From: altar@beaufort.sfu.ca (Ted Wayn Altar)
Subject: Re: an idea
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 16:46:27 GMT

ich Young replies:
>[...much verbosity deleted...]
          ^^^^^^^^^
Note that the facts and arguments that support my make my case
you have here conveniently ignored and dismissed as mere "verbosity".
 
 
 
>>All very reassuring, but I don't think you are being candid with
>>us about what you really think about vegetarianism.  Permit to
>>post a reminder of your own words:
 
>[...much more verbosity deleted...]
>No, "ted", what you reprinted shows what I think of McDougall and
>Robbins, NOT what I think of vegetarians or vegetarianism.
>
 
To take another example.  You have just recently e-mailed the
following vicious remark to another vegetarian who simply
responded to your public declaration that you "dislike 
promulagtion of faulty information under the guise of fact":
 
     vegetarian X> I often see you trying to correct information
     vegetarian X> that is not faulty.
 
     Rich> In YOUR not-so-humble-and-in-fact-incredibly-
     egotistical opinion.
     . . .
     Rich> You've simply become irrelevant at this point; just
     Rich> another raving zealot whose ability to think has been
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     Rich> stolen by the blindness of his rage.
 
In this exchance, the only rage I saw was on your part.
 
So, it turns out that it's not just me to whom you send insulting 
"hate-mail", i.e., e-mail whose purpose is to insult and demean, 
e-mail that evinces a real animus on your part towards these 
vegetarians.
 
Returning to example of how you slandered John Robbins, it so happens
that Robbins is a vegetarian and many vegetarians here have found
his book informative, useful and well-documented.  To merely
proclaim otherwise and impute motives of GREED on Robbins part is
a scurrilous defamation of his character and an insult to us
vegetarians who have read for ourselves what is an intelligent
and respectable book.
 
The only purpose of your defamation of writers like Robbins is to
undermine vegetarianism and dismiss through slander what we read.
 
 
>
>    You have just proven to the world that your true goal is to vent your
>    spleen in public, not to perform any useful function in the newsgroup.
>    Once again, I invite you to respond in e-mail and spare those readers
>    who have no desire to waste time on your displays of intolerance.
 
>
Such an invite for e-mail is disingenuous of you.  Other readers
are not aware that I have sent, "unbidded" as you once
complained, many FRIENDLY and always CIVIL messages detailing at
times in great length what I thought was simply a
misunderstanding of some things.  What was the result?  Endless
personal insults, solely on your part, like that of calling me
"immature" and "stupid".
 
The evidence of your animus towards some vegetarians in
particular (see example above) and vegetarianism in general (see
previous posting) is simply too strong to ignore and tolerate.
 
I regret to say that e-mail with you has simply turned
out to be a waste of time.  I think it best to now use my
precious little time to here speak to intelligent and good-
hearted vegetarians, and defend them if need be, from oily-
tongued omnivores like yourself who have publically referred to
some vegetarians in general as akin to "religious fanatics" and
even publically insulted some particular vegetarians like Dave
McWade as "liars". 
 
                                             ted
 
 
P.S.  I really do wish that you would climb down 
and finally apologize to Dave McWade for that uncalled 
for public insult of calling him a "liar".  You at least owe 
him that much.  After all, I at least publically apologized 
to you for much less.   Maybe if you could just for once 
admit to being wrong, we could advance debate beyond this 
kind of rudeness.  You also ought to consider sending a private
e-mail apology to the person above who you demeaned as a
"another raving zealot".