From: keegan@windsurf.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Doing the Right Thing
Date: 8 Apr 92 13:47:49 GMT
Organization: T.S.A.K.C.

kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> keegan@sunroof.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
-> >kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> >-> keegan@sungod.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
-> >-> >kevin@rotag (Kevin Darcy) writes:
-> >-> >-> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
-> >-> >-> >He doesn't even support such an idea *on* the net,
-> >-> >-> >for people he likes. When Steven Kellmeyer posted
-> >-> >-> >private email on the net a few weeks ago, Darcy
-> >-> >-> >defended him.
-> >-> >-> 
-> >-> >-> Wash your mouth out with soap, Nora. I did no such thing.
-> >-> >
-> >-> >sure you did kebbie. here's the full, unedited version of
-> >-> >your post.
-> >-> >
-> >-> >==========included post follows
-> >-> > [We've seen this shit before already]
-> >-> >==============end included post
-> >-> 
-> >-> Jimmy, please produce a quote which shows me discussing email
-> >-> privacy issues. This one you dredged up is totally irrelevant.
-> >
-> >perhaps it's not relevant to you kebbie, although i can't
-> >imagine why that would be the case. it seems to me that it
-> >was relevant to several posters, many who commented on your
-> >defense of kellmeyer well before i posted the actual text of
-> >your message.
-> 
-> They misremembered the context. Kellmeyer posted private
-> email, and I defended him, but those were INDEPENDENT events.
-> I was defending his right to post child-support-related
-> material to talk.abortion, *NOT* his right to post private
-> email.

i realize you'd like to remember it that way. unfortunately for
you, the facts do not support your recollections

-> It was a natural mistake, and one which I am willing to
-> forgive, if the matter is dropped. However, if you insist on
-> trying to smear me with charges that I "defended Kellmeyer's
-> posting of private email" you'd better get a RELEVANT quote,
-> Jimmy. The one you're relying on right now has *NO* mention of
-> email in it, nor reference to the privacy thereof. It doesn't
-> help your "case" one iota. It just makes you look like you're
-> desperately trying to get the "goods" on me, and you'll stoop
-> to twisting ANYTHING for that purpose.

"*NO* mention of email in it" you say? let's just examine the
facts, shall we.

in response to one of my posts entitled, "Subject: kellmeyer
posts private email! (Re: To T.S.A.K.C. (or whatever the hell it
is))," you replied with a defense of kellmeyer. the full text of
your post is appended. perhaps, in your desperation to find
something to flame me for, you erred in making this post.
whatever the case, defended kellmeyer and later flamed garvin for
posting email, although in garvin's case, this newsgroup has
clearly indicated overwhelming support of her actions. in fact, i
can't recall that another poster, other than you and welch,
posted anything but support of garvin.

-> >i noticed you deleted it above. does it make you uncomfortable.
-> 
-> I elided it because it was irrelevant. See above.

"irrelevant" in your opinion only kevin. as almost always, you
are arguing a case that just about everyone has already decided.

-> >it's interesting that you deleted what you actually wrote and
-> >then expressed an oninion on what you said. heh.
-> 
-> Maybe it was "interesting" [sic] to you, but it was simply
-> routine to me.  Irrelevant verbiage is often elided in
-> net.discussions.

again, "irrelevant" in your opinion only kevin. let readers
decide for themselves. it's appended below.

============included article begins
From kevin@cfctech (Kevin Darcy) Thu Mar  5 08:16:38 1992
From: kevin@cfctech.cfc.com (Kevin Darcy)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: kellmeyer posts private email! (Re: To T.S.A.K.C. (or whatever the hell it is))
Date: 5 Mar 92 02:33:56 GMT
Organization: Chrysler Financial Corp., Southfield, MI

In article <28049@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> keegan@ukulele.crd.ge.com (James G Keegan Jr) writes:
>cornered, and unable to support one of his false allegations,
>steven kellmeyer posts an annotated copy of an email message i
>sent to him in response to an email message from him.
>
> [same old, same old]

Jimmy, don't you ever tire of playing such a repetitive, officious, nit-picking 
little weasel?

I mean, if we all spent great gobs of time trying to prove/support/
substantiate/corroborate/regurgitate every event since the Big Bang to 
*YOUR* (seemingly insatiable) satisfaction, that wouldn't leave much 
opportunity to actually discuss -issues-, now would it?

=======end included article

--
----
charter member   ...   T.S.A.K.C.