Re: WARNING: long boring post about Jean.

[Jwycliffe@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 97-11-21 09:34:48 EST, Scott writes:

<< The point is that this is a public forum. Jean expresses an 
opinion and someone disagrees.  Opinions by definition are 
open to dispute. If someone wants to dismantle Jean's opinions, 
then more power to them - I believe that it's called free speech. >>

    This so called "thread" is inappropriate and entirely out of 
hand. How seriously can one take Scott Flaherty who has 
already engaged in three separate *public* flame wars during
his modest tenure on this list (one extended one with a teen-
ager). This is the first time I have responded to this publicly,
but I have sent several private notes to Scott indicating why 
this kind of perpetual flaming of an individual is inappropriate
on the list. Yet, he continues his childish assaults, always
trying to get the last word.
     The argument he makes (above) is transparent. Yes, if it
were simply a matter of disagreeing with an opinion Jean has
expressed, or anyone else's opinion for that matter, then it
might be appropriate, though not necessarily conducive to the
supposed ends of this list. However, most of Scott's posts on 
the subject have been intended to personally offend, not refute
an individual's opinion. How else can you justify a relatively new
contributor publicly telling Jean that she is "widely reveiled by 
so many on this list". That is not "disagreeing with an opinion"
or well intentioned "free speech". It is inconsiderate to a long
standing member of this list's feelings, and reprehensible. It 
has also led to a prolonged, personal flame war that has NO
place on this list. Go back to the archives and you will see 
that Scott has been carrying on this same flame for more 
than 3 weeks. As for opinions, perhaps we could disagree
with Scott's opinions if he had ever contributed a single Led
Zeppelin relevant post to the list. As it is, I have no idea where
he stands on any Zep isues, but I certainly know in depth what
he personally thinks of Jean, Jason Artman etc... Scott calls
himself the "Crusader for Relevancy" and asks for individuals to
"get back on topic". This guy wouldn't know "on topic" if it were
served to him buffet style. His NZC to ZC post ratio is 20:1.
     If a large number of people disagree with Jean's stated 
opinions, then it is atleast because she has had the courage 
to express them. That is a great deal more than I can say for
Scott, who to the best of my knowledge has posted no more
than one or two Zep related posts to the list, compared to the
numerous flames he has publicly sent to Jean and Jason.
   I think Jean has acquitted herself well by being above publicly
responding in kind to these personal attacks. There have been a
number of posts by Jean that I have disagreed with during the time
that I have been on this list, but not to an extent that would call for
this type of ill-considered response. There are numerous problems
with this list, and as far as I can see NONE of them are the result 
of Jean Lorrah's contributions. These individuals like Carmilla and 
Scott, who perpetuate the litany of non Zep related personal attacks,
are of far greater detriment to the list in my opinion. The problem with
this list is not the reflective, contemplative people on this list (like 
Jean), it is the masses of individuals who are either iunwilling to take
the time, or incapable of forming well-conceived thoughts about the 
band and their music. Let's not dissuade one of the individuals who
can/does think for him/herself from contributing to the list. I would
hope that Scott will read this and realize that this matter has been
taken far enough.


~Paul