Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 ... I just read the moderator's ex culpa, "EDIT: I just re-read
7 this and it seems that the tone is more negative than I really
7 intended. I've made harsher statements than were really
7 called for, and I appologize. Please take the above comments
7 as a simple "disagreement" and not the "condemnation" that
7 they sound like."

_
That is a Sun Dec 10, 2006 5:19 pm quote of Herbert Vaughn.
Herbert Vaughn is not the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 Sloans comments are supported by Ron Suarez and also
7 a USCF Delegate. Another poster comments that the
7 moderator now engages in 'a nice spin'.

_
That was a Sun Dec 10, 2006 7:46 pm Timothy Sawmiller
note, asserting that one could infer that Herbert Vaughn
said Joe Lux made an unjustified attack against Mr.
Korenman. Herbert Vaughn is not the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 But this moderator [who BTBW sent me an e-mail] is
7 not quite catching the drift as has replied to that comment,
7 "Other than showing yourself to be educationally impaired,
7 what purpose does your post serve?"

_
That is a Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:05 pm quote of Herbert Vaughn.
(He was denying that he said Joe Lux made an unjustified
attack against Mr. Korenman.) Herbert Vaughn is not the
moderator.
_
By the way, previously (Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:52:36 GM),
Phil Innes tried to have us believe that Herbert Vaughn had
"jumped all over" a question by Timothy Sawmiller. I
noted that Phil Innes did not identify the queston. Now
Phil Innes quietly drops the jumped-all-over-a-question claim.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 and this is where the comemnt occurs: 'Nice. What a
7 pleasant experience it must be to have a conversation with
7 you! I express a simple opinion, with a little humor added,
7 about what could be inferred from your remarks, and this
7 is your response. Serves me right I guess, for even thinking
7 about expressing an opinon on these bastions of free
7 expression.' ...

_
That is the Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:31 pm Timothy Sawmiller
reaction to the note Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:05 pm note of
Herbert Vaughn. Herbert Vaughn is not the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 ... I am noticing what other people are saying; here is yet
7 another voice: "I think that you hate Sam Sloan so much,
7 that anything that he does say must be attacked."

_
That was a Sun Dec 10, 2006 8:49 pm Douglas Forsythe
note addressing Herbert Vaughn. Herbert Vaughn is not
the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 Now Nolan has kicked in to ask about other disciplinary
7 measures to be taken against Sam Sloan. ...

_
What I see is a Sun Dec 10, 2006 10:21 pm Mike Nolan
note commenting on Sam Sloan's lack of involvement in
drafting acceptable forum usage guidelines and disciplinary
procedures. I see nothing in the note about disciplinary
measures to be taken specifically against Sam Sloan.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 ... On the next page the moderator has used outside
7 type IN RED to shout at Sam Sloan.

_
That is a Mon Dec 11, 2006 9:36 am note of Herbert Vaughn.
Herbert Vaughn is not the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 This BIG RED is met by a new poster's comment "The
7 Tanstaafl comet is back; look at it going around the Sloan
7 star, and what a dysfunctional solar system we have."

_
That was a Mon Dec 11, 2006 11:14 am Douglas Forsythe
note addressing Herbert Vaughn. Herbert Vaughn is not
the moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 Which obtains an apology for knee-jerk reactions and
7 'over-reations' from the [ROFL] moderator

_
Those are (approximately) Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:35 pm
quotes of Herbert Vaughn. Herbert Vaughn is not the
moderator.

_
Phil Innes wrote (Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:34:04 GMT):

7 But then we have thread-drift, and Bill Goichberg plus
7 other politicos begine to talk about being reimbursed for
7 expenses, and eventually fizzles when someone called
7 'rfeditor' writes [in a moderated forum] "You must know
7 as well as I do what those line items were for. I'd really
7 like to phrase this more harshly (something on the order
7 of "Are you really a moron or an amazingly lifelike
7 imitation?"), but that might be considered a personal
7 attack."
7
7 To which the Moderator [ROFL] says NOTHING.

_
John Hillery was addressing Sam Sloan who has used
the word, "stupid" more than once.