>Huxter: Last post from me on the topic
DNAunion: Good, then this will be the last time I have to reply to you on
this. I - as the defendant - will have some fun with this if you don't mind.
>Huxter: I find it ironic that a chap who feels the need to post under
several aliases on the same board and in fact have them compliment each other
...
DNAunion: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I ask that my client - me - be
found not guilty on all charges, either due to technicalities or outright
errors and oversights in the prosecution's case.
First, a minor point. In his latest charges, Huxter claims that I - while
supposedly posting under SEVERAL different names at once at another site -
used multiple identities to "compliment each other". I do not recall
Huxter's evidence for this. As DNAunion, I did quote from my posts as
WWASIAUC and did say that the earlier statements were correct: they were mine
after all and I had not so quickly turned on myself and I was continuing the
same discussions I had started earlier: just in a more polite manner). To
the best of my recollection, that is as far as the "complimenting" went -
confirmation that the earlier statements were correct and that the opponent
was wrong for claiming them to be incorrect (note: obviously I don't recall
every statement of every post I made at that site: but I do believe my above
statements are correct and feel that Huxter should provide evidence that they
are not: seeing as how I am innocent until proven guilty and all).
Now to the more important points.
In this last of his charges, Huxter says that I posted under *SEVERAL* names
at another site. In order for his claim to be valid, he MUST count the ONE
time I INADVERTENTLY posted under ArnOrg, but I don't feel this single post
should be counted. As explained elsewhere, because I navigated to the site
from one of my work computers, the web site logged me in AUTOMATICALLY as
ArnOrg - an account I set up from that computer but then never used - and it
was not until AFTER I posted (the one and only message under that name, by
the way) that I could tell I was not logged in under DNAunion: by that time,
it was IMPOSSIBLE for me to go back and change the name under which the post
was made. This single posting under ArnOrg was hardly a voluntary and/or
dishonest act on my part.
Therefore, I believe the most Huxter has the right to claim here is that I
posted under TWO names, not SEVERAL. But even this charge seems inaccurate.
As explained elsewhere, I never posted as both people at once: I started off
as WWASIAUC, then left, then came back as DNAunion. So I was not posting
under two names simultaneously at any site.
Furthermore, as explained elsewhere, my motive for dropping out and coming
back under a different name was NOT DISHONEST: my purpose was to erase a
negative history between me and the person to which I had been responding the
most and to thereby allow our uncivil exchanges to return to polite and civil
exchanges. Again, I dispute the charge of being DISHONEST in this matter as
my motives were purely honorable.
Furthermore, as explained elsewhere, the site had no rules against posting
under multiple names so I was not in contempt or violation of ANY rules.
Here is the URL to that boards rules for those who wish to check for
themselves:
http://pub18.ezboard.com/fhavetheologywillarguerules.showMessage?topicID=2.top
ic
Now, if a law is in effect in Georgia, and someone violates that law *while
in Georgia*, then that person has done wrong and deserves to be arrested.
However, if the law that is on the books in Georgia is not on the books in
California, and someone in California "breaks the Georgia law", then that
person has NOT violated any laws and is not subject to arrest. Same goes
with my posting under only 2 names at separate times at a different site
which had no rules against posting even under 10 names at once: I violated no
rules.
Hence, I ask that the charges of (1) dishonesty and (2) wrongdoing in posting
under multiple names be dropped and the case dismissed.
Now, about some of the others of Huxter's original charges.
Huxter implied that I was posting under multiple names here: that is untrue,
plain and simple. I ask that the charges be dropped.
Furthermore, Huxter implied that I posted under multiple names at ARN. Yet
another of Huxter's unfounded insinuations that is flat out wrong. I ask
that the chages against me be dropped.
Furthermore, Huxter is in the wrong. He should not post rumors, hunches, or
gossip about others. If he feels he must (which he should not), then he
should not place anyone's name in the e-mail which associates them with such
rumors, hunches, and gossip. If he suspects something or someone has done
something questionable, he should either avoid using names, or ask the person
privately and politely (for example, another person who posts here did ask
someone else about the possiblitiy that he/she might have used more than 1
identity at different times: this would have been the proper way for Huxter
to handle the situation). There was no need for Huxter to run around like
chicken little screaming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling": that is,
to blare out "Alerts" and "Be wary" warnings about "Imposters" and
"multiple-name posters here" with my name anywhere in the e-mail. There were
multiple ways for Huxter to handle his hunches, and he chose the one that
would stir up the most contempt against his opponents: a ploy: a tactic.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, as the prosecution has rested its case in
this matter, so too now does the defense rest its case (but reserves the
right to defend against any other charges by any other people in regards to
this issue).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 05 2000 - 20:45:52 EDT