SAY WHAT JACK???

Please warn me next time Travesty, you know it is difficult to get out of this suit in a hurry. That was the funniest ever. [

In fact, eric, I've talked with the mayor on several occasions -- and even provided him with a soothing glass of iced tea at MY mansion on a hot day. I have found him to be a genuinely nice guy -- which is not the same as being an effective mayor and supervisor of aggressive staff. Believe me when I say I neither dislike or distrust Ron as a person.

But, like the rest of the Seven, he needs to step up to the plate and give more thought to constituents and less to appeasing staff. The aggrandizement visible on their parts is counter-productive -- and we will someday broach the subject of failure to see any big pictures. But not now.

Just to save y'all the trouble of going over next door, here's the response to TreyTore as posted:

"Perhaps so, Usual Suspect. I truly don't believe that there is -- or will ever be -- friendship between me and Binky; I may be "impossibly ignorant" in that, too.

Since you were at the meeting in question, you can perhaps figure out how likely it is that I'm going to be used. The fact that I was not taken with either the tenor or method of that meeting is without doubt personally offensive to you, and the fact that I "went public" even more offensive.

Tough.

I've said all along that my intention is to try my hardest to understand my new home, and to that end I'll talk with anyone. That does NOT mean I must agree with them.

The avatar struggle between Binky and I is quite a different issue than what's under discussion here, and remains open and festering. But there are issues which are (or should have been!) private, and then there are issues of public importance and concern.

I knew well what would happen when, as, and if I made that e-mail public. I even debated whether it should happen here or on the other board, and decided that the other board's reaction would teach me more than the anonymous clotpolls who so thoroughly infest Topix any more. You will note that (over there) I have responded only to those with an identifiable persona -- and not those who think that each post demands a different cover.

So: Sorry 'bout that. I should think by now that it is clear that I intend to be a part of no one else's crusade. I am quite capable of mounting my own -- offense and defense."

Seems that any reasonably competent engineer could have saves us $1.5mill by predicting Gila Management's inability to accomplish (based on their own bid, for god's sake!). Specialized or not, any observant and halfway competent engineer (or contract management person) could have seen that one coming miles away.

About running for office: Too many bones on the skeleton (very old bones, but there they are) -- and not enough patience to be a public servant, as many among you have noticed. I do not suffer fools gladly, and I'm not always as careful in my delineation of "fool" as I later find I should have been. It's a character flaw, and mine own; not proud of it, but seem incapable of mending it. . . especially at my greatly advanced age and decrepitude, eric.

As should be apparent to all by now, I'm no fan of hidden, personal, or secret agendas. More than any other factor, that was what impelled me to 'go public' with my e-mail. Like so many other people, I have little faith in coteries or cadres of "true believers", in sole possession of the 'facts'.

That's why I calls 'em as I sees 'em, and I do so in public. To some, that makes me arrogant; to others I am a "TreyTore". As said elsewhere: Tough. I believe we get it out, get it open, and we thereby lessen the possibility of lasting animosity and backstabbing.

And now to bed; it's been a busy day (had the carpets cleaned, and that meant moving a lot of stuff!). Tomorrow is another day; who knows what happy hatreds wiill appear?

"Oh, and Jack, you've probably already guessed that we are all DYING to know what the response was to that e-mail to your friend.

(Yes, I know you will probably never reveal it.)"

You ain't just whistlin' Dixie! That response would open up entirely new and gruesome worm-cans....

DAMMIT, ERIC! will you quit asking me questions tonight? I'm an old and decrepit man (remember?), and I've been moving furniture all day!
Now, to business:

"Is lessening the possibility of lasting animosity something that you truly value?
(That is NOT intended as a smart-ass question.)"

Think back to overtures I've made in the past; you'll know it is. That is especially the case in any political or civic matter, where compromise is ALWAYS going to be required and valuable. Otherwise, we end up with either dictatorship or disinterest -- and neither is the way to run a railroad, or a city, or a nation. We fight like hell 'till the fight is done. . . then we get on with the job of doing what's needed. This is, more than anything else, why I loathe secret agendas: they preclude the necessary adjustments which are always gonna have to happen whenever humans coexist.

Eric, in the frenzy of crossing messages last night, something you said -- twice -- got ignored and needs a response. In two separate posts, you made the passing comment that I had little regard for voters.

Not true. I believe strongly that, once having spoken, their decision must be respected. that does not rule out efforts to get them to change or amend that decision -- to reconsider -- but it does rule out any covert campaign to ignore or subvert that decision!

I've been too heavily invested in too many political efforts and campaigns not to have a deep and abiding respect for the electoral process. I do know, though, how easily the process can be subverted and/or corrupted by those with secret agendas and underground grievances.

As much as anything, this lies at the heart of my reservations concerning City staff and their workings, which have too often struck me as nest-feathering at the expense of the citizens: Pauken and his ride, Elkins and his triple-dip contracts, Lehr and her triple- (quadruple-?) dip rewards. . . this stuff gets old really quickly.

Hey Jack, please do me a favor. I know the avatar issue remains a hot button for you and I totally understand; What Eric said was inexcusable. Yet, having said that, I want to ask for a moment that you try to consider what has occurred from the viewpoint of an omniscient observer. I would ask you to think back to the things that were said and implied about Eric; his relationship with the mayor, his background, his job, his lack of a job, his banning from Elliot's forum, his appearance, the comparison made about him that equated his posts with plagiarism and its commission with child molestation. And basest of all, the attacks on his family and the implication he had an unnatural relationship with his mother. Jack that stuff came from pure malice and it was vile.

I believe you are fairly perceptive and can equate the distress you've had with his. Now, Kick it up a notch, extend that feeling over a far longer period of time. Expand the source of that irritation and you might be able to appreciate why Eric became more and more strident in his attacks. Remember, Eric didn't just get that from one person. Nor did he receive strength or support from too many others; and those who did try got attacked; their voices represented a minority. Those who attacked Eric were never castigated by their peers, and Eric didn't resort to reporting it as a violation of TOS until Jeff started. (Of course we have to remember, Jeff had used that gambit before on Elliot's forum.) So Eric was given no comfort and that treatment came from nearly everyone on that forum; from minions, and doppelgänger to innocent bystanders who assumed that since the majority believed it, it must be true. This has been a concerted effort at character assassination that has gone on for several years.

Everyone handles things differently. Eric chose to combat fire with fire. It may not be your approach or mine but we can understand it. Now this is the hard part, while what Eric did was inexcusable, you were not an innocent bystander. Some of the things you said got pretty harsh. I hope you can appreciate that both of you have suffered, and while yours was more directly attributable to Eric, the true genesis for all of it was Jeff Harris.

First, with regard to your last point: Over next door, the "Pauken Promotion" thread suddenly disappeared, just after I got an e-mail denial from Jeff that "TreyTore" was his nom de guerre for the nonce. Make of this combination what you will....

Second, and more responsive to your comments: One of the main reasons you see me here now is that I have been struck by the different eric I see here than the Binky on whom I have heaped insult next door. His posts here (while often flippant) show none of the bitterness and bile to which I've responded with my own bitterness and bile -- it's been a bloody war, and I've felt (and said, and tried) several times to curtail it, but "fresh Hell" kept intruding. I'm hoping to avoid that in the future; a bit of cooperation on both our parts might accomplish that, and pave the way to rational discussion.

Much of the history you cite is well before my acquaintance with these online arenas; I only discovered them in September, and can only attempt to infer and reconstruct what happened before -- and through other conversations and others' input, make sense of it.

About "the avatar issue": I have always thought that that was a mess unworthy of eric, provoking responses unworthy of me... but once in the middle of it, it wouldn't go away. A specific thread over here devoted to my nephew's picture and my supposed ignorance and/or ulterior motives didn't help much.

I understand what say in your post; as best I can, I understand what you mean. Frankly, I would always rather not be involved in bitterness --- contention is quite another matter.

That first sentence SHOULD read: "...that 'TreyTore' was NOT his nom de guerre...."

Again: his e-mail was a DENIAL, NOT AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

Why did the thread get whacked? I don't believe the . His modus operandi is to use multiple names and to impersonate people (his favorite appeared to be Eric). Why the big deal anyway Jack? Actually you are boring me with your indepth analysis of every minute word of every thing you state. Do we have to listen to your numerous dissections? Why don't you and Eric (cause he is a fair guy) just bury the hatchet and let's all start fresh. Who cares what name Jeff is posting as? And, as a afterthough, do you really think he would admit it to you when there stands the possibility you would publish what he said (as you have)?

Highly unlikely. Concise enough?

Why the thread got purged? No idea, but the timing makes me wonder.

Jack, I meant to add that in your posts I see that you are trying to be fair. That is very commendable .

Cannon wrote:

First, with regard to your last point: Over next door, the "Pauken Promotion" thread suddenly disappeared, just after I got an e-mail denial from Jeff that "TreyTore" was his nom de guerre for the nonce. Make of this combination what you will....

My view about this is that Harris had the thread pulled and wrote those replies. Harris is hyper paranoid about what can be googled about him, which explains both his comment to you and why he has so many threads pulled. I think he's afraid something negative about him could find its way out in the public and that it could hamper his online dates.

This from Jim Mars: "Actually you are boring me with your indepth analysis of every minute word of every thing you state. Do we have to listen to your numerous dissections?"

No, you don't. But in making the decision to appear here, I also realized that my persona and my positions have Topix baggage trundling along behind. I thought that I should make a strong attempt at making some of my thinking clear -- to try to 'clear the decks'.

It was also an attempt (don't know how clearly) to get those on both sides know that I'm not drinking anybody's Kool-Aid. Because I am NOT running for anything, and have NO vested interest in anyone's campaigns or crusades, I simply wanted to 'introduce myself'. It will not be a continuing pattern.