Alan Fox quits Association of Non-Censoring Bloggers
Alan Fox, the blogger on the Languedoc Diary blog, has quit the ANCB because I am a holocaust revisionist, even after I told him that being associated with a holocaust revisionist does not necessarily mean that he is a holocaust revisionist himself. IMO he is a hypocrite and I am now sorry that I ever urged him to join ANCB. I will remove his blog from my external link list. He can do what he wants with his posts on my ANCB website -- my no-deletions policy prevents me from deleting them myself. Alan's statement canceling his membership is here.
PS --
Alan,
I might add that when someone from a big website told me that he and is teammates wanted to cite my blog but were afraid to do so because of my holocaust revisionism, I told him that I understood. I understood because he had a big, well-known website that had a lot to lose by being associated with a holocaust revisionist. But you just have a ridiculous little blog that is now averaging only about 10 visitors per day.
PS --
Alan,
I might add that when someone from a big website told me that he and is teammates wanted to cite my blog but were afraid to do so because of my holocaust revisionism, I told him that I understood. I understood because he had a big, well-known website that had a lot to lose by being associated with a holocaust revisionist. But you just have a ridiculous little blog that is now averaging only about 10 visitors per day.
Labels: Internet censorship (new #1)
posted by Larry Fafarman | 5/31/2007 09:56:00 AM
16 Comments:
> Alan Fox, the blogger on the Languedoc Diary blog, has quit the ANCB because I am a holocaust revisionist <
He also seemed concerned that he was the only member who actually practiced the stated principles of the group (if you can count two people as a group)
> IMO he is a hypocrite <
He warned you that he would pull out if you didn't follow the standards you preached.
> and I am now sorry that I ever urged him to join ANCB. <
"Begged him" would be the proper words.
> But you just have a ridiculous little blog that is now averaging only about 10 visitors per day. <
Sour grapes, Larry? You may only have about 10 visitors per day with some checking in multiple times.
The bottom line is that Alan Fox wanted a higher standard.
Perhaps if you renamed the association to something more accurate: "Association of Mindlessly Repetitive Pettifoggers" for example.
>>>>>> He warned you that he would pull out if you didn't follow the standards you preached. <<<<<<
Why didn't you read the reason he gave, dunghill --
I did not realise holocaust denial/revisionism was such an industry in the US. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.To say I do not wish to be associated with it is an understatement. So I hope you will understand why I am walking away from your association forthwith.
So he quit because of my holocaust revisionism, just like I said in my post. He didn't say that I don't follow my no-censorship standards -- and I do follow them. And I don't want to get into another big argument about my refusal to allow gossip about my private affairs.
And why haven't you responded to Alan's call for guest articles? You think that writing blog articles is so easy.
>Why didn't you read the reason he gave, dunghill<
Well you pathetic pettifogging dimwit, You seem to be taking only the last statement from Alan Fox. Let's look at some others:
You may not agree, but your persistent off-topic posts at PT were initially bounced to the bathroom wall legitimately, and it was only your subsequent use of aliases that earned you a permanent ban.
If people ignore our opinions, we cannot blame censorship.
I suspect, if I were in a position to decide, I would ask you to keep to the topic of the thread and not make repetitive posts, and also to support claims when challenged, or withdraw them. How would you feel about being asked to acknowledge and abide by the site rules?
So, you are banned at PT, AtBC and Ed Brayton's blog. On this you base your campaign about internet censorship. Pardon me for saying, this is rather like a campaign against Larry Fafarman being banned at three sites.
At this you bleated about others changing the subject and also said "Also, failure to support claims is not an excuse for censorship."
This appears like you are admitting that you often do not support claims.
Alan replied:
I was asking how you might react if asked to give an undertaking as to future behaviour. You are only responsible for your own comments in a forum. It is open to you to contact the moderator with objections to posters who are not abiding by the blog rules. This does not really relate to censorship.
As to your begging and pleading wit him to join your association, he said:
The motive for your doing so appears to be to gain some credibility for yourself.
It is only after these that the subject of Holocaust denial came up:
There is another issue that makes me reluctant to associate with you. I recall that you have been identified as a holocaust denier. Does this allegation have any factual basis?
To which you first tried to weasel out with: "I consider myself to be a holocaust revisionist."
But beyond that he stated:
I am not comfortable with the way you express yourself on your own blog.
Reluctantly he joined saying:
Well, so long as you understand I will walk away if you do not keep to your own standards, I will join your association.
After joining he noted:
It does seem Larry is able to ignore evidence and to churn out abuse on a regular basis.
After he bailed out, the following exchange occurred:
I said: "Please read something about this subject before attempting to respond."
To which you protested: "Voice simply does not know how to engage in a civil conversation and he always presumes that he is smarter than the next guy."
After which Alan Fox sagely noted:
It's good advice, Larry.
You dunghill, Alan Fox mentioned none of those other things in his statement canceling his membership. You even started talking about things he said after he canceled his membership. Furthermore, like my holocaust revisionism, none of those other things have anything to do with whether I am following the stated principles of the Association of Non-Censoring Bloggers.
Anyway, I am through with Alan Fox. He is a lousy hypocrite.
> Alan Fox mentioned none of those other things in his statement canceling his membership.<
Nor did VIW claim that he did.
> Anyway, I am through with Alan Fox. <
That is why you are continuing to post on his site.
Anyway, Alan Fox is through with you. You are a lousy hypocrite.
Voice in the Urbanness driveled,
>>>>>> Alan Fox mentioned none of those other things in his statement canceling his membership. <
Nor did VIW claim that he did. <<<<<<<
He didn't need to claim that, dunghill -- we were talking about Fox's stated reason(s) for quitting.
>>>>>> Anyway, I am through with Alan Fox. <
That is why you are continuing to post on his site. <<<<<<
My comments to Alan there were just a few parting shots. My other comments there were replies to other commenters.
> He didn't need to claim that, dunghill -- we were talking about Fox's stated reason(s) for quitting. <
A rational mind could tell that VIW was expanding the subject. Of course you are not a person with a rational mind, as you have repeatedly shown.
Voice in the Urbanness said...
>>>>>> He didn't need to claim that, dunghill -- we were talking about Fox's stated reason(s) for quitting. <
A rational mind could tell that VIW was expanding the subject. <<<<<<
Expanding what subject? Why in hell doesn't ViW just let Fox give his own reasons for quitting ANCB rather than making up reasons for him?
> Why in hell doesn't ViW just let Fox give his own reasons for quitting ANCB rather than making up reasons for him? <
You disingenuous dunderhead, ViW didn't make up anything. He quoted Alan Fox directly. You are deliberately trying to mislead the readers here.
Hasn't it ever occurred that if you have to lie to support your position, you would be better off to say nothing?
Voice in the Urbanness wheezed,
>>>>>>> Why in hell doesn't ViW just let Fox give his own reasons for quitting ANCB rather than making up reasons for him? <
ViW didn't make up anything. He quoted Alan Fox directly. You are deliberately trying to mislead the readers here.<<<<<<
You no-good worthless piece of crap, ViW was making up reasons for Fox's decision to quit ANCB. Here are ViW's exact words (June 01, 2007 8:50:00 PM) --
(I said) Why didn't you read the reason he gave, dunghill.
(ViW answered) Well you pathetic pettifogging dimwit, You seem to be taking only the last statement from Alan Fox. Let's look at some others:
I wasn't talking about "statements" from Fox -- I was only talking about the reason he gave for quitting ANCB.
Someone would have to be quite warped (as you have shown yourself to be) to think that the statements that ViW quoted verbatim from Alan Fox were not also reasons that he was backing off having any association with you.
As Alan Fox observed, you seem unable to discuss anything without hurling insults.
> I wasn't talking about "statements" from Fox -- I was only talking about the reason he gave for quitting ANCB. <
And ViW was talking about the other reasons that Fox was uncomfortable being associated with you.
Perhaps you could learn from this and make your blog more acceptable among the serious blogs. You wonder why you are never cited elsewhere. Nobody wants to be associated with a mud-slinging baby.
Then again you have shown that you can't learn anything. You only regress with time.
Hector said,
>>>>>> Someone would have to be quite warped (as you have shown yourself to be) to think that the statements that ViW quoted verbatim from Alan Fox were not also reasons that he was backing off having any association with you. <<<<<<
Wrong. One would have to be quite warped to assume that those statements were also reasons for his quitting ANCB. In fact, Alan implied that they were not also reasons for his quitting ANCB because he only asked me to understand why he was quitting ANCB because of my holocaust revisionism -- he didn't ask me that in regard to any of those other statements. Here is what Alan said:
I did not realise holocaust denial/revisionism was such an industry in the US. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.To say I do not wish to be associated with it is an understatement. So I hope you will understand why I am walking away from your association forthwith.
I answered that I do not understand that reason because he just runs an obscure little blog -- and in fact he said, " I am not interested in promoting my blog" -- and so has little or nothing to lose by being associated with a holocaust revisionist. Because his blog is so obscure, few people would be interested in unjustifiably attacking him because of an association with a holocaust revisionist.
>>>>>>You wonder why you are never cited elsewhere. Nobody wants to be associated with a mud-slinging baby. <<<<<<<
Sleazy PZ Myers and Fatheaded Ed Brayton sling a lot of mud and are cited plenty. And I get plenty of mud thrown at me, too. And I am frequently accused of being ignorant or stupid when I obviously am not. Commenters frequently make that charge without even explaining why they think I am ignorant or stupid.
Anyway, I thought that you thought that this blog is too lousy to be worth citing anywhere (which makes me wonder why you, ViW, ViU, etc. hang around this blog so much).
> Wrong. One would have to be quite warped to assume that those statements were also reasons for his quitting ANCB.<
You would have to be quite sane to assume those statements were also reasons for his quitting ANCB.
> In fact, Alan implied <
You are always getting "implications" out of all sorts of things that aren't really there.
> he said, " I am not interested in promoting my blog" <
That was in answer to your pleading with him to stay as a member so you would not look like the clown you do as the only member. You were offering help in promoting his blog which would be the blind leading the blind.
> And I am frequently accused of being ignorant or stupid when I obviously am not. <
Obviously you are.
> Commenters frequently make that charge without even explaining why they think I am ignorant or stupid. <
They often explain why but you are too stupid to understand.
> I thought that you thought that this blog is too lousy to be worth citing anywhere (which makes me wonder why you, ViW, ViU, etc. hang around this blog so much). <
It has nothing to do with you being worth citing. It has to do with entertainment value. "Larry's Cry Room" is the funniest blog on the net.
>>>>>> In fact, Alan implied <
You are always getting "implications" out of all sorts of things that aren't really there. <<<<<<
OK, Alan Fox was not implying anything -- he was saying exactly why he was quitting ANCB:
I did not realise holocaust denial/revisionism was such an industry in the US. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. To say I do not wish to be associated with it is an understatement. So I hope you will understand why I am walking away from your association forthwith.
His other statements of opinion about me had nothing to do with his decision to quit. He didn't say or imply that my holocaust revisionism was the last straw. He obviously would have quit anyway even if he did not have those other opinions about me.
>>>>>> Commenters frequently make that charge without even explaining why they think I am ignorant or stupid. <
They often explain why but you are too stupid to understand. <<<<<<
And more often than not they do not explain anything.
>>>>>> I thought that you thought that this blog is too lousy to be worth citing anywhere (which makes me wonder why you, ViW, ViU, etc. hang around this blog so much). <
It has nothing to do with you being worth citing. <<<<<<
Wrong again. Hector said that the reason why I am not cited is that I sling mud:
Perhaps you could learn from this and make your blog more acceptable among the serious blogs. You wonder why you are never cited elsewhere. Nobody wants to be associated with a mud-slinging baby.
Give it up, ViU. You trolls have lost this argument. You are just kicking a dead horse.
>>>>>>... It has nothing to do with you being worth citing. <<<<<<
> Wrong again. Hector said that the reason why I am not cited is that I sling mud: <
Wrong again, dimwit. ViU was answering why we hang around your blog so much. His answer was totally correct. Your comparing it to the reason you are not cited shows that the atmosphere is too thin on your planet.
Post a Comment
<< Home