Title: Re: [NewPacifica] you have been dealt
with.
I have learned, during this past year, to save about two hours a
week by not reading posts from certain people, on this list and
several others. My rule is, neverevenever open up posts by
certain people. However, when someone whose ideas are
interesting sends a message and I open the message only to find copies
of stuff I had been trying to avoid, it makes the whole thing
pointless.
One solution would be for me to stop reading the list
altogether. Another would be for everyone to filter out the same
messages I am filtering out, thereby depriving ourselves of much junk
and an occasional nugget of interest, if not wisdom. I can only
wish that people would stop fanning the flames of pointless exchanges
by bothering to answer. As Ogden Nash put it, "When called
by a panther/ Don't anther." They - you and I - would save a lot
of time and energy, and I could open messages from ordinarily
sensible posters without fearing that I was turning over another rock.
I confess: I am occasionally guilty of weakening and responding
to an interesting post by someone whom I know better than to try and
conduct a logical conversation with - and pay dearly for the slip.
I apologize, am strengthening my resolve to neverevernever, and will
be reading less and less, I'm afraid, if others on the list cannot
also resist the temptation to make sense out of nonsense.
Carolyn
I'm just curious why eileen has the need
to send all
this to other lists, when 1) this is taking place on
THIS list, not another, 2)many of us eileen is
attacking all the time are not on those other lists so
you can spin things any ole way you want and most of
us are not in a position to respond. And finally 3)
some of those you perpetually attack on this list
aren't even on it (such as Carol Spooner)and therefore
aren't here to respond to your attacks.
Seems to me eileen, this is a pretty cowardly
approach. In other words, you're a "lone voice"
because none of us wants to play you game.
--- evan davis <evan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I told you; I'm fishing these e-mails out of the
> "trash". My filters
> direct them there rather than to my "in-box".
> As for your laziness here, again is the relevant
> section from my post
> from earlier this week that you seem so reticent to
> answer.
> "As far as I know minutes of all LSB meetings are
> available in printed
> form for the asking as well as numerous audio
> recordings of the actual
> meetings plus all LSB and PNB meetings are either
> open for any member to
> attend or are netcast live. Therefore Eileen's
> assertion that Pacifica's
> governance is not "transparent" is simply untrue.
To
> prove her other
> claim, that Pacifica is "unaccountable to its voting
> constituency"
> Eileen will need to offer more substance. For
> instance; is ALL of
> Pacifica "unaccountable"? Are the programmers,
PD's,
> GM's, LSB's, PNB
> and all of the various committees unreachable? Are
> they un-responsive?
> Are the by-laws not being adhered to? Is the PNB
> unable to achieve a
> quorum or a majority in order to set policy and is
> the ED refusing to
> execute policies set by the PNB? Is the ED issuing
> instructions to the
> GM's that the GM's are refusing to follow? Are
> requests for critical
> financial data not being answered by the CFO or by
> the GM's? Eileen
> offers no specifics yet states as though it were a
> universally
> acknowledged fact that "Pacifica is unaccountable
> and non-transparent".
> She offers no proposals for addressing the vague and
> generalized
> problem(s) she alleges."
>
> I'll add here that Eileen appears to be one of those
> people who insists
> on the right to cry "fire" in a theater but who
> can't take the heat of
> an ordinary kitchen (figuratively speaking, of
> course).
> Evan
> P.S.
> I did not carry this correspondence to the other
> lists you've forwarded
> this exchange to. I'm doing so now - and just this
> once as a courtesy to
> the other folks you've exposed and to say to THEM;
> if any of you feel
> this exchange warrants your attention ad you want
> clarification
> regarding my point of view I'll be happy to answer
> you off-list.
>
>
> Eileen Goodman wrote:
> > just what I expected from you - lot's of hot
> air.....
> > again, since your filter appears to be working
> fine and you appear to
> > be the liar - tell this board - what are you
> talking about and what
> > answers have I refused to answer. I'm hoping
> people read the archives
> > of this list because the false picture you are
> trying to paint, now -
> > doesn't wash.... as I said - folks have thanked me
> for my time and
> > efforts posting concerns....... If there was not a
> person, such as
> > myself, as I'm a lone voice here - this board
> would be dead - a place
> > for announcements as the very latest past emails
> will confirm.......
> > Eileen J. Goodman
> >
> > */evan davis <evan@xxxxxxxxxxx>/* wrote:
> >
> > As you well know all one need do is
to read
> back just a few
> > e-mails in
> > this exchange to come across the one
in which
> I posed a series of
> > questions to you - questions which
you still
> refuse to answer
> > preferring, apparently instead to
turn the
> light of inquisition back
> > upon me though it was you, not I who
made the
> initial charges
> > regarding
> > Pacifica's "transparency"
and
> "accountability". I've neither
> > denied nor
> > supported those charges but merely
challenged
> you to substantiate
> > them
> > and yet you've accused me further of
holding a
> particular point of
> > view
> > which you claim to disagree with and
yet you
> also refuse to
> > identify or
> > define.
> > If your conduct here were to
exemplify the
> standards of discourse and
> > debate to which Pacifica may be
expected to
> aspire then surely
> > we're not
> > only doomed but an embarrassment to
the whole
> of intellectual
> > development - I plane which
seemingly dangles
> above you like the
> > grapes
> > to Aesop's fox.
> > Evan
> >
> > Eileen Goodman wrote:
> > > Evan,
> > > Your post speaks for who,
what...... Just
> for clarity and since you
> > > boast of accuracy - For the
record - why
> don't you list what it is
> > > I've compained about - since
others need to
> know - let's understand
> > > now - just what is it - I've
(your words)
> refused to speak about,
> > > those readers out there needing
to know,
> what is it I refuse to
> > > answer.......
> > > Eileen J. Goodman
> > >
> > > */evan davis /* wrote:
> > >
> > > My filters are back on and
working just
> fine. I'm fishing these
> > > messages out of the trash to
respond to them
> and I'm doing it only
> > > out
> > > of a sense of loyalty ( to
Pacifica) and
> confronting your "big lie"
> > > techniques simply on principle
- and you
> still haven't
> > > substantiated any
> > > of your charges ( undoubtedly
because you
> can't) yet you insist on
> > > taking further liberties by
proliferating
> more of them.
> > > Evan
> > >
> > > Kevin White wrote:
> > > > Just as I was about to
think, since you
> admit you don't have a
> > > radio,
> > > > that your lack of grip on
reality was just
> ignorance, you go and
> > > do this.
> > > > I think I now understand
what Edwin means
> by "Pacifica Loon."
> > > > K
> > > >
> > > > */Eileen Goodman /*
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Typical response from a
Carol Spooner
> Progressive faction member.
> > > > The big difference between
us - I support
> you and you want to get
> > > > rid me hoping ridicule
will do it (it
> might). Let me repeat myself
> > > > - I don't play your games.
I post from my
> heart - spontaneously -
> > > > carefree. I'm enjoying
everyone's
> suggestions for a folio and give
> > > > myself credit for starting
the
> conversation.
> > > > Something tells me your
filter is not
> working or you are just
> > a liar
> > > > Eileen J. Goodman
> > > >
> > > >
*/evan davis /* wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As predicted Eileen has
declined to
> address any of my
> > > > questions nor
> > > > substantiate her charges.
Instead she has
> multiplied them.
> > > > Eileen says that she
"got the better of
> him" (me) when she
> > > > refused
> > > > to support some spurious
and defamatory
> claim she made after I
> > > > demonstrated that her
statement was false
> and challenged her
> > > > to prove
> > > > otherwise. If that's the
way Eileen wins
> an argument then
> > > > perhaps she
> > > > could sign on as
co-counsel for the
> defense in the coming
> > > > trial of Karl
> > > > Rove. As for the rest of
us we'll extract
> what little
> > > > entertainment
> > > > value we can from Eileen's
claim that she
> "represent(s) the
> > > > listener".
> > > > And, to answer Eileen's
charge; yes I did
> recommend a board
> > > > trainer - several, in fact
and yes, the
> board(s) ( some of
> > > > them, anyway)
> > > > did eventually receive
some training
> (though not from any of
> > > > the people
> > > > I recommended). It's a
ritual that needs
> to be conducted on a
> > > > periodic
> > > > basis until a culture of
efficiency can be
> established that
> > > > can be
> > > > passed on to new incoming
board members.
> > > > Evan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Eileen Goodman wrote:
> > > > > All this attention
and energy focused on
> me. Since I know the
> > > > > hostility of you
folks and have pointed
> it out - I should
> > > > thank you
> > > > > for your
comments.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of us are just
listeners who do not
> spend enormous
> > > > amounts of
> > > > > time trying to stay
with all that
> happens in Pacifica. Some
> > > > of you
> > > > > folks are involved
and need to, I quess
> - still where has
> > > > all the time
> > > > > and energy you've
spent being informed
> in any way gotten you
> > > > - gotten
> > > > > Pacifica.
> > > > >
> > > > > You complain now,
saying these bylaws
> are the answer but
> > > > that folks
> > > > > don't follow the
bylaws, did you folks
> ever think that would
> > > > happen, I
> > > > > did, considering the
cooperation it will
> take for the bylaws
> > > > to be
> > > > > effective.....
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, it's true - I'd
rather bring folks
> together despite their
> > > > > differences and
support anyone's right
> to participate. Yes,
> > > > it's true
> > > > > I've been extremely
critical of you
> folks.
> > > > >
> > > > > So Evan doesn't
remember what our little
> go around was -
> > > > since I got
> > > > > the better of him -
it was just after
> the passing of Bylaws,
> > > > during
> > > > > the first elections
when most of you
> folks finally realized
> > > > even the
> > > > > best of the
professionals needed
> training. Evan said he had
> > > > just the
> > > > > man for the job.....
I wonder did anyone
> hear Evan - did he
> > > > follow
> > > > > through on this idea
he had for training
> folks. Did folks get
> > > > > trained......
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry folks but I
don't play your games
> and all this posting
> > > > you've
> > > > > done says to me -
someone heard this
> listener-sponsor
> > > > dedicated to a
> > > > > good tomorrow for
all.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you folks want a
real peace, a real
> understanding of your
> > > > fellow
> > > > > human you're going to
have to get off
> your elitist cloud and
> > > > find
> > > > > peace with ordinary
people, like myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Most folks are like
me. I represent the
> listener out there
> > > > and I
> > > > > complain we are not a
networked powered
> by the people - not
> > > > yet.... If
> > > > > folks are going to
work towards that
> goal Pacifica needs to
> > > > inform us
> > > > > so we can be a
powerful group supporting
> Pacifica.
> > > > >
> > > > > So many people have
thanked me for my
> posting. I've said,
> > > > > hey participate...but
hear - no way do
> they want to be
> > > > subjected to
> > > > > the crap you folks
have just so
> carelessly shown towards me.
> > > > And all
> > > > > because I've had the
courage to be
> critical of your
> > > > power-group, I've
> > > > > started to call the
Carol Spooner
> progressive faction.
> > > > >
> > > > > Eileen J. Goodman
> > > > >
> > > > > */Richard /*
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Good feet on the
ground post.
> > > > >
> > > > > A few thoughts:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Folios quarterly
or monthly? Years
> back WBAI's were
> > > > monthly with
> > > > > unobtrusive mom and
pop adverts. Fine.
> 'course the station
> > > > was more
> > > > > volunteer oriented
then so I assume
> running the station was all
> > > > > around less
> > > > > expensive.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Speaking for
myself with dial-up I
> can't take advantage
> > > > of video
> > > > > streaming and often
audio is "chunky"
> and I think it's not
> > > > only a
> > > > > problem
> > > > > for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3) What bothers me
also is what I
> perceive as a failure
> > > > (KPFA) to put
> > > > > sufficient info on
the air re PBN
> electorial candidates. I think
> > > > > in the
> > > > > past too much
reliance was placed on the
> comp and elsewhere.
> > > > > Nothing can
> > > > > adequately substitute
for open, on-air
> DISCUSSIONS and debates.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4) It would aid
listeners if PNB/LSB
> print voting records were
> > > > > available on
> > > > > a website. As is
overall so much time is
> required to dig out
> > > > > fundamental
> > > > > info from the web
it's discouraging.
> Maybe it's partially my
> > > > > fault....time
> > > > > considerations.
> > > > >
> > > > > /R
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original
Message-----
> > > > > From:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
[mailto:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > > > > Behalf Of evan
davis
> > > > > Sent: Monday, May 15,
2006 10:03 AM
> > > > > To:
NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re:
[NewPacifica] you have been
> dealt with.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm all for restoring
the Folios,
> including articles on LSB
> > > > > elections, minutes,
candidates
> statements, etc. and for
> > > > devoting air
> > > > > time to the same. As
far as I know
> minutes of all LSB
> > > > meetings are
> > > > > available in printed
form for the asking
> as well as numerous
> > > > audio
> > > > > recordings of the
actual meetings plus
> all LSB and PNB
> > > > meetings are
> > > > > either open for any
member to attend or
> are netcast live.
> > > > Therefore
> > > > > Eileen's assertion
that Pacifica's
> governance is not
> > > > "transparent"
is
> > > > > simply untrue. To
prove her other claim,
> that Pacifica is
> > > > >
"unaccountable
> > > > > to its voting
constituency" Eileen will
> need to offer more
> > > > substance.
> > > > > For instance; is ALL
of Pacifica
> "unaccountable"? Are the
> > > > programmers,
> > > > > PD's, GM's, LSB's,
PNB and all of the
> various committees
> > > > unreachable?
> > > > > Are they
un-responsive? Are the by-laws
> not being adhered to? Is
> > > > > the PNB
> > > > > unable to achieve a
quorum or a majority
> in order to set
> > > > policy and is
> > > > > the ED refusing to
execute policies set
> by the PNB? Is the
> > > > ED issuing
> > > > > instructions to the
GM's that the GM's
> are refusing to
> > > > follow? Are
> > > > > requests for critical
financial data not
> being answered by
> > > > the CFO
> > > > > or by
> > > > > the GM's? Eileen
offers no specifics yet
> states as though it
> > > > were a
> > > > > universally
acknowledged fact that
> "Pacifica is
> > > > unaccountable and
> > > > >
non-transparent". She offers no
> proposals for addressing the
> > > > vague and
> > > > > generalized
problem(s) she alleges. Is
> her post therefore a
> > > > legitimate
> > > > > _expression_ of opinion
or a malicious
> broadside?
> > > > > The last time I had a
go-around with
> Eileen she had made a
> > > > > claim in
> > > > > one of her posts that
I knew she could
> not substantiate
> > > > (don't ask me
> > > > > what it was as I no
longer have the
> stored messages). I
> > > > challenged her
> > > > > to either back up her
claim or retract
> it. She did neither
> > > > but she
> > > > > took
> > > > > a more conciliatory
tone for a while.
> That's her typical
> > > > game; she
> > > > > belches out some
hit-and-run barbs
> attacking individuals or
> > > > groups
> > > > > within Pacifica - or
in this case
> Pacifica in its entirety,
> > > > then she
> > > > > spars with the few
folks who take the
> time to call her on her
> > > > > shenanigans and when
someone calls upon
> HER to be
> > > > accountable she
> > > > > slips
> > > > > in to "oh, why
can't we all just get
> along" mode.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm happy to debate,
discuss, brainstorm
> and work toward
> > > > > resolution with
anyone who has views
> regarding Pacifica that
> > > > > differ from
> > > > > my own and to do so
with civility and
> respect but that requires
> > > > > coherence and
sincerity on the part of
> both parties engaged
> > > > in the
> > > > > dialogue. When it
comes to the Eileens
> among us; as a friend
> > > > said
> > > > > recently on another
list in response to
> a raging Zionist
> > > > "freeper"
> > > > > whose
> > > > > posts attacked
everyone and made no
> discernible sense;
> > > > "Didn't your
> > > > > mother teach yu never
to enter a battle
> of wits un-armed"?
> > > > > Evan
> > > > > wendy wrote:
> > > > > > Eileen certainly
has the right to post
> - She doesn't have
> > > > immunity
> > > > > > from the
questioning of what the hell
> she is talking about
> > > > though.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > New Yahoo! Messenger
with Voice. Call
> regular phones from
> > > > your PC
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > and save big.
> > > > >
> > > > > New Pacifica Working
Group
> > > > > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > > > > 'Save Our
Stations!'
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS
LINKS
> > > > >
> > > > > * Visit your group
"NewPacifica
> > > > > " on the
web.
> > > > >
> > > > > * To unsubscribe from
this group, send
> an email to:
> > > > >
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > * Your use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject
> to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > > Service .
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > How low will we go? Check
out Yahoo!
> Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone
> > > > call rates.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > New Yahoo! Messenger with
Voice.
> > > > Call
> > > > regular phones from your
PC
> > > >
> > > > and save big.
> > > >
> > > > New Pacifica Working
Group
> > > >
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > > > 'Save Our Stations!'
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > > >
> > > > * Visit your group
"NewPacifica
> > > > " on the web.
> > > > * To unsubscribe from this
group, send an
> email to:
> > > >
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > * Your use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject to
> the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > > Service .
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------ Yahoo!
Groups
> Sponsor
> > >
> > >
> > > New Pacifica Working Group
> > > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > > 'Save Our Stations!'
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Yahoo! Messenger with
Voice.
> > >
> > > PC-to-Phone calls for
ridiculously low
> rates.
> > >
> > > New Pacifica Working Group
> > > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > > 'Save Our Stations!'
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > > * Visit your group
"NewPacifica
> > > " on the web.
> > > * To unsubscribe from this
group, send an
> email to:
> > >
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
subject to
> the Yahoo! Terms of
> > > Service .
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------ Yahoo!
Groups Sponsor
> >
> >
> > New Pacifica Working Group
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > 'Save Our Stations!'
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone
> Calls
> >
>
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman1/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com>
>
> > to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
> >
> > New Pacifica Working Group
> > http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> > 'Save Our Stations!'
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > * Visit your group
"NewPacifica
> > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewPacifica>"
> on the web.
> > * To unsubscribe from this group,
send an
> email to:
> >
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
>
<mailto:NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=Unsubscribe>
> > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is
subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> You can search right from your browser? It's easy
> and it's free. See how.
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/_7bhrC/NGxNAA/yQLSAA/xYTolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> New Pacifica Working Group
> http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
> 'Save Our Stations!'
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
NewPacifica-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
Loraine
= = = = = = = = = = =
Read "Internment Camps of Bangladesh," by Loraine Mirza
Published by Crescent International Newspapers, Inc.
300 Steelcase Road West, Unit 8, Markham, Ontario, Canada L3R 2W2
"The story of a long-suffering people told with compassion and
sensitivity. All who care for justice must read this book. Loraine
Mirza, an American Muslim print and broadcast journalist, has written
this remarkable account of the 'Stranded Pakistanis,' trapped in
internment camps in Bangladesh since 1972." (Zafar Bangash,
Director of Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought.)
For more information:
e-mail: haq_for_u@xxxxxxxxxxx
info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
crescent@xxxxxxxxxxxx
crescent.uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Visit web sites: www.statelesspeopleinbangladesh.net
www.strandedpakistanis.com
www.OBATHelpers.org
www.muslimedia.com
www.ihrc.org
New Pacifica Working Group
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
'Save Our Stations!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
New Pacifica Working Group
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
'Save Our Stations!'
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS