Question For Ramsey Campbell

hauntedriver.RemoveThis@hotmail.com (Haunted River) wrote in message news:<f6c24082.0411231643.240ebd1e.RemoveThis@posting.google.com>...
 > Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
 > you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
 > the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
 > charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
 >
 > CB

Pray tell us what business this is of yours?

Willie<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

"Todd T" <tttNOSPAM RemoveThis @megapipe.net> wrote in message news:<daTod.13$Uq3.2@fe39.usenetserver.com>...
 > "Haunted River" <hauntedriver RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
 > news:f6c24082.0411231643.240ebd1e@posting.google.com...
  > > Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
  > > you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
  > > the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
  > > charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
  > >
  > > CB
 >
 > You often speak of how you are striving to keep important issues on the
 > radar. Is this one of those issues? Is our understanding or enjoyment of
 > ghost fiction altered by this issue? It seems like spiteful mudslinging to
 > me.
 >
 > Let alone that being investigated does not equal being convicted, or that I
 > don't know why we would care if someone were guilty anyways. How many
 > writers have had their flings with intoxicants? Many, many, many. I do not
 > care whether Ramsey Campbell is interested in drugs, or for that matter
 > whether someone dances naked in bus stations and smokes couch stuffing; why
 > should I? This sort of posting undermines your stance of bold warrior, I
 > can't help but think.
 >
 > - Todd T.

Todd:

It may appear spiteful mudslinging, and perhaps it may be in the final
analysis, but equally one could argue that it is a perfectly valid
query based upon the precedent set in this forum by the likes to
Roden, Pelan and Campbell.

For wasn't it those same three who hotly argued that that even a minor
infringement of copyright was a serious crime? Was it not those same
three who reported the matter to the HWA - of which Pelan is Trustee -
to incite them into issuing a formal reprimand on this allegedly
serious issue? And did they not write to my ISP, again alleging
serious law-breaking?

Yet the issue of copyright is a civil one, where illegal drug-taking
is a criminal one. Not only in the eyes of many has Campbell broken a
far more serious law, but in the eyes of the law too.

I have not the slightest qualm about raising this issue because of the
precedent set by Roden, Pelan and Campbell on the matter of copyright.
Indeed, we can safely conclude that they are quite happy to manipulate
certain laws when it suits them to, and to disregard others when they
find adherence inconvenient. Had they not set the standard, then
undoubtedly I would have ignored the drug-taking at the British
Fantasy Society Convention 2004. Not only do I support the sensible
legalisation of certain 'soft' drugs, but on most judiciary matters I
favour leniency.

However, Roden, Pelan and Campbell appear to have set a benchmark of
'zero tolerance' when it comes to such matters, and it is therefore
only right that Campbell's drug-taking receives due attention.

CB

PS. I can't help wondering whether this issue will have knock-on
effects for future BFS conventions. I can't see many hotels or
conference centres being too eager to accept bookings when the
Society's own President advocates taking drugs on the premises during
said convention. After all, it's a very serious issue for them, and
could result in their loss of various licenses. Regardless of your or
my views on the general issue of drug use, it *is* currently illegal,
and hoteliers' livelihoods can be put at stake as a consequence.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

On 23 Nov 2004 16:43:49 -0800, hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com (Haunted
River) wrote:

 >Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
 >you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
 >the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
 >charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
 >
 >CB


What would you care about British Fantasy Society events? My
understanding is that you are persona non grata there (as you are most
places).

In the menatime, have you stopped painting your ass red and running
through the streets screaming "I am the Mandrill King"?

Cheers,


John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

On 23 Nov 2004 16:43:49 -0800, hauntedriver.DeleteThis@hotmail.com (Haunted
River) wrote:

 >Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
 >you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
 >the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
 >charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
 >
 >CB

Why would you care about events at a BFS event? As I understand it,
you're banned from attending such things due to your prior attempts to
defraud the BFS.


Cheers,

John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

Mud-slinging -- as Todd noted -- followed by self-justification and
rationalization. This is a fairly consistent pattern, Chris, and not one
that does you credit.

I'm sorry Chris, but whatever moral highground you claim for yourself
you erode every time you send a post like this.


Randy M.
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

willie.meikle.TakeThisOut@btinternet.com (Willie Meikle) wrote in message news:<1b51b553.0411240033.76715a0d.TakeThisOut@posting.google.com>...
 > hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com (Haunted River) wrote in message news:<f6c24082.0411231643.240ebd1e.TakeThisOut@posting.google.com>...
  > > Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
  > > you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
  > > the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
  > > charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
  > >
  > > CB
 >
 > Pray tell us what business this is of yours?
 >
 > Willie

I did that in my response to Todd.

CB<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

John Pelan <jpelan13.TakeThisOut@msn.com> wrote in message news:<0859q0hd9nep8lalsbji1dk4lvmv50ao1n.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>...
 > On 23 Nov 2004 16:43:49 -0800, hauntedriver.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com (Haunted
 > River) wrote:
 >
  > >Please could you confirm whether the West Midlands Police investigated
  > >you for drugs offences at the British Fantasy Convention? I was under
  > >the impression that they had. More specifically, do they plan to press
  > >charges, or have they let you off with a caution?
  > >
  > >CB
 >
 > Why would you care about events at a BFS event? As I understand it,
 > you're banned from attending such things due to your prior attempts to
 > defraud the BFS.
 >
 >
 > Cheers,
 >
 > John

Two replies? Tad obsessive, that.

I'm not 'banned', you silly fool. Nor did I attempt to de-fraud them.
In point of fact, they de-frauded me, and several other attendees.

(SIGH). As you know perfectly well, I stopped a £50 cheque to the BFS
becauseSteve Jones screwed up in his management of several events and
then had the apparently characteristic temerity to explode like a
vomiting volcano when politeley asked why. (Indeed, Jones apologised
to the magistrate at a later date for his unprofessional behaviour).

However, it is a point of law that you cannot stop a cheque under such
circs. You must allow the cheque to go through and then sue for
compensation. Ergo, Jones "won" on a technicality - not because he
hadn't provided a crap service.

It's strange how you persist in trying to distort this. The facts are
exactly as described above. I seriously worry about your mental
competence given that I have had to explain this to you about ten
times. Besides, you *know* I tell the truth (your ISOMEDIA lie, for
example). Still, why let the truth stand in the way of a Pelan insult,
eh?

Punt you later,

CB<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

Randy Money <rbmoney.RemoveThis@spamblocklibrary.syr.edu> wrote in message news:<41A4A0C2.7020003.RemoveThis@spamblocklibrary.syr.edu>...
 > Mud-slinging -- as Todd noted -- followed by self-justification and
 > rationalization. This is a fairly consistent pattern, Chris, and not one
 > that does you credit.
 >
 > I'm sorry Chris, but whatever moral highground you claim for yourself
 > you erode every time you send a post like this.
 >
 >
 > Randy M.

All's fair in love and war, they say.

Roden and Pelan seem quite content to use any resource at their
disposal to attack or smear me, whether it be sock puppet, malicious
abuse group, review-skewing, lie-spreading, stalking across the
internet, crony influence, string-pulling etc etc; with certain
reservations, I am prepared to hit back.

Yes, I concede that the only true way to retain the moral high ground
is not to engage in similar tactics. And I think I did, right up until
the time that Salmonson, Pelan and Woolwich (in particular) dragged my
family into things, and said some deeply malicious things about my
wife and kids. After God-knows how long of regular conflict, that one
thing changed me. Hence my reporting of Salmonson and Pelan to Seattle
PD for using their pcs to post extremely vile allegations on the
internet, hence my complaint to ISOMEDIA about John Pelan's telling
lies about them, etc etc. Rather than just sit back and respond to the
nonsensical allegations that are thrown at me, I now pro-actively set
out to ensnare these internet bullies. Yes, I may have qualms about
the wider issues - for example, I support the decrimming of soft
drugs, and think that some of our copyright rules are pretty silly -
but the bottom line is that if these people step out of line
*anywhere*, and I get to hear about it, I will stir up trouble for
them. After having had my private life dragged centre-stage in the
alleged pursuance of internet discussion, I prefer the cold dish of
revenge to the warm savour of aloof moral disregard.

My questionning of Ramsey Campbell's winning of so many BFS awards
when he is President of that Society, for example, should perhaps
result in heated genre debate, but it should *not* escalate into
malicious personal abuse and threats from some of his fans to stalk me
at my home in the UK, as it has done.

CB<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell 

On 24 Nov 2004 12:49:46 -0800, hauntedriver DeleteThis @hotmail.com (Haunted
River) wrote:


 >My questionning of Ramsey Campbell's winning of so many BFS awards
 >when he is President of that Society, for example, should perhaps
 >result in heated genre debate, but it should *not* escalate into
 >malicious personal abuse and threats from some of his fans to stalk me
 >at my home in the UK, as it has done.
 >
 >CB

Seems like just last year (as a matter of fact, it was) that you were
threatening to carve people's hearts out with a spoon and challenging
me to visit you so that you could "sort me out".

What happened, tough guy, someone a little closer to home decided to
take you up on one of your invitations?

As you've demonstrated over and over, you are nothing more than a
cheap bully and coward.

What a waste of human energy you are, Hoppy.

Cheerio,

John<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Question For Ramsey Campbell