[ga-full] Re: [ga] Exclusion of Jeff Williams for 2 weeks

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Harald and all,

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> At 07:47 07.02.00 -0800, Jeff Williams wrote:
> >Harald and all,
> >
> >   Some how I knew something like this was going to occur.  To
> >bad it is not legitimate.
> >
> >   Define "Offensive Language" in the context of these not agreed upon
> >"Rules" and the referenced post, Harald?  How is it offensive?  It seems
> >pretty much a "Descriptive" reference to me.
>
> Eye of the beholder, I suppose.
> Since you chose to use the reference, and are defending your use of the
> term, I suppose you did not find it offensive. However, I did.

  Ohhhh?  You did?  I thought this complaint was from Joe Kelsey, not
you?  Is that not correct?  Or is you meaning that YOU as the questionably
legitimate monitor found it offensive or abusive.  How does "Eye of the
Beholder" justify the poorly defined, if at all, the term abusive?  And
I don't also see any rule using the term "Offensive" either.  How if what
 I said in the, "Eye of the beholder" violates an existing (Illegitimate?)
rule?

>
>
> >   As you know this will fail, but that is fine.  How have you handled the
> >complaint I sent on yourself Harald?  Or are you ignoring that one?
>
> Since you did not reference a specific message or how it was in conflict
> with the rules, it was not possible to take action on that message.

  It was referenced in the reply to the message to which you posted
Harald. That was quite clear.  But I get you GAME here. As does
everyone else.

>
>
> >  What was the nature of the complaint?  Are we going to see a copy
> >or this so called complaint?  How was this decision arrived at?  On what
> >basis without recourse on my part to rebut, is this decision made?
>
> The nature of the complaint was that the message was in conflict with the
> rules. I investigated, and found that I agreed.
> The basis of the decision was the content of the message.
> This list is open for your arguments and rebuttal; the chair's address is
> open for an appeal.

  Obviously this list is NOT open for arguments and rebuttal given
a restriction on speech.

>
>
> So far you have claimed that the term you used was a factual description,
> and that the rules are not legitimate.

  I did not use the word "Factual" I said a "Descriptive" Harald.  Nothing
more.  Please don't inaccurately misquote me, thank you.  Read what I said
again, above.

>
> Is that the total extent of your argument?

  No.  It is only part of my arguments. The remainder of my
Argument is in this reply above.

>
>
> Are you appealing?

  Of course.  Duh!

>
>
>                   Harald T. Alvestrand
>
> --
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
> Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208