I need help.......

[RENE BOUTIN]

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

Thank you.

Monsieur Papillon

Neil Jones wrote:

> In article <3.0.6.32.20000504094106.0088bbd0 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