Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]It would appear that the already rapid spiral descent will simply continue, with more and more unsubstantiated accusations and more and more extreme measures advocated, unless I explain the situation as I see it. I know this is long, but I'd ask that people indulge me and read it to the end. Several days ago, Alf Breull posted the following: >Francesco, don't forget the internet possibilities. > >Your sites are listed as porn even in pretty free countries (Sjonnie) and >linked between adult pages, which speak of "teen bitches" who etc. >(sexysites) - besides the copyright violations and a lot of other >information (4000+ hits) about you and your past and current correspondence. > >It's the context of which I'm speaking. Since I was interested in the idea of a LUG web page, I followed up on Alf's suggestion, fired up the usual internet search tools, and searched the internet for stuff on Francesco and Five Senses. Anyone who cares to can do the same search themselves. In the interest of getting a balanced view, I also fired up the usual tools, searching for Alf Breull. Along with the expected references to his web page, assorted camera related things, and other miscellany, I found one item that I found peculiar, especially when set against his (in my view) vitriolic denouncement of Francesco as a pornographer. Using this one item, I found a considerable quantity of stuff which seemed very inconsistent with what Alf was saying publicly on this list. There was no subterfuge; I was simply performing the same process with Alf as I had applied with Francesco. Again, anyone who cares to do so can do exactly what I did using the usual internet search tools. Now, it's possible that this one item was some sort of error. In my view, the discussion on this list had already degenerated past simple name calling, mud slinging, and character assassination. So,rather than making the matter public, I forwarded it to Alf, via private mail, along with a request for some sort of explanation from him. Since my previous exchanges with Alf had generated considerably more heat than light, and because I strongly expected that the response from Alf would be either silence or rudeness, I suggested that if he did not care to discuss it privately with me, or if his response was rude, I would take that as tacit acceptance that the item in question was written by him, and would simply forward it to this mailing list and let it get sorted out in public. Since Alf has no compunctions about discussing the moral values of others in this forum, it would seem only fair to allow his to be discussed likewise. I am sure there are subscribers to the list who feel what I've done was blackmail. I am uninterested in this point. In my view, if someone wants to publicly attack the morals of another, then it seems reasonable to apply the same standards to them as they apply to the person they attack. The item I forwarded to Alf is completely public. In any case, neither Francesco nor Danny was aware of, let alone involved in any of this. I would say that those people who accused them unjustly should be busy typing up apologies, particularly those who accused them of mudslinging. It certainly was not my intent to force Alf from the list, and I sincerely hope that he reconsiders his action. It would appear that Alf and I disagree strongly on many things, but I think that he's a valuable contributor to discussions of things Leica. In the interests of getting the mailing list back to productive discussion, I'd suggest that if people want to discuss this, they do so off list. In any case I'll be unsubscribing (for reasons unrelated to this fracas), so if you want to discuss it with me, you'll *have* to do it privately.