|
Dear Jock,
You are obviously unaware of what started all this
off, namely, a series of spiteful attacks by Ryan including serious libel
against Michael Greaney. Ryan has continued his attacks and demands the right to have
his libels stay in the archives while he repeats the libels elsewhere (e.g. to
his own elist) and then deletes any attempt to rebut them.
You, presumably,
like Alan Avans, think that is fair and so do not understand why I have tried to
get (or be) a moderator. Another big reason is stop all the irrelevance --
Ryan is the worst culprit, but you may not have noticed and so do do not understand that virtually all of Ryan's emails are
irrelevant and he has destroyed the main purpose of this list with his
continual, and often spiteful, irrelevance. The lsit subject is capital
ownership and not continual repetitions of A + B. So please do not
try lecturing me when you, very late in the day, come across me trying to do
something about the situation.
I note that you could not
be bothered to offer yourself as moderator while I did so. For your
information, I am away from my home on average about 60 hours per week, and now,
on top of that, have work which takes me abroad (Wednesday mornings was my only
free time, including week-ends, and now even Wednesday morning has gone).
In short, I work longer hours than you and at a guess earn less, thankyou., and
if you knew what proportion of my income goes to others in various ways, you
would be amazed. So, in future try to avoid your nasty snide remarks about
"Some of us have jobs to do."
You have also
failed to understand what I am saying about the endogenous (as defined)
movement. To put it bluntly, it is not being understood anywhere in the
West (although there is a good chance of it being the main issue in a 2006
conference in one of the USA's great universities). To be frank, there is
no evidence so far that anybody on this elist is interested. Adn what is
now becoming a major international movement can hardly bd described -- as you so
sweetly put it -- a "pet project".
But if you are interested, I
will now tell you where the key moves will next be made and where you can
gain access -- there is much going on between now and December but you
cannot get access but next open access is in December, in Dacca, at the
Universal Paradigm conference where, believe you me, you have to integrate your
ideas with those coming from some really hard intellectual
tough-nuts. Just putting ideas
forth to Ownership is easy -- you want to try doing it on the international
scene. That will sort you out. To take but one example, at one
conference I had what was in effect a death threat if I should ever be perceived
as advocating debt-free money (they would eat Ryan and his version of
social creditf or breakfast) and, at a recent conference, there were
guards at the conference plus a contraption against car bombers
and an armed guard at the hotel and I was closely escorted for every single part
of the whole conference. I hope you now understand the point I am making
-- all the serious action is taking place away from this elist and
similar. I offered this elist the chance to find out more on condition
that they did some basic reading and that there was an indication that people
wanted the subject discussed. But nobody, nobody so indicated becasue they
are only interested in their own navels and not in the developments going on in
the wider world. And that is also true of the UK.
BUT, if you want to, and you can do an Abstract
within the next two weeks, I will try to forward the Call for Papers (I
will do my best, but all my Inbox content has been destroyed) and will make
representation in the appropriate quarter for the late submission. You can
attend the conference even if not presenting a paper. You will have
to pay your own air fare to Dacca but you are on a salary because you said "Some
of us have jobs" didn't you?.
Rodney Shakespeare.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:50
AM
Subject: Re: OWNERSHIP: Jock's
progressive economic ideas
Well, well. I'm not sure I targeted anyone in particular. But
this sort of riposte seems to be a pattern on here.
I'll tell you why.
When I saw the phrase and read the first couple of posts, the discussion once
again degenerated into a bitch fight. So I switched off.
I'm sorry,
I've maybe missed an opportunity. But in my experience it helps to attract new
listeners by maintaining some dignity. I do not "blame" you, or anyone else in
particular. I cannot even remember the substance of the bitch fight or who may
have been involved. Although watching the past few days I could make some
fairly reasonable guesses I suspect. And I fear I am not ready to take
economic lessons from someone who so quickly resorts, however provoked he may
think he is or actually is, to intemperance.
An object lesson in how to
lose potential friends and disciples. I shall now likely be much more
suspicious of messages from folk like Peter Challen here in London by
association. Is that what you want? Seems a very odd way to go about changing
the world if you ask me.
As it happens I am working on a few things.
But if you think I'm going to share them on this list to be the object of the
sort of ire and rudeness I've witnessed recently you need to think
again.
I admire people of conviction, don't get me wrong, but the
arrogance to question why I haven't read up on your particular pet projects
just because I just happen to lament the behaviour of some who are actively
putting people off is astounding, and I am sure I share view this with many of
the quieter lurkers on here. Some of us have jobs to do as well.
No
wonder we all don't want to be more active participants and sharers on
here!
On 13 Jul 2005, at 00:17, Rodney Shakespeare wrote:
Dear All,
Jock Coates wrote that he joined Ownership in order to read and learn
interesting things about progressive economic ideas. Good.
However,
I would be fascinated to know why Jock did not avail himself of the
offer to learn more about the endogenous (as defined) loan movement now
making excellent progress in universities (with much more progress to
come). In short, the movement is about an interest-free
money supply -- interest-free loans for public capital projects, wide
private ownership, small/start-up businesses and green capital
projects. It goes much wider than the capital ownership as usually
discussed on the Ownership elist and, among other things, creates a basic
income and gives back control of an economy to the society it is within (as
opposed to having the society being ripped off by outsiders).
Yet Jock showed no overt interest in the biggest capital ownership movement
to date, even when he was advised on the easily accessible sources at
present on the internet. Why?
And exactly what does Jock mean by "progressive economic ideas"?
Presumably, if he does not avail himself of opportunity given on this elist,
he has some ideas of his own to put forward. Let's see them.
Rodney
Shakespeare.
----- Original
Message -----
From:
Jock Coats
To:
ownership@cog.kent.edu
Sent:
Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:00 AM
Subject:
Re: OWNERSHIP: Ownership
Moderator
Can anyone please give us
any good reason why any of us ought to stay around on this list, which
most of us, I suspect, joined in order to read and learn interesting
things about progressive economic ideas?
Or are there really only
half a dozen of us on this list who do not stoop to this sort of
thing.
This is CLASSIC "off-list" type stuff - moderator or no,
common courtesy says take this to one side and don't disturb others with
it. As are most of the rantings that have been flying around of late. It
is wholly unedifying. I cannot imagine anyone "dabbling" in these
progressive ideas coming along here and wanting to stick around more than
five minutes.
Congratulations one and all who have made this a
thoroughly nasty place to "hang out". I thought, and still perhaps dare to
hope, that I had found a fantastic resource on all sorts of interesting
issues, and a well stocked electronic library as well. To Dan & Co -
the current troubles on this list are, I would think, diminishing the name
of KSU and your great group. If it were me, I'd have found an alternative
host for these squabbles ages ago and washed my hands.
We have 99%
of the rest of the world to fight and win over on most of these issues and
ideas. It seems to me at the moment like a bizarre rerun of Monty Python's
"Judean Peoples' Front" scene.
Outraged of
Oxford
Jock
PS - as an IT person in a university I can vouch
for how much of a pain in the butt it is to get constant requests to
tinker with something as out of the mainstream of our work as Majordomo
mailing lists. The attitude here is, if you can't do it yourself, you
can't do it. Unless it is causing problems for the rest of the
university's IT infrastructure.
On 12 Jul 2005, at 23:29, Rodney
Shakespeare wrote:
Dear Vice-Chair of The Party of Two (Alan
Avans),
[...]
You and Ryan really
ripe ones, aren't you? "Righteous anger" you wrote, you
little prig. Ha, Ha,
ha.
Rodney Shakespeare
----- Original Message -----
From:
Adavans@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:09
PM
Warning: This is a very angry post. For those of you
to whom my righteous anger is aimed let me recommend that as you read,
please imagine the voice of God being directed toward you. Then
imagine that you are sinners in the hands of an angry God. I've
frikkin' had it with a couple of jerks around
here.
[...]
Regards to those whom regards are
due
The rest of you to whom any regard is not due (Rodney
Shakespeare for example), don't let the door hit your fanny on the way
out.
Alan Avans
Prairie Village
KS
--
J1e Morrell Hall,
OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714
M: +44 7769 695767
--
J1e Morrell Hall,
OXFORD, OX3 0BP, United Kingdom
T: +44 1865 485019 F: +44 845 1275714 M:
+44 7769 695767
|