S
Sieweke
Guest
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C26C3A1.4201E402%40deSPAMMERmindspring.com&output=gplain
What seems to be bothering everybody, is that I'm still
friends with Groves. That doesn't mean I see eye-to-eye with
Groves, but at least 50% of the time, we don't argue.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C44F550.903FE163%40fu-
se.net&output=gplain
> The thread was more controlled without him.
Controlled? In what sense? I apologize if this offends you,
but you were jumping around like a dual-personality off
their meds. You probably will claim that this was planned.
No need. This group includes humans from every walk of
life, every intelligence level, and every humor level.
Seldom can anyone fool all of us, either most of the time
or all of the time.
This
> causes some friction but it ends in a few minutes and then
> we get something productive done.
This is called maturity. Most of us have learned this lesson
long ago. Those of us that haven't, well, this group will
gladly help us reach the goal.
> Now that you know I want to keep Groves away from
> the public,
I would think, from a representative (either volunteer or
paid) standpoint, that it would be to your benefit to
identify Dave's strong points and help him to develop those
points. He does get attention. He is fervent in his desires.
There is a gold mine there, if you know how to use it. But
therein lies the key. I don't know your age, but I sure as
hell feel like my mother here. Sorry.
> just email me if he shows and I'll help to move him on to
> his official duties.
Absolutely no need. We enjoy a good discussion. Dave's
presence seems to always guarantee this.
> I'll probably set up a thread to suck him in, embarrass
> him in public
Please don't. I always favor the underdog. And I really
don't know how I will sleep given my feeling of favor versus
my feeling of righteousness. ;o}
> I also hope you see how specific the conflict was and
> that (hopefully) nobody else got hurt in the process.
Yes, I can see it. However, the 'hurt' may come about
because we, most of us, read all of the threads. And some of
us are long-time friends. Internet friends, maybe, but still
friends. And, as with all good friends, we monitor if any of
us need anything. Even when we don't need the help (as with
Beav) we may jump in just for the support.
> You should also realize how deliberate and methodical I
> am by now.
I am not sure that I do.
> If a side argument will not help to achieve the goal, it
> gets shutdown.
Claiming control of all the threads on this group?
> Sorry to upset everybody, my mission is over, thanks,
Dang, Jim. relax already. Mission? methodical? use?
deliberate? We are all trying to get through this. But
none of us will survive any longer than our bodies hold
out. I mean it, relax. View us as your 'soon to be'
friends. No need to use, or manipulate, or any of the
other 'intimidation' type terms you choose to use. (Some
of us have had some pretty strong manipulators try in the
past. We came away stronger. I am not only speaking of the
group, here.)
There is enough knowledge and experience on this group to
satisfy an encyclopedia writer! Sit back and revel in it.
Sorry, again, for sounding like my mom.
Judy Type 1, 25+ years
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D7422D4.EEFE5653%40de-
SPAMALATORmindspring.com&output=gplain
I'll stay friends with Dave. But will not try to work with
him again,
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3E7A89DF.9C8FE5B5%40at-
t.net&output=gplain
You never spoke highly of DG as a DIF person. Since you're
not an animal insulin person, refrain from criticising them.
With friends like you, he doesn't need enemies.
After a few green beers on Saint Patty's day, I resigned
from DIF over this
> issue of support for the Canadians.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a8d34ee7.0403071324.58-
433a2f%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
For the record: Your "snake in the grass" tactics were known
at the first DIF meeting in DC where he tried to take over
DIF even before it was offically formed. You were kept on
the board to keep and eye on. The world knows your character
now, by your own words. Resigned???? You were fired!
From the links, looks like Beav and I are not alone in our
defining of friendship. You can't even decide if you were a
friend of Mr. Groves or not--in your own warped sense of
it. Comparing the posts in this thread, you claim to be,
then claim that it was to further your own means re: a patient-
based DM organization. You called yourself a friend of Mr.
Groves in the links above--Gary Ennis was not the only one.
You also can't decide whether you are a politician or not;
some posts are nothing but politically oriented re:
references, in this one you say you are not a politician.
Small wonder that the friendship issue has been so
difficult for you.
You indicated that you wished to end it and will say that
you can call me friend as you wish; know that the exact
connotation is placed on it with its use for me as it was
for Mr. Groves. Amusing that someone whose hypocrisy is so
well-documented can try to turn around and accuse others of
it others where there's no basis found there. You admit to
hypocrisy if it gets the job done.
Ah, that old "line of duty" defense--didn't the SS also try
it to justify putting people into gas chambers?. They had a
variation on it, I think, called "just following orders".
Interesting to see that there are two versions of your
leaving DIF--yours is that you resigned, Mary Hunt posted
here that you were fired. So you are no longer with the
organization, but you continue to speak in your posts to
this thread as you are, using the present tense regarding
DIF and planning a name change for an organization you no
longer have any part of. Hostile takeover of DIF in the
works? Why else worry about moving the organization away
from Dave Groves' image? For an organization which you
described as too much baggage from the past in this thread,
you seem to be very concerned about what to do with it.
Your aspirations are easy to see--a patient-based DM
organization. With the people skills you've demonstrated
here re: friendship and hypocrisy, how many people do you
think are willing to become involved with any organization
you were part of? Can't think that many would be part of an
organization which believes that anything is necessary or
moral to get the so-called "job" done; with your value
system, no participants would ever know if they were next on
the list to be on the receiving line of one of them.
Your claims regarding such an organization are supposedly
based on service to the DM community. Your posts and
scruples say that it's only going to serve your ego and
relentless quest for power. Pity the DM's who might be
caught between them!!
Jim Dumas <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote in
message news:<[email protected]
ews.com>...
> Beav wrote:
>
> >
> > "Jim Dumas" <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote in
> > message news:[email protected]
> > anews.com...
> >> Beav wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > "Jim Dumas" <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote
> >> > in message news:e006373f2529fe821efd808922edb456@new-
> >> > s.bubbanews.com...
> >> >> Beav wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Come on Jim, accept what S said. you did say you'd
> >> >> > set DG up for an embarrasing moment, and he's
> >> >> > right, friends DON'T do that.
> >> >>
> >> >> Anybody with common sense knows you don't jump into
> >> >> a ng thread if you
> have
> >> >> no idea what's going on, i.e., the significance of
> >> >> this death.
> >> >
> >> > Jim, you're squirming here. You did say you were
> >> > going to set DG up and friends DON'T do those things
> >> > to each other. That's the WHOLE point of sieweke's
> >> > post.
> >>
> >> I don't remember saying that I would "set up Dave."
> >
> > Jim, let's not get into playing childish word games eh?
> > You know EXACTLY what you wrote (see the quote)
> >
> >
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C431F39.1EBDD4D5%4-
> 0dontSPAMMEmindspring.com&output=gplain
> >
> > J.D. said....Now that you know I want to keep Groves
> > away from the public, just email me if he shows and
> > I'll help to move him on to his official duties.
> > I'll probably set up a thread to suck him in,
> > embarrass him in public and this will get him out
> > of mhd for awhile.
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
>
>
> Dear Beav,
>
> It worked on you two years ago. It's an effective method
> and I'll continue to use it.
>
>
> > Now do you think that's the kind of things friends do to
> > each other? I don't, and sieweke doesn't either, which
> > is why he pulled you. I think he was right to do that
> > and I think you ARE wrong to keep on arguing the "finer"
> > point.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------------
>
> I've seen friends beat the sh*t outta each other. So this
> is mild. It really depends on the relationship. Some
> people aren't happy unless they are in an argument with
> somebody. My exwife was like this, and Dave Groves had
> this propensity. So friendship is in the eyes of the two
> beholders. These two parties are all that count as the
> bond is only between them.
>
>
> > J.D. said....You should also realize how deliberate and
> > methodical I am by now.
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------------
> >
> > This is another part of your post and it shows EXACTLY
> > how good a "friend" you were to DG.
> >
> > If a side argument will not help to achieve the goal,
> > it gets shutdown.
> >
> > Sorry to upset everybody, my mission is over, thanks,
>
> All these are true. When my mission is over I shut down
> the thread just as I did in our argument two years ago. If
> a side argument is wasteful, it gets shut down.
>
> But this argument is useful. You're moving the cause
> forward unwittingly. We're looking at the seed of some patient-
> based organization. This is Dave's true contribution to
> the DM community.
>
>
> > But I do remember
> >> saying that I would try to move him away from MHD if he
> >> ever came here because he was too disruptive.
> >
> > You said what you said Jim and it's there for all
> > to see.
>
> Indeed I did. And I'll do it all over the same way again.
>
>
> > You do this by using embarassment as a tool
> >> in a public forum like MHD. The end result (move him
> >> away from MHD) is planned. But the method is unknown as
> >> it unfolds as an argument
> progresses.
> >> I look at this as part of trying to keep the DIF image
> >> from getting worse as Dave spouts off. He was his own
> >> worst enemy. In any case, friendship ends as the ship
> >> begins to sink because of poor decisions.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > S came in
> >> >> as the curtain fell on the last act of this tragedy.
> >> >
> >> > The "whole thread" at that point was a mere 4 posts
> >> > long (his was the
> 5th
> >> > in the thread)
> >>
> >>
> >> I Googled back to S's first post in September's "Dave
> >> Groves in Hospital" thread. It demonstrated a person
> >> without knowledge or interest in Dave's beef insulin
> >> work.
> >
> > So? Dave was more than a beef insulin advocate
> > wasn't he?
>
> It was: 1) beef insulin, 2) a cure for diabetes; and, 3)
> support for T1s with legal problems from hypoglycemic-
> mediated events like car accidents.
>
>
> > So the "curtain was falling" as S tried to understand
> >> why this was important in MHD.
> >
> > It was important because DG used to be a "member" here.
> > It's sometimes interesting to find out how past members
> > are faring. In Daves case, not to well at that time.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > Then S tries to
> >> >> deduce what happened.
> >> >
> >> > I don't see it that way. There was no deducing to do.
> >> > Granted, your previous posts on DG were dug up, but
> >> > that doesn't alter the fact that
> you
> >> > said what you said. It doesn't matter WHEN you said
> >> > it, or WHY you said it, it matters only that you DID
> >> > say it, and as sieweke said, friends DON'T do that to
> >> > each other. I can't understand why you won't accept
> that.
> >>
> >> I stand by all that I've said. The reasons were
> >> political posturing to
> move
> >> away from damage Dave had done to DIF. So yes, I accept
> >> what I said. But the why's are no longer friendship
> >> related. They are organizational related.
> >>
> >>
> >> > S will never have the full picture and should just
> >> >> stand clear.
> >> >
> >> > I disagree. A full picture isn't needed in this
> >> > instance.
> >>
> >> Any sound decision requires all the information
> >> available.
> >
> > That's a fair amount more squirming you're dong there
> > Jim. Siewke's ONLY issue was you calling yourself Daves
> > friend. Plainly you're not, so why not just admit it and
> > this thread will go the way of all the others before
> > it.
>
> Then you must be squirming back. As I posted to Sieweke
> much earlier in this thread, by his/her narrow
> definition, I was not Dave's friend. This issue was
> resolved by that post and Sieweke fell silent. So you
> must have missed that post.
>
>
> > If you only get
> >> part of the picture and take off on a tangent, you've
> >> done all a disservice.
> >
> > What other part of the picture "I was a friend of Dave
> > Groves" IS there to know? now if you'd said "I was a
> > friend of Dave Groves UNTIL...... that changes the whole
> > slant, but you didn't.
>
> With Dave Groves, one day you were his best friend and the
> next day you were his worst enemy. So it was difficult for
> anybody to know which day it was: good or bad. If I summed
> the bad days, they were probably 75% of our decade
> relationship. He was far more upset with me than I was
> with him.
>
> You're doing a wonderful job, Beav.
>
>
> >> > As an example, even you will not show your anger at
> >> > Dave in
> >> >> public, now that he's dead. Because it will serve no
> >> >> useful purpose
> now.
> >> >
> >> > Everyone that's ever seen any of mine and DG''s posts
> >> > (to and about each other) will know there was no love
> >> > lost between us, and WHY, but I
> haven't
> >> > said he was ever a friend of mine, so I'm not likely
> >> > to be accused of
> back
> >> > stabbing. EVERYTHING I've written about DG, I've said
> >> > TO him on many occasions. You on the other hand,
> >> > posted to the NG that you'd set him up KNOWING he
> >> > wouldn't read the post because he no longer
> >> > frequented the newsgroup. That's back stabbing in my
> >> > book, and then to call him a
> friend,
> >> > well, that's taking things a bit too far don't you
> >> > think?
> >>
> >> Again, friends with a political agenda are atypical
> >> friends. They do what is necessary to get the job done.
> >> The political agenda governs. More importantly, you're
> >> operating in a Machiavellian environment with
> >> friendship secondary.
> >
> > So you're not ACTUALY friends, you just feed off each
> > other to further
>
> Good. No skin off my nose.
>
>
> >> >> And you of all people should know that if you jump
> >> >> into a thread in a
> ng,
> >> >> then you should expect to be challenged.
> >> >
> >> > Indeed, and rightly so, but what sieweke quoted is
> >> > still there for
> anyone
> >> > to see, and THIS thread isn't actually that
> >> > complicated anyone with half
> a
> >> > brain couldn't work through in two minutes.
> >>
> >> Then I encourage all to look for themselves.
> >
> > Sieweke saved them the trouble. He posted all the links
> > in his post to you. Perhaps you should've checked them.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > He's basically saying that you're a hypocrite, and if
> >> > the original post
> on
> >> > this thread had come from me and I'd said "Dave
> >> > Groves has gone and I'll miss our discussions" (no
> >> > mention of frienships) I'd expect a whole slew of
> >> > peple bombarding me with words a "little" stronger
> >> > than "hypocrite". Wouldn't you?
> >>
> >> Then I must be a hypocrite. All in the line of duty.
> >
> > Sorry Jim, but that's bollocks.There IS no duty that
> > requires hypocrisy. (Hypocrisy is just a nice way of
> > telling lies)
>
> Everybody is a hypocritical in their daily life. It's a
> tool to get the children to behave as in: "Do as I say and
> not as I do." Both you and Sieweke are hypocritical on
> this issue with Dave Groves, as another example. You both
> have cast the first stone. But in doing so, have judged
> yourselves in the process. In any case, I admit that I'll
> be hypocritical if it gets a job done. And I'm an
> engineer, we don't lie.
>
>
> > The greater goal is
> >> to make DIF into a more powerful organization. But this
> >> can't be done unless it moves away from Dave's image.
> >> This is why I think a name change is necessary.
> >
> > This is totally irrelevant to this discussion. Muddy the
> > waters all you like, but I'll just put on astonger
> > light, as will others.
> >>
> >>
> >> > It goes with the turf.
> >> >>
> >> >> Lastly, friendship becomes complex when a political
> >> >> agenda binds these people together.
> >> >
> >> > That isn't friendship Jim. You MAY heve been friendly
> >> > with DG at some
> time
> >> > (but even friendly isn't friendship) but you blew
> >> > that when you said
> you'd
> >> > set him up n front of the whole net-world.
> >>
> >> Agreed. Politics and friendship don't mix well. And I
> >> admit, I play a
> game
> >> of chess in an argument with people on newsgroups. If
> >> they fall into my trap, then shame on them.
> >
> > Jim, you're falling into the trap of actually believing
> > you're in cntrol and some sort of debating genious who
> > thinks 20 moves in front of everyone. You're not.
> >
> > That's the way these public forums work. It's a
> >> political microcosm. This technique wins arguments and
> >> is used on friends as well as enemies. So "set up" is
> >> independent of friendship.
> >
> > Phsycobabble. And morel bollocks too.
>
> You keep squirming and you'll fall off your chair, Beav.
>
>
> >> > All the usual relationship rules no longer hold.
> >> > This is
> >> >> easy to see, just look at political running mates.
> >> >> They are not always "best friends." (FDR and Truman,
> >> >> JFK and Johnson to name two.)
> >> >
> >> > Totally irrelevant Jim, this isn't a discussion about
> >> > political running mates, this is a discussion about
> >> > YOU saying you were a FRIEND of Dave Groves.
> >> > Obviously you weren't.. If you're a friend of
> >> > someone, you don't tell his peers that you're going
> >> > to set him up.
> >>
> >> DIF still has a political agenda and therefore it is
> >> relevent.
> >
> > This discussion has nothing to do with the DIF. I
> > realise this is a political trick (never answer a
> > question) but this isn't misc.health.politics and you
> > ain't no politician.
>
> It doen't matter. The jury read it. And I admit I'm not a
> politician, thank God.
>
>
> > The
> >> organization needs public opinion to help its cause. As
> >> a test, would you join DIF now that Dave has passed on?
> >> Or is his legacy still keeping people away?
> >
> > No way. Not while people who don't think twice about
> > stabbing their "friends" in the back are associated
> > with it.
> >
> >>
> >> Next, friendship is an evolutionary process. Sometimes
> >> it ends abruptly
> as
> >> mortal enemies.
> >
> > Indeed it does, but they don't carry on calling each
> > other friends.
>
> Good point. But it was Gary Ennis that said I was
> Dave's friend.
>
>
> > In my case with Dave, it remained on the fence for
> >> political reasons. The organization was more important
> >> then differences between people in the organization.
> >>
> >> ASIDE: In light of the AARP's sell out on the Medicare
> >> bill this year, it would seem more important then ever
> >> for some patient-based political organization to get
> >> into Washington, DC. DIF was going in this direction
> >> but it never focused on the majority needs.
> >
> > Would that be because the majority "needs" are perfectly
> > satisfied by GM insulins? remember Jim, they ARE. it's
> > only a tiny minority who actually NEED animal derived
> > insulins, and whn push comes to shove, they CAN get
> > them, even if they live in the states.
> >
> >>
> >> So I rest my case,
> >
> > Actually, what you did was try to deflect your case onto
> > something completely different. I answered, but I wasn't
> > fooled.
>
> I never deflect. I stand and fight. But I use the
> opportunity to further the cause: That of some patient-
> based organization.
>
> And keep posting because I'm not done yet. Thanks as
> always,
What seems to be bothering everybody, is that I'm still
friends with Groves. That doesn't mean I see eye-to-eye with
Groves, but at least 50% of the time, we don't argue.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C44F550.903FE163%40fu-
se.net&output=gplain
> The thread was more controlled without him.
Controlled? In what sense? I apologize if this offends you,
but you were jumping around like a dual-personality off
their meds. You probably will claim that this was planned.
No need. This group includes humans from every walk of
life, every intelligence level, and every humor level.
Seldom can anyone fool all of us, either most of the time
or all of the time.
This
> causes some friction but it ends in a few minutes and then
> we get something productive done.
This is called maturity. Most of us have learned this lesson
long ago. Those of us that haven't, well, this group will
gladly help us reach the goal.
> Now that you know I want to keep Groves away from
> the public,
I would think, from a representative (either volunteer or
paid) standpoint, that it would be to your benefit to
identify Dave's strong points and help him to develop those
points. He does get attention. He is fervent in his desires.
There is a gold mine there, if you know how to use it. But
therein lies the key. I don't know your age, but I sure as
hell feel like my mother here. Sorry.
> just email me if he shows and I'll help to move him on to
> his official duties.
Absolutely no need. We enjoy a good discussion. Dave's
presence seems to always guarantee this.
> I'll probably set up a thread to suck him in, embarrass
> him in public
Please don't. I always favor the underdog. And I really
don't know how I will sleep given my feeling of favor versus
my feeling of righteousness. ;o}
> I also hope you see how specific the conflict was and
> that (hopefully) nobody else got hurt in the process.
Yes, I can see it. However, the 'hurt' may come about
because we, most of us, read all of the threads. And some of
us are long-time friends. Internet friends, maybe, but still
friends. And, as with all good friends, we monitor if any of
us need anything. Even when we don't need the help (as with
Beav) we may jump in just for the support.
> You should also realize how deliberate and methodical I
> am by now.
I am not sure that I do.
> If a side argument will not help to achieve the goal, it
> gets shutdown.
Claiming control of all the threads on this group?
> Sorry to upset everybody, my mission is over, thanks,
Dang, Jim. relax already. Mission? methodical? use?
deliberate? We are all trying to get through this. But
none of us will survive any longer than our bodies hold
out. I mean it, relax. View us as your 'soon to be'
friends. No need to use, or manipulate, or any of the
other 'intimidation' type terms you choose to use. (Some
of us have had some pretty strong manipulators try in the
past. We came away stronger. I am not only speaking of the
group, here.)
There is enough knowledge and experience on this group to
satisfy an encyclopedia writer! Sit back and revel in it.
Sorry, again, for sounding like my mom.
Judy Type 1, 25+ years
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3D7422D4.EEFE5653%40de-
SPAMALATORmindspring.com&output=gplain
I'll stay friends with Dave. But will not try to work with
him again,
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3E7A89DF.9C8FE5B5%40at-
t.net&output=gplain
You never spoke highly of DG as a DIF person. Since you're
not an animal insulin person, refrain from criticising them.
With friends like you, he doesn't need enemies.
After a few green beers on Saint Patty's day, I resigned
from DIF over this
> issue of support for the Canadians.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a8d34ee7.0403071324.58-
433a2f%40posting.google.com&output=gplain
For the record: Your "snake in the grass" tactics were known
at the first DIF meeting in DC where he tried to take over
DIF even before it was offically formed. You were kept on
the board to keep and eye on. The world knows your character
now, by your own words. Resigned???? You were fired!
From the links, looks like Beav and I are not alone in our
defining of friendship. You can't even decide if you were a
friend of Mr. Groves or not--in your own warped sense of
it. Comparing the posts in this thread, you claim to be,
then claim that it was to further your own means re: a patient-
based DM organization. You called yourself a friend of Mr.
Groves in the links above--Gary Ennis was not the only one.
You also can't decide whether you are a politician or not;
some posts are nothing but politically oriented re:
references, in this one you say you are not a politician.
Small wonder that the friendship issue has been so
difficult for you.
You indicated that you wished to end it and will say that
you can call me friend as you wish; know that the exact
connotation is placed on it with its use for me as it was
for Mr. Groves. Amusing that someone whose hypocrisy is so
well-documented can try to turn around and accuse others of
it others where there's no basis found there. You admit to
hypocrisy if it gets the job done.
Ah, that old "line of duty" defense--didn't the SS also try
it to justify putting people into gas chambers?. They had a
variation on it, I think, called "just following orders".
Interesting to see that there are two versions of your
leaving DIF--yours is that you resigned, Mary Hunt posted
here that you were fired. So you are no longer with the
organization, but you continue to speak in your posts to
this thread as you are, using the present tense regarding
DIF and planning a name change for an organization you no
longer have any part of. Hostile takeover of DIF in the
works? Why else worry about moving the organization away
from Dave Groves' image? For an organization which you
described as too much baggage from the past in this thread,
you seem to be very concerned about what to do with it.
Your aspirations are easy to see--a patient-based DM
organization. With the people skills you've demonstrated
here re: friendship and hypocrisy, how many people do you
think are willing to become involved with any organization
you were part of? Can't think that many would be part of an
organization which believes that anything is necessary or
moral to get the so-called "job" done; with your value
system, no participants would ever know if they were next on
the list to be on the receiving line of one of them.
Your claims regarding such an organization are supposedly
based on service to the DM community. Your posts and
scruples say that it's only going to serve your ego and
relentless quest for power. Pity the DM's who might be
caught between them!!
Jim Dumas <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote in
message news:<[email protected]
ews.com>...
> Beav wrote:
>
> >
> > "Jim Dumas" <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote in
> > message news:[email protected]
> > anews.com...
> >> Beav wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > "Jim Dumas" <[email protected]!mindspring.com> wrote
> >> > in message news:e006373f2529fe821efd808922edb456@new-
> >> > s.bubbanews.com...
> >> >> Beav wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Come on Jim, accept what S said. you did say you'd
> >> >> > set DG up for an embarrasing moment, and he's
> >> >> > right, friends DON'T do that.
> >> >>
> >> >> Anybody with common sense knows you don't jump into
> >> >> a ng thread if you
> have
> >> >> no idea what's going on, i.e., the significance of
> >> >> this death.
> >> >
> >> > Jim, you're squirming here. You did say you were
> >> > going to set DG up and friends DON'T do those things
> >> > to each other. That's the WHOLE point of sieweke's
> >> > post.
> >>
> >> I don't remember saying that I would "set up Dave."
> >
> > Jim, let's not get into playing childish word games eh?
> > You know EXACTLY what you wrote (see the quote)
> >
> >
> >
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3C431F39.1EBDD4D5%4-
> 0dontSPAMMEmindspring.com&output=gplain
> >
> > J.D. said....Now that you know I want to keep Groves
> > away from the public, just email me if he shows and
> > I'll help to move him on to his official duties.
> > I'll probably set up a thread to suck him in,
> > embarrass him in public and this will get him out
> > of mhd for awhile.
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
>
>
> Dear Beav,
>
> It worked on you two years ago. It's an effective method
> and I'll continue to use it.
>
>
> > Now do you think that's the kind of things friends do to
> > each other? I don't, and sieweke doesn't either, which
> > is why he pulled you. I think he was right to do that
> > and I think you ARE wrong to keep on arguing the "finer"
> > point.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------------
>
> I've seen friends beat the sh*t outta each other. So this
> is mild. It really depends on the relationship. Some
> people aren't happy unless they are in an argument with
> somebody. My exwife was like this, and Dave Groves had
> this propensity. So friendship is in the eyes of the two
> beholders. These two parties are all that count as the
> bond is only between them.
>
>
> > J.D. said....You should also realize how deliberate and
> > methodical I am by now.
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------------
> >
> > This is another part of your post and it shows EXACTLY
> > how good a "friend" you were to DG.
> >
> > If a side argument will not help to achieve the goal,
> > it gets shutdown.
> >
> > Sorry to upset everybody, my mission is over, thanks,
>
> All these are true. When my mission is over I shut down
> the thread just as I did in our argument two years ago. If
> a side argument is wasteful, it gets shut down.
>
> But this argument is useful. You're moving the cause
> forward unwittingly. We're looking at the seed of some patient-
> based organization. This is Dave's true contribution to
> the DM community.
>
>
> > But I do remember
> >> saying that I would try to move him away from MHD if he
> >> ever came here because he was too disruptive.
> >
> > You said what you said Jim and it's there for all
> > to see.
>
> Indeed I did. And I'll do it all over the same way again.
>
>
> > You do this by using embarassment as a tool
> >> in a public forum like MHD. The end result (move him
> >> away from MHD) is planned. But the method is unknown as
> >> it unfolds as an argument
> progresses.
> >> I look at this as part of trying to keep the DIF image
> >> from getting worse as Dave spouts off. He was his own
> >> worst enemy. In any case, friendship ends as the ship
> >> begins to sink because of poor decisions.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > S came in
> >> >> as the curtain fell on the last act of this tragedy.
> >> >
> >> > The "whole thread" at that point was a mere 4 posts
> >> > long (his was the
> 5th
> >> > in the thread)
> >>
> >>
> >> I Googled back to S's first post in September's "Dave
> >> Groves in Hospital" thread. It demonstrated a person
> >> without knowledge or interest in Dave's beef insulin
> >> work.
> >
> > So? Dave was more than a beef insulin advocate
> > wasn't he?
>
> It was: 1) beef insulin, 2) a cure for diabetes; and, 3)
> support for T1s with legal problems from hypoglycemic-
> mediated events like car accidents.
>
>
> > So the "curtain was falling" as S tried to understand
> >> why this was important in MHD.
> >
> > It was important because DG used to be a "member" here.
> > It's sometimes interesting to find out how past members
> > are faring. In Daves case, not to well at that time.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > Then S tries to
> >> >> deduce what happened.
> >> >
> >> > I don't see it that way. There was no deducing to do.
> >> > Granted, your previous posts on DG were dug up, but
> >> > that doesn't alter the fact that
> you
> >> > said what you said. It doesn't matter WHEN you said
> >> > it, or WHY you said it, it matters only that you DID
> >> > say it, and as sieweke said, friends DON'T do that to
> >> > each other. I can't understand why you won't accept
> that.
> >>
> >> I stand by all that I've said. The reasons were
> >> political posturing to
> move
> >> away from damage Dave had done to DIF. So yes, I accept
> >> what I said. But the why's are no longer friendship
> >> related. They are organizational related.
> >>
> >>
> >> > S will never have the full picture and should just
> >> >> stand clear.
> >> >
> >> > I disagree. A full picture isn't needed in this
> >> > instance.
> >>
> >> Any sound decision requires all the information
> >> available.
> >
> > That's a fair amount more squirming you're dong there
> > Jim. Siewke's ONLY issue was you calling yourself Daves
> > friend. Plainly you're not, so why not just admit it and
> > this thread will go the way of all the others before
> > it.
>
> Then you must be squirming back. As I posted to Sieweke
> much earlier in this thread, by his/her narrow
> definition, I was not Dave's friend. This issue was
> resolved by that post and Sieweke fell silent. So you
> must have missed that post.
>
>
> > If you only get
> >> part of the picture and take off on a tangent, you've
> >> done all a disservice.
> >
> > What other part of the picture "I was a friend of Dave
> > Groves" IS there to know? now if you'd said "I was a
> > friend of Dave Groves UNTIL...... that changes the whole
> > slant, but you didn't.
>
> With Dave Groves, one day you were his best friend and the
> next day you were his worst enemy. So it was difficult for
> anybody to know which day it was: good or bad. If I summed
> the bad days, they were probably 75% of our decade
> relationship. He was far more upset with me than I was
> with him.
>
> You're doing a wonderful job, Beav.
>
>
> >> > As an example, even you will not show your anger at
> >> > Dave in
> >> >> public, now that he's dead. Because it will serve no
> >> >> useful purpose
> now.
> >> >
> >> > Everyone that's ever seen any of mine and DG''s posts
> >> > (to and about each other) will know there was no love
> >> > lost between us, and WHY, but I
> haven't
> >> > said he was ever a friend of mine, so I'm not likely
> >> > to be accused of
> back
> >> > stabbing. EVERYTHING I've written about DG, I've said
> >> > TO him on many occasions. You on the other hand,
> >> > posted to the NG that you'd set him up KNOWING he
> >> > wouldn't read the post because he no longer
> >> > frequented the newsgroup. That's back stabbing in my
> >> > book, and then to call him a
> friend,
> >> > well, that's taking things a bit too far don't you
> >> > think?
> >>
> >> Again, friends with a political agenda are atypical
> >> friends. They do what is necessary to get the job done.
> >> The political agenda governs. More importantly, you're
> >> operating in a Machiavellian environment with
> >> friendship secondary.
> >
> > So you're not ACTUALY friends, you just feed off each
> > other to further
>
> Good. No skin off my nose.
>
>
> >> >> And you of all people should know that if you jump
> >> >> into a thread in a
> ng,
> >> >> then you should expect to be challenged.
> >> >
> >> > Indeed, and rightly so, but what sieweke quoted is
> >> > still there for
> anyone
> >> > to see, and THIS thread isn't actually that
> >> > complicated anyone with half
> a
> >> > brain couldn't work through in two minutes.
> >>
> >> Then I encourage all to look for themselves.
> >
> > Sieweke saved them the trouble. He posted all the links
> > in his post to you. Perhaps you should've checked them.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > He's basically saying that you're a hypocrite, and if
> >> > the original post
> on
> >> > this thread had come from me and I'd said "Dave
> >> > Groves has gone and I'll miss our discussions" (no
> >> > mention of frienships) I'd expect a whole slew of
> >> > peple bombarding me with words a "little" stronger
> >> > than "hypocrite". Wouldn't you?
> >>
> >> Then I must be a hypocrite. All in the line of duty.
> >
> > Sorry Jim, but that's bollocks.There IS no duty that
> > requires hypocrisy. (Hypocrisy is just a nice way of
> > telling lies)
>
> Everybody is a hypocritical in their daily life. It's a
> tool to get the children to behave as in: "Do as I say and
> not as I do." Both you and Sieweke are hypocritical on
> this issue with Dave Groves, as another example. You both
> have cast the first stone. But in doing so, have judged
> yourselves in the process. In any case, I admit that I'll
> be hypocritical if it gets a job done. And I'm an
> engineer, we don't lie.
>
>
> > The greater goal is
> >> to make DIF into a more powerful organization. But this
> >> can't be done unless it moves away from Dave's image.
> >> This is why I think a name change is necessary.
> >
> > This is totally irrelevant to this discussion. Muddy the
> > waters all you like, but I'll just put on astonger
> > light, as will others.
> >>
> >>
> >> > It goes with the turf.
> >> >>
> >> >> Lastly, friendship becomes complex when a political
> >> >> agenda binds these people together.
> >> >
> >> > That isn't friendship Jim. You MAY heve been friendly
> >> > with DG at some
> time
> >> > (but even friendly isn't friendship) but you blew
> >> > that when you said
> you'd
> >> > set him up n front of the whole net-world.
> >>
> >> Agreed. Politics and friendship don't mix well. And I
> >> admit, I play a
> game
> >> of chess in an argument with people on newsgroups. If
> >> they fall into my trap, then shame on them.
> >
> > Jim, you're falling into the trap of actually believing
> > you're in cntrol and some sort of debating genious who
> > thinks 20 moves in front of everyone. You're not.
> >
> > That's the way these public forums work. It's a
> >> political microcosm. This technique wins arguments and
> >> is used on friends as well as enemies. So "set up" is
> >> independent of friendship.
> >
> > Phsycobabble. And morel bollocks too.
>
> You keep squirming and you'll fall off your chair, Beav.
>
>
> >> > All the usual relationship rules no longer hold.
> >> > This is
> >> >> easy to see, just look at political running mates.
> >> >> They are not always "best friends." (FDR and Truman,
> >> >> JFK and Johnson to name two.)
> >> >
> >> > Totally irrelevant Jim, this isn't a discussion about
> >> > political running mates, this is a discussion about
> >> > YOU saying you were a FRIEND of Dave Groves.
> >> > Obviously you weren't.. If you're a friend of
> >> > someone, you don't tell his peers that you're going
> >> > to set him up.
> >>
> >> DIF still has a political agenda and therefore it is
> >> relevent.
> >
> > This discussion has nothing to do with the DIF. I
> > realise this is a political trick (never answer a
> > question) but this isn't misc.health.politics and you
> > ain't no politician.
>
> It doen't matter. The jury read it. And I admit I'm not a
> politician, thank God.
>
>
> > The
> >> organization needs public opinion to help its cause. As
> >> a test, would you join DIF now that Dave has passed on?
> >> Or is his legacy still keeping people away?
> >
> > No way. Not while people who don't think twice about
> > stabbing their "friends" in the back are associated
> > with it.
> >
> >>
> >> Next, friendship is an evolutionary process. Sometimes
> >> it ends abruptly
> as
> >> mortal enemies.
> >
> > Indeed it does, but they don't carry on calling each
> > other friends.
>
> Good point. But it was Gary Ennis that said I was
> Dave's friend.
>
>
> > In my case with Dave, it remained on the fence for
> >> political reasons. The organization was more important
> >> then differences between people in the organization.
> >>
> >> ASIDE: In light of the AARP's sell out on the Medicare
> >> bill this year, it would seem more important then ever
> >> for some patient-based political organization to get
> >> into Washington, DC. DIF was going in this direction
> >> but it never focused on the majority needs.
> >
> > Would that be because the majority "needs" are perfectly
> > satisfied by GM insulins? remember Jim, they ARE. it's
> > only a tiny minority who actually NEED animal derived
> > insulins, and whn push comes to shove, they CAN get
> > them, even if they live in the states.
> >
> >>
> >> So I rest my case,
> >
> > Actually, what you did was try to deflect your case onto
> > something completely different. I answered, but I wasn't
> > fooled.
>
> I never deflect. I stand and fight. But I use the
> opportunity to further the cause: That of some patient-
> based organization.
>
> And keep posting because I'm not done yet. Thanks as
> always,
