Theos-Talk Archives (December 1999 Message tl00252)

> I think that was a point I made; the group slandering you was much
> stronger than the group falsely accusing John Algeo, and the group
> protecting you was much weaker than the group protecting John Algeo.

Ok Bart - not certain why in the world you'd want to dredge all this up -
but since you've apparently decided to do so - your patently false
portrayals are *not* going to go unanswered. It may take a couple of days to
fully respond ... but baby if ya want to fight, okey-dokey. Perhaps you
should understand, however, that

1. To make an accusation is *not* necessarily to "slander". If 9/10's of the
accusations are *ture* trying to point to one and prove it "false" is not a
defense.
2. The leadership of *any* democratically elected organization can, and
*should* be looked at very closely. Especially when the organization shows
dramatic declines in membership, and MOST especially when power is extremely
centralized. When one man controls all publications, that man damn well
better *Expect* to be put under a microscope, and in any *healthy*
organization, *WILL BE*. When one small group controls all uses of money,
and has changed bylaws so that it is exceedingly difficult for any that
aren't "approved" to gain seats, they damn well better *Expect* to be looked
at very closely - and in any *healthy* organization they are.
3. Other groups within the organization *do* have a legitimate right to make
accusations, and attempt to make significant changes to democratic
organizations.

John Algeo, yourself, and at least a couple of Board members acted like
victims, acted, (as you are still acting) as though some terrible,
slanderous deeds were done against poor suffering selfless workers. The fact
that you've interpreted what in any other organization would be considered
the *normal workings of a healthy, democratic organization* as such only
demonstrates all the more fully what dire straits have been reached. -JRC