Open letter to Carl Fogel

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.

It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public, but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing. If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

In rec.bicycles.misc said:

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Meh. I was going to post something more long-winded. But I realized
that all I wasnted to say was that dragging dirty laundry out and
crossposting it to four groups is really being a [censored].

rb.soc and rb.rides? Come on, FFS, grow-up guys.

--
Dane Buson - [email hidden]
"Eagles fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines."

Quoted message said:

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Trying to fathom the ravings of the anonymous ones is beyond the scope
of human endeavor.

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Don't be coy. You sent me an email wherein you made certain allegations
regarding an RBT regular. I replied in earnest, and soon found that you
had leaked some info to other RBT posters "offline" (via private email)

For the curious: Carl sent an email in which he said an RBT regular
might "just be replying to the voices in his head". he also included a
private email between himself (Carl Fogel) and another RBT regular
(we'll call him "RA" in a Kubrickesque slant), wherein "RA" said the
other RBT regualur in question was "seriously mentally ill".

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Beware.

Cheers,
Ozark

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.

No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.

Quoted message said:

It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.

Quoted message said:

but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.

Quoted message said:

If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.

I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

Quoted message said:

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.

The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.

Quoted message said:

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Are you "entertained", Carl?

Quoted message said:

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Well, there have been times Carl's disagreed with me on something, and as
I'm the world's reigning authority on all things cycling (NOT!), that's akin
to character assassination...

But more seriously, this isn't the place to be exposing the dark side,
whether real or imaginary. I try to imagine that those who behave poorly
on-line are probably wonderful people in person, and those who act nicely
on-line? I'd rather not be thinking too much about what's behind the mask.

I'd also rather not see *any* sort of attack, or counter-attack, or
whatever, spread across a sea of newsgroups. If this topic is all that
important, peole will find it on their own. And I would encourage anyone
else responding to delete all but the most-relevant newsgroup they feel
appropriate as well.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Don't be coy. You sent me an email wherein you made certain allegations
regarding an RBT regular. I replied in earnest, and soon found that you
had leaked some info to other RBT posters "offline" (via private email)

For the curious: Carl sent an email in which he said an RBT regular
might "just be replying to the voices in his head". he also included a
private email between himself (Carl Fogel) and another RBT regular
(we'll call him "RA" in a Kubrickesque slant), wherein "RA" said the
other RBT regualur in question was "seriously mentally ill".

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Beware.

Cheers,
Ozark

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'd also rather not see *any* sort of attack, or counter-attack, or
whatever, spread across a sea of newsgroups. If this topic is all that
important, peole will find it on their own. And I would encourage anyone
else responding to delete all but the most-relevant newsgroup they feel
appropriate as well.

I don't think that would be r.b.m. Whatever Ozark is talking about seems to
have taken place on r.b.t.

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> Dear Carl,
>
> It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
> confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
> me.
>
> So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
> directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
> stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
> you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).
>
> You decide.
>
> Cheers,
> Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.

No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.

Quoted message said:

It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.

Quoted message said:

but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.

Quoted message said:

If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.

I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

Quoted message said:

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.

The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.

Quoted message said:

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

Quoted message said:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:

>
>Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> Dear Carl,
>>
>> It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
>> confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
>> me.
>>
>> So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
>> directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
>> stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
>> you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).
>>
>> You decide.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ozark
>
>While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
>as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
>with him directly, first.
>
>Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
>you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
>yourselves.
>
>Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.

No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.

Quoted message said:

It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.

Quoted message said:

but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.

Quoted message said:

If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.

I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

Quoted message said:

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.

The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.

Quoted message said:

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

Quoted message said:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Since you continue to try to BS your way through this, here is a link
to the email you sent to me:

http://tinyurl.com/edfxs

They say a liitle sunlight eliminates maggots, what do you think?

Cheers,
Oz

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Don't be coy. You sent me an email wherein you made certain allegations
regarding an RBT regular. I replied in earnest, and soon found that you
had leaked some info to other RBT posters "offline" (via private email)

For the curious: Carl sent an email in which he said an RBT regular
might "just be replying to the voices in his head". he also included a
private email between himself (Carl Fogel) and another RBT regular
(we'll call him "RA" in a Kubrickesque slant), wherein "RA" said the
other RBT regualur in question was "seriously mentally ill".

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Beware.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Despite our differences, I wrote to warn you about considerable
difficulties that another bicycle dealer had suffered, since you were
about to step into the same mess.

I'd tell you that the bridge is out if I saw you about to head out in
the dark.

Writing to you was no fun, since the problem was a person, not a
bridge, but I didn't want the two of you to get into trouble just
because I wanted to avoid the whole unpleasant situation.

You replied and thanked me for warning you. Here's your reply in full,
except for a name:

Quoted message said:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I just
naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

Today said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

What "confidences" do you see in your thank-you note?

What on earth could you confide in me?

Where do you feel that it became "apparent" that they were "breached"
today on RBT?

What did I (or anyone else) post on RBT today that "breached" your
"confidences"?

Are you abandoning your original public blackmail threat in favor of
incoherence?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:
>
> >
> >Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> >> Dear Carl,
> >>
> >> It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
> >> confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
> >> me.
> >>
> >> So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
> >> directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
> >> stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
> >> you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).
> >>
> >> You decide.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Ozark
> >
> >While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
> >as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
> >with him directly, first.
> >
> >Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
> >you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
> >yourselves.
> >
> >Fred
>
> Dear Fred,
>
> I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
> was about a completely unrelated thread.
>
> He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
> apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
> which I haven't.
>

No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.

> It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.

> but Oz may just be so
> confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.

> If he wants to publish
> my email and his reply, I can't complain.
>

I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

> But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
> figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
> mistaken.
>
> In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
> just as I did.
>

The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.

> If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.
>

Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

Quoted message said:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Since you continue to try to BS your way through this, here is a link
to the email you sent to me:

http://tinyurl.com/edfxs

They say a liitle sunlight eliminates maggots, what do you think?

Cheers,
Oz

Dear Oz,

The link appears to be as incoherent as your posts.

It asks for the yahoo id and password to ozarkbicycleservice.com.

Here's the email that you're apparently incompetent to post, with
names removed:

Dear Oz,

Sorry to bother you off-line, but I hope that you'll understand after
you read what [bike dealer] wrote to me last month about X, who
mysteriously wrote me out of a clear blue sky about being ripped off
by [bike dealer].

If you're happy dealing with X, then ignore me as well-meaning
busybody and accept my apologies. If the following messages help you
avoid problems, then everyone's happy.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: [bike dealer]
To: [email hidden]
Subject: Re: mystifying email from datakoll
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 16:37:35 +0000

Quoted message said:

At 5:12 AM +0000 4/20/06 said:

Dear [bike dealer],

Shortly after I began infesting RBT again,

Welcome back! We've missed you!

Quoted message said:

X sent me this mystifying email:

Quoted message said:

From: X@somewhere
To: "[email hidden]"
Subject: Re: Water tires experiment/need contributions

Cheers, > Carl Fogel

[bike dealer] ripped me off!

[pseudonym]

We have a long history with X. I'm afraid he is seriously
mentally ill. He has placed lots of small orders with us over the
years, and he always complains that mysterious people have stolen
parts of the contents from his mailbox or whatever. When we used to
take phone orders he would bend our ears unendingly about this sort
of thing, and he sends deliberately incomprehensible emails (he
signs them "[pseudonym]" or some variation of that) I
have taken to ignoring his emails, it's a no-win situation.

All the best,

[bike dealer]

Quoted message said:

My post was just a silly link to a farm equipment page selling
adaptors to fill tractor tires with water--absolutely nothing to do
with [bike dealer], as far as I can see.

X may just be replying to the voices in his head, or perhaps
trying to make some unfathomable joke and signing himself as "[pseudonym]."

I plan to ignore X, but I thought that you might want to know, in
case he has some unhappy mail-order dispute with [bike dealer]. I
hope that it makes no more sense to you than it does to me.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Ozark Bicycle said:

Quoted message said:

On 22 May 2006 19:35:38 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>
>[email hidden] wrote:
>> On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> >> Dear Carl,
>> >>
>> >> It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
>> >> confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
>> >> me.
>> >>
>> >> So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
>> >> directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
>> >> stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
>> >> you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;-> ).
>> >>
>> >> You decide.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Ozark
>> >
>> >While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to [censored] you off, it's just
>> >as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
>> >with him directly, first.
>> >
>> >Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
>> >you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
>> >yourselves.
>> >
>> >Fred
>>
>> Dear Fred,
>>
>> I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
>> was about a completely unrelated thread.
>>
>> He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
>> apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
>> which I haven't.
>>
>
>No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
>email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.
>
>
>> It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,
>
>"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
>sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
>the shadows.
>
>
>
>> but Oz may just be so
>> confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.
>
>Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
>sleazebag.
>
>
>
>> If he wants to publish
>> my email and his reply, I can't complain.
>>
>
>I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
>your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
>scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
>invitation to post a link to the email?
>
>> But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
>> figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
>> mistaken.
>>
>> In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
>> just as I did.
>>
>
>The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
>my hand to this point.
>
>
>> If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.
>>
>
>Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

>Hi Carl,
>
>It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
>just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
>something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
>have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
>those around them.
>
>Thanks for the head's up.
>
>Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Since you continue to try to BS your way through this, here is a link
to the email you sent to me:

http://tinyurl.com/edfxs

They say a liitle sunlight eliminates maggots, what do you think?

Cheers,
Oz

Dear Oz,

The link appears to be as incoherent as your posts.

Try this, Carl:

http://ozarkbicycleservice.com/fogelemail.txt

Is that better, sleazeball?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ozark Bicycle said:

Since you continue to try to BS your way through this, here is a link
to the email you sent to me:

http://tinyurl.com/edfxs

They say a liitle sunlight eliminates maggots, what do you think?

I'm sorry to say it, Oz, but I can't make out what you're on about.
You're not making any more sense than many of datakoll's posts. If you
keep it up, you'll be in danger of needing sunscreen yourself.

Yes, Carl's excessive politeness can be annoying and smacks of the
passive-aggressive, but so what? It's no worse and indeed much less
irritating than the vitriolic manner that many others (sadly, including
myself) often resort to. It's pretty hard to complain that someone is
being polite (except on Usenet, of course).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'd also rather not see *any* sort of attack, or counter-attack, or
whatever, spread across a sea of newsgroups. If this topic is all that
important, peole will find it on their own. And I would encourage anyone
else responding to delete all but the most-relevant newsgroup they feel
appropriate as well.

I don't think that would be r.b.m. Whatever Ozark is talking about seems
to have taken place on r.b.t.

Could be, but so far I have resisted temptation to follow the link Ozark
provided. Hey, I missed 3/4 of Desperate Housewives the other night too. I
figure if it's important enough and something I actually need to know about,
the info will find me, rather than me having to find it.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Mike Kruger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'd also rather not see *any* sort of attack, or counter-attack, or
whatever, spread across a sea of newsgroups. If this topic is all that
important, peole will find it on their own. And I would encourage anyone
else responding to delete all but the most-relevant newsgroup they feel
appropriate as well.

I don't think that would be r.b.m. Whatever Ozark is talking about seems
to have taken place on r.b.t.

Ozark,

You rock. You seem so reasonable and wise.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name.

Carl, don't worry.

Copyright law says that you have the full and complete control of
re-publication of anything you write. This includes letters and email.

While the recipient has ownership of the copy he or she receives,
intellectual property rights remain vested in you; and should you wish to
counter threats of blackmail (nomatter how deranged), if full disclosure
will reveal that you are blameless while a party who has in the recent past
relentlessly attacked your positions (and person) is not, your course is not
only clear, but honourable.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Are you abandoning your original public blackmail threat in favor of
incoherence?

Hey Carl, the incoherence comes as a free extra, ok?