Pollyellon banned me

[Tonker]

If you're going to get all Statphaggy about this, you need to factor in the forty thousand posts that got Rattoed.

[Chuck to Chuck]

He wrote back!

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Yellon [mailto:al@yellon.org]
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:21 PM
To: Chuck Gitles
Subject: Re: Heh

Disingenuous. Introducing me to your kid and giving me your phone numbers has nothing to do with the lies that you posted.

And don't put lies in quotes, because they were -- and are -- exactly that.
Lies. Untruths. Falsehoods.

If you would like to know the truth, let's meet and hash this out.

I tried to be conciliatory by the end of the email and you decided to call "gutless" again, which is BS.

So which is it? Gutless? Or ready to be an actual human being and solve a problem?

Your move.

Al

Here's my response to his response.

You are really unbelievable.

Yes, introducing you to my kid and giving you my phone number has nothing to do with "lies" that I posted.  It has to do with you suggesting I was using the "anonymity of the Internet" as a shield to cower behind.  See, when I wrote, "As to 'anonymity of the Internet'," that's what I was talking about.

I put "lies" in quotes because, unless you are talking about a message board post from March 24th, 2009, I can't even find an instance of me commenting on your "work" on the book.  I used the scare quotes because, without any evidence, your use of the word "lies" does not have the conventional meaning of "lies."  Oh, and that post from the message board?  It had to do with how much Kasey got paid and that Kasey had been culling scorecards for years.  Unless you are suggesting that it was a lie that he had been collecting scorecards, then I have no idea what you are talking about.  Maybe somewhere else I posted "lies", but I have no idea where and when.

But even that isn't the real issue.  I called you gutless because of the way you have reacted.  Instead of making the effort of direct contact, you chose the passive-aggressive approach of banning me from your site.  That's cowardly, especially if you believe I defamed you.  Even more so given that you have my contact information.

Furthermore, the banning happened within the past few days.  Your stated reason for banning me is some unknown comments from months back.  So, either you just discovered these "comments" or you needed an excuse to ban me now because of something else.

The bottom line is this: For an internet blogger, you have skin thinner than that of a molted snake.  Your opinions are out there for everyone to see and comment on.  Bloggers have to be prepared to handle criticism, even if some of it is over the top.  I'd love to see the e-mail boxes of Andrew Sullivan or James Taranto or Josh Marshall.  They probably get more hate mail in a day than perceived insults you've received in years.  Yet they handle it.  How many people have you banned?  Just how cozy do you need your little cocoon to be?  Are you really that much of a control freak or are you simply scared that your statements cannot withstand the scrutiny of the mass public?  Given your reactions of non-engagement and passive retribution, my money's on scared.

As to meeting with you face-to-face, no thanks.  I can't see what good would come from the use of my time.  I have little interest in your mutual admiration and deletion of contrary opinion society and you aren't Virgil Sollozzo.

There's my move.  I'm done.

[Quality Start Machine]

He wrote back!

I still see the possibility of HJE.

[TDubbs]

He wrote back!

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Yellon [mailto:al@yellon.org]
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:21 PM
To: Chuck Gitles
Subject: Re: Heh

Disingenuous. Introducing me to your kid and giving me your phone numbers has nothing to do with the lies that you posted.

And don't put lies in quotes, because they were -- and are -- exactly that.
Lies. Untruths. Falsehoods.

If you would like to know the truth, let's meet and hash this out.

I tried to be conciliatory by the end of the email and you decided to call "gutless" again, which is BS.

So which is it? Gutless? Or ready to be an actual human being and solve a problem?

Your move.

Al

Here's my response to his response.

You are really unbelievable.

Yes, introducing you to my kid and giving you my phone number has nothing to do with "lies" that I posted.  It has to do with you suggesting I was using the "anonymity of the Internet" as a shield to cower behind.  See, when I wrote, "As to 'anonymity of the Internet'," that's what I was talking about.

I put "lies" in quotes because, unless you are talking about a message board post from March 24th, 2009, I can't even find an instance of me commenting on your "work" on the book.  I used the scare quotes because, without any evidence, your use of the word "lies" does not have the conventional meaning of "lies."  Oh, and that post from the message board?  It had to do with how much Kasey got paid and that Kasey had been culling scorecards for years.  Unless you are suggesting that it was a lie that he had been collecting scorecards, then I have no idea what you are talking about.  Maybe somewhere else I posted "lies", but I have no idea where and when.

But even that isn't the real issue.  I called you gutless because of the way you have reacted.  Instead of making the effort of direct contact, you chose the passive-aggressive approach of banning me from your site.  That's cowardly, especially if you believe I defamed you.  Even more so given that you have my contact information.

Furthermore, the banning happened within the past few days.  Your stated reason for banning me is some unknown comments from months back.  So, either you just discovered these "comments" or you needed an excuse to ban me now because of something else.

The bottom line is this: For an internet blogger, you have skin thinner than that of a molted snake.  Your opinions are out there for everyone to see and comment on.  Bloggers have to be prepared to handle criticism, even if some of it is over the top.  I'd love to see the e-mail boxes of Andrew Sullivan or James Taranto or Josh Marshall.  They probably get more hate mail in a day than perceived insults you've received in years.  Yet they handle it.  How many people have you banned?  Just how cozy do you need your little cocoon to be?  Are you really that much of a control freak or are you simply scared that your statements cannot withstand the scrutiny of the mass public?  Given your reactions of non-engagement and passive retribution, my money's on scared.

As to meeting with you face-to-face, no thanks.  I can't see what good would come from the use of my time.  I have little interest in your mutual admiration and deletion of contrary opinion society and you aren't Virgil Sollozzo.

There's my move.  I'm done.

Why did you guys use typewriters?

[Kermit, B.]

LSA!

[BH]

Chuck touched me.

[Eli]

He wrote back!

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Yellon [mailto:al@yellon.org]
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:21 PM
To: Chuck Gitles
Subject: Re: Heh

Disingenuous. Introducing me to your kid and giving me your phone numbers has nothing to do with the lies that you posted.

And don't put lies in quotes, because they were -- and are -- exactly that.
Lies. Untruths. Falsehoods.

If you would like to know the truth, let's meet and hash this out.

I tried to be conciliatory by the end of the email and you decided to call "gutless" again, which is BS.

So which is it? Gutless? Or ready to be an actual human being and solve a problem?

Your move.

Al

Here's my response to his response.

You are really unbelievable.

Yes, introducing you to my kid and giving you my phone number has nothing to do with "lies" that I posted.  It has to do with you suggesting I was using the "anonymity of the Internet" as a shield to cower behind.  See, when I wrote, "As to 'anonymity of the Internet'," that's what I was talking about.

I put "lies" in quotes because, unless you are talking about a message board post from March 24th, 2009, I can't even find an instance of me commenting on your "work" on the book.  I used the scare quotes because, without any evidence, your use of the word "lies" does not have the conventional meaning of "lies."  Oh, and that post from the message board?  It had to do with how much Kasey got paid and that Kasey had been culling scorecards for years.  Unless you are suggesting that it was a lie that he had been collecting scorecards, then I have no idea what you are talking about.  Maybe somewhere else I posted "lies", but I have no idea where and when.

But even that isn't the real issue.  I called you gutless because of the way you have reacted.  Instead of making the effort of direct contact, you chose the passive-aggressive approach of banning me from your site.  That's cowardly, especially if you believe I defamed you.  Even more so given that you have my contact information.

Furthermore, the banning happened within the past few days.  Your stated reason for banning me is some unknown comments from months back.  So, either you just discovered these "comments" or you needed an excuse to ban me now because of something else.

The bottom line is this: For an internet blogger, you have skin thinner than that of a molted snake.  Your opinions are out there for everyone to see and comment on.  Bloggers have to be prepared to handle criticism, even if some of it is over the top.  I'd love to see the e-mail boxes of Andrew Sullivan or James Taranto or Josh Marshall.  They probably get more hate mail in a day than perceived insults you've received in years.  Yet they handle it.  How many people have you banned?  Just how cozy do you need your little cocoon to be?  Are you really that much of a control freak or are you simply scared that your statements cannot withstand the scrutiny of the mass public?  Given your reactions of non-engagement and passive retribution, my money's on scared.

As to meeting with you face-to-face, no thanks.  I can't see what good would come from the use of my time.  I have little interest in your mutual admiration and deletion of contrary opinion society and you aren't Virgil Sollozzo.

There's my move.  I'm done.

That's pretty good, Chuck.  Nice move.

[Quality Start Machine]

I'm guessing Al never graduated college.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Why did you guys use typewriters?

Tiny typewriters, at that.

To match your tiny computer?

[Saul Goodman]

LSA!

LSA 4 C2C!

[Gil Gunderson]

That was probably the most amazing thing I've read in a while.  Nicely done.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Thanks for the kudos.  I wonder if he knows the Sollozzo reference?

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

I'd also like to express, er, my fondness for that particular email.

[Internet Apex]

Meh.

[Gil Gunderson]

I'd also like to express, er, my fondness for that particular email.

The man's never read an email in his life...