provoking him by posting his private
>messages to the net is not going to help.
>
>This is the public internet. Free Speech reigns. Isn't it amazing how
>those who are so passionate in their abhorence of regulation suddenly
>become proponents when they are involved personally.
>
>If you post here you risk getting flamed personally. You will also
>get spam. There is no cure for that either. 
>
>Roger shouldn't be posting his messages to you, but then you should
>not be posting them to the list. Two wrongs do not make a right.
>
>
>> But, I don't want to "infect" the list with this type of behavior so
>> I am seeking any other method.  Please advise.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Jacob