Anthony,
Pardon me if I cut things down to quick responses. Plese don't read
anything into my briefness other than boredom.
1: Facts are never insults. Facts are just facts.
2: Last Saturday. It's been a busy summer for me. <smile> Work has
gotten in the way a few times.
3: These have already been gone over in detail and the response back from
the PtB have been that the global officers don't _have_ to adhere to them.
4: "White Wolf Publishing, Inc" The "inc" means they are a corporation,
not a private organization.
5: Actually I was wondering if you would bite at that one. It says what
ever the person listening hears.
6: I believe that each individual do the right thing. Are you saying that
if the rest of the Camarilla leadership jumped off a cliff Jon should too?
7: ....
You know... <smile> skip it. This has all been gone over adnausium. You
can toss out sentance after sentance but it's not going to change the base
facts, only obscure them. I was serious. I'm just here for the game now.
I gave my input and you responded. I responded, you responded, I responded
you respond.... bored now. <smile> Enjoy. See you next game I hope! I
do love your characters.
Michael Shaffer
US2003082207
> [Original Message]
> From: Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request] <daslurpee@...>
> To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: 8/27/2005 1:48:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [steelshadows] two things
>
> Michael-
>
> What Jon has to accept as fact is that the Camarilla Council has
sustained a
> disciplinary action regarding Jason and his ability to function as a part
of
> the ST chain. His job is to act accordingly. Whether or not you believe
> Jason was in the wrong, and whether or not Jon believes Jason was in the
> wrong, Jon's job to to act as if Jason was in the wrong.
>
> In your e-mail, you make several unsubstantiated allegations. For the
> purposes of clarity, I would appreciate it if you helped me understand
these
> claims, as they do not appear to make any sense.
>
> You claim that our domain took the "high road." Was this before or after
we
> began to openly insult every officer in the chain above the local level?
>
> You claim that you're here to play a game. What's the last Camarilla game
> (local or no) that you participated in? Last Camarilla activity?
>
> You claim that this incident is in violation of the MH and the CoC. Which
> part of the investigation violated either of these texts? Which part of
> Jon's standing policies violate either of these texts?
>
> You claim that this incident may have broken US law. Which part of a
private
> organization with an internal conflict and dispute resolution system and
> internal officer checks and balances broke US law, and which law prevents
> private organizations from determining it's own officers?
>
> You claim that supporting this action speaks volumes about the supporter.
> What specifically does supporting this action say about the supporter?
>
> You specifically state that you do not believe Jon should support the
> policies and decisions of the Camarilla. Do you believe we would be better
> off if officers in this organization did whatever they pleased, whenever
> they pleased?
>
> You propose that we skirt the disciplinary action by allowing our domain
to
> slip into Black status. Do you believe all such disciplinary actions
should
> be skirted, or that ours is a special case? What makes this disciplinary
> action so important?
>
> You pose a question (which I presume is rhetorical) regarding Jon and his
> ability to make decisions on his own. Do you believe that Jon actively
has a
> vendetta against the domain, or do you believe he is doing his job?
>
> Fundamentally Michael, you're uninformed. You're spouting off vindictive
> non-sense because you're displeased with the outcome of a disciplinary
> action that has been appealed and sustained. While it is your right to do
> so, please do not expect that this domain will back the anarchy you
propose
> because we might achieve a better result.
>
> Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request]
> US2003021263
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Shaffer" <pelantan@...>
> To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2005 12:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [steelshadows] two things
>
>
> > Anthony,
> >
> > <shakes head> If that is your belief, so be it. I'm not here to
> challenge
> > anyone's belief structure. However please doen't expect everyone to
agree
> > that what you say is fact just because you say it. Allowing a domain to
> > elect who they want especially when the one they wish to elect has not
> > violated any rules in the handbook is not making a special case. It's
> > called doing your job. It comes down to very basic things. Jason
> violated
> > no rule in the handbook. You can't use the handbook to further attack
him
> > for what was done by someone outside the boundries of the book. Unless
> you
> > working on finding and excuse to punish a Domain that dared take the
high
> > road during all of this mess.
> >
> > Its rather sad the number of people these days who are willing to roll
> over
> > just because the powers that be tell them to. I'm here to play a game.
> > Not stroke someone's ego. This entire incident has been in violation of
> > the Code of Conduct and the Membership Handbook. It could even be
argued
> > that it was in violation for US law. To support it in any way says
> volumes
> > about the person supporting it. I don't care if Jon has done all sorts
of
> > wonderful things in the past. History is repleat with those who have
done
> > wonderful things all their lives and yet when push came to shove, made
the
> > wrong decision. This is one of those cases. If he enforces this, he
will
> > be putting himself with the MST on this. And considering this only came
> > out after a number of us in the Domain were willing to let our Domain
slip
> > into black status for a month so we could put Jason back in the spot he
> has
> > earned it points to one of two things. Either he is going to force us
to
> > submit to being slaves of the Camarilla or he is going to use it as an
> > excuse to disband the Domain. Those are the only two reasons for doing
> > this based on the facts of _this_ case.
> >
> > Or are you insulting Jon and calling him nothing but a robot who only
does
> > things per his programing and never on the facts of an incident?
> >
> > Michael Shaffer
> > US2003082207
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request] <daslurpee@...>
> > > To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Date: 8/27/2005 6:33:18 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [steelshadows] two things
> > >
> > > Michael-
> > >
> > > The RST is not admitting he has it in for Pittsburgh. On the contrary,
> > those
> > > who have actually bothered to talk to him in a civilized and
> non-offensive
> > > manner have discovered that these policies have been his modus
operandi
> > > since he took office. For him to break these standards would be for
> > > Pittsburgh to be a special case. Again.
> > >
> > > Your uninformed attack on Jon's office is inflammatory. Your belief in
> an
> > Us
> > > vs. Them confrontation is extremely contending. Before you continue to
> > > attack Jon, I recommend you educate yourself on his policies and
> decisions
> > > in cases prior to ours.
> > >
> > > Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request]
> > > US2003021263
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Michael Shaffer" <pelantan@...>
> > > To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2005 1:30 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [steelshadows] two things
> > >
> > >
> > > > Anthony,
> > > >
> > > > This list is for information and facts which I stated. Nothing
bitter
> > > > about it. Nothing inflamitory. Just a recitation. If that bothers
> > you,
> > > > perhaps you should find a list where truth is not spoken. If you
read
> > > > anger in my e-mails, then perhaps you should talk with someone for
> there
> > > > was none. <smile> Ignoring the wall doesn't make it not there.
The
> > same
> > > > for the expressed attitude of those who have seized power. There
can
> be
> > > no
> > > > other infrence obtained from the RST's actions and words then he is
> > trying
> > > > to attack the Pittsburgh domain in the only way he can. He isn't
> > helping
> > > > the situation, he is adding fuel to the fire. There is no way this
> can
> > be
> > > > taken any other way and keep your eyes open at the same time.
<smile>
> > > >
> > > > Michael Shaffer
> > > > US2003082207
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > [Original Message]
> > > > > From: Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request] <daslurpee@...>
> > > > > To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Date: 8/26/2005 8:15:24 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [steelshadows] two things
> > > > >
> > > > > Michael-
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of us would appriciate it if you would cease your
inflammatory
> > and
> > > > > non-constructive comments. If you want to be bitter, there are
other
> > > > e-mail
> > > > > lists with which you may vent your anger. Some of us are not
> > subscribed
> > > to
> > > > > that list because we don't want to read it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > >
> > > > > Anthony C. [name redacted at Anthonys request]
> > > > > US2003021263
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Michael Shaffer" <pelantan@...>
> > > > > To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 7:11 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: [steelshadows] two things
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you. So the RST is admitting that he has it in for
> > Pittsburgh.
> > > I
> > > > > > hope the RC is paying attention to this as he was the one who
said
> > > > > > otherwise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Michael Shaffer
> > > > > > US2003082207
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Original Message]
> > > > > > > From: Kris Borer <felixplaz@...>
> > > > > > > To: <steelshadows@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > > > Date: 8/26/2005 6:52:53 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [steelshadows] two things
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm assuming that he is refering to the election
> > > > > > > > that will be held _after_
> > > > > > > > Jason's 6 month suspention is up. So... show me
> > > > > > > > the rules that back this
> > > > > > > > up please.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Membership Handbook:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "After the application deadline, the officer
> > > > > > > administering the election reviews the applications.
> > > > > > > The officer may remove any applications that are
> > > > > > > inappropriate. Legitimate reasons for removal of an
> > > > > > > applicant include past disciplinary actions..."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kris Borer, DC, US2002106794
> > > > > > > ****************************
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ____________________________________________________
> > > > > > > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> > > > > > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > > > > > > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > > > > > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > > > > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > > > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Visit our Domain Website at:
> > http://www.steelshadows.com
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Visit our Domain Website at:
> http://www.steelshadows.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>