I need help.......
rboutin at sympatico.ca
Fri May 5 08:14:35 EDT 2000
At one time people were talking about making two leps-list, one european one
american and at that time I thought it was a good idea and that it might takeMr.
Jones off our back and I still think so,would their be other advantages
Neil Jones wrote:
> In article <184.108.40.206.20000504094106.0088bbd0 at mail.airmail.net>
> llrogers at airmail.net "Linda Rogers" writes:
> > At 08:34 PM 5/3/2000 -0700, Patrick Foley wrote:
> > Linda and other leppers,
> > Don't jump on Neil Jones; just argue out the science.
> > That is NOT what Mr. Jones was doing! He
> > invites stinging replies with his abrasive
> > and offensive manner. He says he doesn't
> > want to start a flame war, then proceeds
> > to insult and offend.
> My experience suggests that on Usenet the offence taken and the
> vehemence of the reponse are directly proportional to the accuracy
> of the original remark.
> > In his reply regarding releases he did not
> > ARGUE THE SCIENCE. He called names:
> > lawbreakers, dubious salesmen, untruth
> > peddlers,
> Logically this statement shows one of two things.
> 1. Linda Rogers is deliberately misrepresenting what I said.
> 2. Linda Rogers misunderstood what I said.
> Just to clarify the point. The lawbreakers were convicted felons nothing
> to do with the IBBA. The dubious salesmen were people like a chinese "dealer"
> obscuring his identitiy and trading in endangered species again nothing
> to do with the IBBA. I was explaining why I respond to this kind of thing
> on grounds of personal ethics.
> and accused people of
> > deliberate deceit and not knowing subject.
> No I accused people of EITHER deliberate deceit OR not knowing the subject.
> The fact is that there is an article on your website that is NOT truthful.
> You are marketing a product and an idea by using statements that are
> NOT TRUTHFUL. It is my duty as an honest and ethical citizen to point this
> out to those who may not realise it.
> It is abundantly and obviously clear that the statment you use to justify
> yourself does not refer to the subject to which you claim.
> YOu have misquoted a scientist to say something which he does not say.
> This is NOT truthful.
> > He discredits in a petty fashion to convince
> > the reader to take his opinion. Or, he's
> > "protecting" them from lying carpetbaggers
> > (since the reader's not intelligent enough to
> > read for themselves and form their own
> > opinion).
> Intelligence has little to do with it, accurate truthful information does.
> I believe quite strongly that not to respond when ideas are peddled
> which are not truthful would be unethical.
> > The "Bimbo and Rambo" comment,
> > was that ARGUING SCIENCE?? This sort of
> I obviously got through with this one didn't I :-)
> I was arguing that people get mislead if they are presented with information
> that is NOT TRUTHFUL. I picked two names that suggested cluelessness.
> > attack and negative behavior does not open
> > the door to learning nor to any thoughtful
> > dialog between groups.
> Well It was not I who started being negative. The IBBA membership
> has constantly attacked and attempted to undermine the North American
> Butterfly Association because they want proper laws protecting butterflies
> and their habitats. The social changes needed for this are against the
> COMMERCIAL interests of the IBBA.
> > Linda Rogers, Member
> > International Butterfly Breeder's Association
> > www.butterflybreeders.org
> 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
More information about the Leps-l