Re: ASA re-visited

["Jim" <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
> Jim wrote:
>
> > I don't think you'll have the time nor be able to actually get the
> > "feel" of what's happened here over 6 years, ...
>
> No, I can't claim to have gone anywhere near that far back.  :-(
> (I do try to have some semblance of a life, though it doesn't always
> show!)
>
That's why I refer to this as a hobby.

> > Everyone here gives information to end users and to each other,
> > freely, but he USES that, along with his lies to make a profit. That's
> > wrong. No if and's or but's. It's wrong.
>
> I'm nowhere near arguing that it isn't wrong.  Please don't
> misunderstand me;  I'm not trying to convince anyone that he _should_ do
> what he's been doing;  what I'm trying to convince you of is that your
> vocal (well, typed) opposition to it does more harm (in general) than
> good.

Well, I can counter that with the fact that if someone here HADn't been
vociferous about it, you would not be aware of what he was doing to the

group. If no one said anything to him. If everyone ignored what he does
to
people and how he besmirches the industry ...What his reputation was
...
You'd probably have obtained your information and be long gone by now.
You may have even purchased product from him and have been totally
unaware of the means by which he'd obtained your business.

>
> > I don't really care if you believe what I'm saying or not.  ...
>
> Oh, I _believe_ you, don't doubt that; I'm just trying to be one of the
> voices that says "let it go ... people will see him for what he is
> without any help".
>

I don't see how NOT bringing his conduct into the forefront, by
objecting
to it,  to people that come here, is going to discourage him from being

the nasty rat that he purposely is to the regular participants.
I see it that his goal is to sell to
people regardless of what he has to do to others and the reputation of
the installation trade. Curtailing his ability to sell will certainly
not be
encouragement for him to continue, except for shear stoubborness to
not be (in HIS terms) bullied into doing something that he doesn't have
to do. In this type of fourm, he's right, you can't "force"anyone to do
anything. But you sure don't have to remain silent in the presence of
absolute arrogance and disregard for the majority of the people that
regularly participate in this Newsgroup. For the very same reason that
"nothing" can be done to stop someone from being a nasty misfit, it
has to be countered with somthing that is equally unsavory or it will
simply continue. In real life people can walk away and find another
group. But there's no way that I'm going to "walk away" and let this
misfit dictate how and where and what I do. Steve Rykman, let Bass
dictate what he wanted to do, by walking away from this group. All
this time, it's now obvious, Steve's been lurking in the background
self shackeled into not participating in this group, simply because he
chose to "ignore" Bass. That was his decision but it's not EVER
going to be mine. I think that it is BECAUSE of pacifisim such as
this, that people like Bass think that they can bully people into
backing
down even though they know what they're doing is wrong. As soon
as you let your fear of consequenses override your sense of what is
right, you've allowed something that is to wrong dictate what you do.
Your freedom to fuction as you choose, is taken down another notch.
And doing things wrong becomes a little more acceptable. You HAVE
to stand up and speak up for what is right or you relagate yourself
to servility.


> > You seem to be offering a way to write more words that every
> > one else is supposed to adhere to but that he will ignore.
>
> Well, my offer was to "write more words" if there wasn't already any
> document outlining a consensus of how participants in the group should
> behave.  Frank pointed to some documents that in my opinion do represent
> such consensus, so my current offer is to group the relevant sections of
> those into a single document that, once agreed on by regular participants
> in the group could be automatically posted on a regular basis.  I no
> longer believe that a "new" document would be necessary, but rather that
> a summary of existing documentation would suffice.

I anxiously await that happening..


>
> > ... no doubt ignoring him will be the decree of your masterpiece.
>
> It's in the group's proposal (I believe), though it doesn't name
> anyone specific.

I doesn't say what should be done if ignoring doesn't stop the
intrusion.



>
> > You've obviously not noticed that no one is interested in selling
> > anything to anyone here except Bass.
>
> Not directly, but I assure you that I would have no hesitation to
> translate some of the information I've received from some of the
> regulars here into hired services if I were looking for such.  I've
> gotten an impression that the group is generally populated with folks
> who have a professional attitude and take pride in a job well done, and
> who perhaps occasionally need to let off steam about clients or
> installations that were clearly done by less experienced personnel.
> That means they're human too.  :-)

On occasion, but very VERY rarely, does someone here have business
dealings with people who come here. Possibly it occurs out side of the
group, but if so, it isn't that apparent. Sometimes people are directed
to
participants that are known to provide a service they're looking for,
but
once that occurs, no one knows what transpires. By the way, that's
exactly what would happen with Bass also, if he wasn't so hell bent
on destroying people and reputations himself. HE knows this and has
been told this many, many times. But he just wont stop with the jabs,'
and other unsavory conduct.
>
> > So what does "reputation" have to do with anything.
>
> Credibility: whether or not I can associate your messages with someone
> who has credibility and whose opinions I can count on. ("I" in this
> sentence referring to any reader, including but not limitted to,
> myself).

I think that you might be wrong in my experience. When someone comes
here, it usually doens't make any differece WHO gives them the
information they're looking for, as long as they get it. They see the
turmoil, usually don't take sides, because they don't know who is the
villan and who isn't. All they know is that they need info or direction
and
will take it from wherever it comes. It's when they're looking for
someone
to buy from that their doubt as to whether the accusations about Bass's

conduct are really true or not. I'd hope that without knowing what's
true and
what's not, that they'd go to another web site, and I've gotten
occasional
E-mail feedback, that they do. Obviously, some don't and I've gotten
feedback on that also. So I know that SOME of what I'm doing is having
SOME affect on his business. That's good enough for me. But it DOES
assure me that total outward rejection by the participants of the group

would be even more effective. Saying nothing at all about his nefarious
and
sinister conduct that has perhaps taken place weeks before a newcomer
comes here, will not be seen by them and Bass will  achieve his goal of

using this group for his own profit. You can bet that a 1000 word
"charter"
is not going to be read by every newcomer either. And even if it is,
without
pointing out that Bass is breaching it, it will serve no purpose. So,
again
outward objection to what he is doing, is necessary.

>
> > Also you haven't noticed that no one knows who I am and surely,
> > never will.
>
> That's true, I hadn't spotted that.
>
> > The only thing that he's ever done to me is steal a post describing a
> > technique and put it on his web site un-accredited.
>
> That would be enough to leave a bad taste in my mouth ...  I think I'd
> counter with placing a copy of the same post, with complete headers on
> my own web site, and make sure that the bigger search engines take note
> of it.  That way, at least, readers would have some opportunity to
> locate the original message with its attribution.  :-)

Uhhhh your memory is VERY short. I don't have anything to sell here.
Therefore,
I don't have a website. If I did, and pointed to it from here, my
identity would be apparent.

>
> > ... if you pick through the manure, you're likely to find
> > some diamonds.
>
> Well, I have to admit, in the time that I've been reading the group
> directly (not via archives), it has been primarily diamonds.  It wasn't
> until this thread started that I started to have the idea that perhaps
> there was a history that I had yet to discover.  (note that I discovered
> the group via archives, and added it to the news server I manage a
> couple of weeks before starting to post in it ... that's all very
> recent.)

Again, another point in favor of outward objection to what he's done to
this group.

>
> >> A newsgroup should not be permitted to become personal.
> >
> > This is an alt group. You can't tell anyone what to do here. You don't
> > control this group or anyone in it. If you don't like it you can leave.
>
> That's true, but please understand that I'm not trying to control you or
> the group.  I'm simply trying to propose an alternate to the behaviour
> that has been seen in the past.  People can just as easily tell me to go
> to hell and leave them alone in their merry chaos, of course.  I would
> have dropped the idea immediately if I'd gotten the sense that the chaos
> was "comfortable".

All I can say is ....... that if you'd come here during a time that
Bass
was participating and you started this kind of subject I would be right
there
bashing you out of the group with every bit of opposition that I could
marshal.


>
> > Syl, you've got to understand. As long as Bass disrupts the group,
> > and incites altercations, there are going to be people who will
> > protest loudly and long at what he does to them.
>
> True.  Then again, protest can also be more subtle.  A sharp blade will
> cut much more deeply and more cleanly than a blunt one.

A heavy blade need not be sharp.

>
> > So whether I continue to openly chastise Bass or not, chaos will
> > continue with others, as long as he remains relentless in
> > his quest to exploit this group.
>
> I wouldn't claim to expect that _no_ chaos would ensue.  I do think that
> a dull roar is likely unavoidable in most newsgroups.  ;-)

With full cooperation from the majority of the regular participants  it
would
be the more desireable road to take. I'm waiting to see if the regular,

non-activists will adjust their views in light of the fact that this
has
gone on so long, doing what has been being done, up to this point.

>
> On the other hand, you and I have been having this discussion,
> disagreement even, with messages that have caused others to comment more
> about the length than about the content, yet we've managed to remain
> completely civil to each other, without once resorting to personal
> attacks against each other.
>
> Then again, neither one of us has displayed the sort of behaviour that
> the other is trying to argue against.  :-)

What you haven't noticed is that the people who I beleive foster Bass's
continuation of his behavior, have had very little or nothing to say in
this
thread.


>
> > it cannot be considered simply a coincidence that most of the
> > regulars here, have, will, and do oppose what he does here.
>
> I certainly have to agree with you on that.  not a coincidence ...
> However, I haven't been trying to say that you don't have a point (I
> did state that if you were one who felt "stepped on", that your points
> cannot be seen as unbiased, but not that they weren't valid, or unclear.)
> The fact that others (including, presumably, some who have had no reason
> to feel personally slighted) feel the same does remove some of that
> bias.
>

I'd have to say that most/all of the people that have been viciously
attacked
by Bass are no longer here or only drop in occasionally .......
anymore.
Being fair about it ...... all but a few of those that I've had
altercations with
over this situation, are mostly gone also.


> > I do see in this thread that you are trying to do something
> > else to try to "smooth the waters"
>
> Exactly.
>
> > I'd be willing to try something new but I have to say that in the face
> > of what we've dealt with in the past, more words are not going to have
> > any effect on his conduct.
>
> You may be (perhaps even probably are) right.  On the other hand, such
> a document would clearly demonstrate what sort of behaviour is intended
> to be found in the newsgroup.  People coming for advice (or trying to
> find goods or services to purchase) would be able to see very quickly if
> someone is stepping beyond those boundaries and exploiting the existence
> of the group for personal gain.  They would then be able to proceed
> according to their own morals.

See my above response to this.

>
> > If he never returns and your "charter" is agreed upon, by the
> > participants of ASA, it'll be a great thing for ASA and I'll embrace
> > it with every bit of cooperation that I can muster.
>
> The only response I would like to make to that is that I wouldn't want it
> to be "my" charter.  I'm willing to put in the time to compile it from the
> existing documentation, discuss it here with others, and more importantly
> (in my opinion) to setup an automatic frequent posting of it, but there's
> no way it would have any meaning in this newsgroup unless it were a
> document agreed upon by those people for whom this group exists (and
> I'm not really one of those, except insofar as I'm able to ask questions
> and get useful answers from others who participate in the newsgroup).

Then lets' get it on!


I'm doubful, but cooperative at this point. Let's see what happens.