Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J..

james.doig.RemoveThis@bigpond.com wrote:

> *Yawn*
>
> I can certainly understand why Reggie wouldn't want to admit anything
> to you, Hoppy...

You don't understand, Mr Doig. Reggie Oliver is accusing you of lying.

Please respond to his email.

CB
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

Hoppy, I haven't received any email from Reggie Oliver. And Hoppy, I
don't lie. On the other hand, you have been caught out lying on
numerous occasions.
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

james.doig.TakeThisOut@bigpond.com wrote:

> Hoppy, I haven't received any email from Reggie Oliver. And Hoppy, I
> don't lie. On the other hand, you have been caught out lying on
> numerous occasions.

No, I think you'll find that the only people who have been caught out
telling demonstrably untrue lies are:

1. John Pelan - who was branded a liar by his ISP for lying about
owning stock in their company
2. Kevin O'Brien - who was branded a liar by several people for several
lies
3. Christopher Roden - who lied about a signature falsfication issue
until a respected third party (a solicitor) agreed to provide a
statement refuting his lie

Now, I'm telling you in public that Reggie Oliver has sent you an email
to the email address you post under. He advises that he has never said
any such as you attribute to him, and asks you to account for your
claim that he did. The fact that you now claim not to have received
this email is hardly suprising given the fact that you saw fit to tell
a lie in the first place.

So please stop lying and stop fudging, and answer the question. Beraing
in mind that RO denies ever having said what you claim he said, on what
basis do you make the claim he did?

CB

PS. I'm not wasting time chasing you on this issue. If you don't answer
the question head on and without evasion I am going to create a new web
page on my website in your honour about this issue. I will quote the
facts including the email from RO you claim not to have receieved and
publicly brand you a liar. It will show up under searches for your name
in Google.
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

On 16 Dec 2006 10:28:05 -0800, Zarok wrote:

>
>
>Let this be a warning to anyone who may be contemplating dealings with
>James Doig: he is not only a stirrer who seeks to sow the seeds of
>doubt between others, but he is brazen liar who has been caught lying.
>If people don't wish to take my word for this they can of course
>contact Reggie Oliver direct.

Oh for God's sake, leave the poor man alone. Hasn't he been through enough?

--
I'm afraid philosophy is just too much responsibility for me.
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

Lesmond wrote:

> On 16 Dec 2006 10:28:05 -0800, Zarok wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Let this be a warning to anyone who may be contemplating dealings with
> >James Doig: he is not only a stirrer who seeks to sow the seeds of
> >doubt between others, but he is brazen liar who has been caught lying.
> >If people don't wish to take my word for this they can of course
> >contact Reggie Oliver direct.
>
> Oh for God's sake, leave the poor man alone. Hasn't he been through enough?
>
> --

The odd thing about your alleged concern is that you don't address it
to James Doig; he is the one who dragged RO into this matter, not me.
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

Zarok wrote:
> Earlier today you claimed that the author Reggie Oliver had said "that
> your online antics are like a sickness that you can't control" in
> reference to me.

Sounds like a reasonable diagnosis to me. Perhaps you should take a
pill.

By the way, when are going to quit damaging Mr. Oliver's career by
hanging on his back like the Old Man of Sea and screeching and throwing
feces? Isn't it enough that you're blacklisted everywhere?

Actually, you aren't blacklisted, you're just so inept a writer that no
one can be bothered with you. I see you're now giving it away on your
website like a drunken chav slag on Saturday night. In both cases,
though what's being offered is free, it's still priced far too high.

Cheers,

John
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

Michael Cook wrote:

>
> I find your statement a bit baffling inasmuch as *you* initiated the
> entire Oliver thread ("Christmas Charity Sale - Rare Reggie Oliver
> Items - Books & Artwork").

(Much snippage but the above is about the gist of it.)

My views are not Reggie Oliver's views. You are more than welcome to
challenge my views.

However, regardless of how controversial you personally deem my website
or Ebay comments, the fact remains that Reggie Oliver should not be
drawn into the argument. Yet James Doig sought to do this, by telling a
brazen lie.

Once again you have proved that you are incapable of taking an
objective perspective, Mr Cook. The bone of contention here is that
James Doig has attributed some comments to Reggie Oliver that Reggie
Oliver denies ever making, yet you pretend the issue doesn't exist.

This is an example of why you keep failing to convince anyone (least of
all me) that your opinion is a valid one. Yes, I concede that my Ebay
listings are controversial, I just can't see why you can't concede that
Doig has blundered into telling a lie which he must now account for. If
you'd acknowledge this point, then at least we could move onwards to
what is perhaps the only valid discussion point i.e. will it be
productive in terms of income generation to have been so controversial
in the listings?
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

Whoops - this actually should merit a separate reply:

Michael Cook aka smee wrote:

>
> I find your statement a bit baffling inasmuch as *you* initiated the
> entire Oliver thread ("Christmas Charity Sale - Rare Reggie Oliver
> Items - Books & Artwork"). You used your eBay auction involving Reggie
> Oliver's works, cynically trading on his fine reputation as author and
> artist, in order to score some cheap debating points off of those on
> your enemies list. This, for example, from the text of your auction:
> "Unfortunately Reggie is not related to Stephen King...

This is actually a joke that Reggie Oliver made himself at a BFS
gathering in front of Peter Crowther, the publisher of Joe Hill's book.
I can't take credit for it, I'm afraid. Reggie even ended by the joke
with the punchline "Seriously, I promise you that I'm not joe-king."

This rather controversial joke went down very well with everybody
except the possible exception of the aforementionned publisher.

Thus your claim that I am "cynically trading on his fine reputation"
falls at the first hurdle.

CB
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

On Dec 17, 11:32 am, "Zarok" (Chris Barker) <hauntedri....RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
wrote (in part):

> My views are not Reggie Oliver's views.

I'm sure Reggie will be immensely relieved to hear this, but nowhere in
my earlier message in this thread did I even hint that I believed such
to be the case.

> You are more than welcome to challenge my views.

You obviously haven't been keeping up with current events. I already
did.

> However, regardless of how controversial you personally deem my website
> or Ebay comments,

I don't think I even mentioned your Web site in my previous message. Ah
well, I've noticed that you're not exactly a "detail" kind of guy when
it comes to these Usenet fracases. And I would personally disagree with
the characterization of your eBay text as "controversial"; I prefer the
term "nonsensical". But, of course, that was never really the point of
my earlier message. Once again, you need to do a better job of paying
attention, Chris.

> the fact remains that Reggie Oliver should not be
> drawn into the argument. Yet James Doig sought to do this, by telling a
> brazen lie.

At last we come to the central (and only) issue of my earlier post. You
shrilly and indignantly accuse James Doig of drawing Reggie Oliver into
this dispute, yet (as I stated before) **you** made Mr. Oliver the
focal point when you initiated the Oliver thread ("Christmas Charity
Sale - Rare Reggie Oliver Items - Books & Artwork"). And as Lesmond so
cogently pointed out, you've now taken the additional step of
advocating that forum members take it upon themselves to contact Mr.
Oliver for further information about this ridiculous squabble!! If
that's not drawing someone into an argument, I don't know what the heck
is.

> Once again you have proved that you are incapable of taking an objective
> perspective, Mr Cook.

You know, I have absolutely no clue what you mean when you employ the
term "objective", Chris, but based upon this response and your previous
ones, I can only assume that an objective opinion is one which blindly
apes your own.

> The bone of contention here is that James Doig has attributed some
> comments to Reggie Oliver that Reggie Oliver denies ever making,
> yet you pretend the issue doesn't exist.

Yes, I've avoided remarking on this aspect of the your rather nasty
post. The fact is that I have absolutely no way of knowing the truth of
James' assertion (nor do I really care one way or another); and despite
the utter certainty with which you publicly brand James a liar, you
have no way of knowing either (unless you're some sort of omniscient
being).

> This is an example of why you keep failing to convince anyone (least of
> all me) that your opinion is a valid one.

Other than you, of course, I don't recall anyone in the newsgroup
touting my past opinions on matters ghostly or otherwise as either
valid or invalid. What was it you said just a few days ago to John? Oh,
yes: "Psychotic people often claim to speak for the majority." But rest
assured, Chris, I do not believe you to be psychotic -- an egotistical
weasel, yes -- psychotic, no.

> Yes, I concede that my Ebay
> listings are controversial, I just can't see why you can't concede that
> Doig has blundered into telling a lie which he must now account for.

Please see above.

Yrs,

Michael
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J.. 

On 17 Dec 2006 06:01:32 -0800, Zarok wrote:

>
>
>Lesmond wrote:
>
>> On 16 Dec 2006 10:28:05 -0800, Zarok wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Let this be a warning to anyone who may be contemplating dealings with
>> >James Doig: he is not only a stirrer who seeks to sow the seeds of
>> >doubt between others, but he is brazen liar who has been caught lying.
>> >If people don't wish to take my word for this they can of course
>> >contact Reggie Oliver direct.
>>
>> Oh for God's sake, leave the poor man alone. Hasn't he been through enough?
>>
>> --
>
>The odd thing about your alleged concern is that you don't address it
>to James Doig; he is the one who dragged RO into this matter, not me.

You're the one inviting folks to actually contact the poor guy.

I believe I shall. I'll tell him that you suggested that I do so. I'll ask
him to explain the entire situation in detail. I think everyone here should
do the same.

--
I'm afraid philosophy is just too much responsibility for me.
 >> Stay informed about: Message for James Doig / Warning To Everybody Else About J..