[MD] free sausages

[ian glendinning]

I'll ignore most of that with the contempt it deserves DMB. For the
benefit of anyone else interested ... Gav for instance ...

My point was pretty stratightforward, I simply noted that Gav had
suggested over two weeks ago that some people on here were anti-MoQ
and didn't recognise its significance, (aimed at individuals, without
naming names) and not one other poster had responded to his mail.

It's the kind of innuendo that creates paranoia, so I didn't want to let it lie.
As I said, I'm genuinely curious who Gav meant, and believe he should
say what he means on this score.

Ian

On 11/21/06, david buchanan <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:
> ian insulted Gav:
> ...I see you are still thrashing around in other threads... ...Most
> responsible, intellectual people who are pro-psychedelics agree that once or
> twice a year is more than enough. Take care, I think you are over half-way
> to the enlightenment already.
>
> ian flattered himself:
> I have certainly been playing "agent provocateur" in the conscience pricking
> sense recently (and have apologised repeatedly for the unintended downside
> effects of that).
>
> ian praised himself:
> However I'm as pro-MoQ and as high-minded as anyone in taking the enormous
> significance of the MoQ seriously in world affairs...
>
> ian barely apologized:
> ...probably a little overblown and pompous ego-wise too at times. Mea Culpa,
> but I have never my hidden my identity.
>
> ian asked if it was about himself:
> ...I'd be very interested to hear which named posters (if any) you consider
> to be hostile towards the MoQ, or not taking its significance seriously?
>
> All because Gav had said:
> ...i think we all need to remember that there are a lot of people on the
> list with rather funny names that may well be 'agent provocateurs'. the
> hostility towards MOQ is proportionate to its importance...
>
> dmb says:
> I don't know if Gav thinks Ian is an agent provocateur or not. Its
> interesting that Ian feels the need to deny it, but that's beside the point.
> But, as you can see by my characterizations the quoted remarks, my point is
> aimed at Ian and his willingness to be so transparently self-serving.
>
> Ian, I gotta tell you. You don't look at all "high minded" about the MOQ or
> anything else, despite your claims about yourself. It seems obvious to me
> that you're barely interested in the MOQ. I honestly don't recall any
> substantial posts from you. Not one. (Feel free to jog my memory on that.)
> Your posts are just a constant stream of vaguely self-congratulating, above
> it all, middle of the roadness. This narcissicist drivel certainly doesn't
> make you look like a person who is serious about the MOQ. You might want to
> say something about metaphysics now and then, to give the appearance of
> seriousness if nothing else. It would also help to be less control freaky.
> Not that I'm offering advice. I'm just disagreeing with your claims about
> Ian, Ian.
>
> Long story short. Keep your free sausages to yourself. They're not worth it
> even at that price.
>
> Thanks,
> dmb
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stay up-to-date with your friends through the Windows Live Spaces friends
> list.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mk
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>