True face of Rebecca Ore (Brown)

plonk

Old USENET saying: "Arguing with someone on USENET is like competing in the Special Olympics, even if you win you're still retarded."

"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."

-- Neil Stephenson, Cryptonomicon

First of all - neither Ms. Brown (Ore) nor I are anonyms. So the history of this dispute is actually a public record attributable to a real person. And reputation. If you have any doubt of my identity I will gladly dismiss your doubts. I hate anonymity and view it as an honorless behavior. One of the reasons I like this group so much is because Mike Petro, Lew, Michael Plant are real names of the real persons. I do not consider Melinda, DogMa or Cowboy anonyms either, because although they use nicknames online, they do not hide their names in private exchange. I do have a card from Dogma and sent and received tea to and from Cowboy. So you words about "anonymous strangers" are out of context here.

Second - Instead of throwing flames as a response to insults endlessly as most of USENET flamers do I offer a simple and effective way to resolve such situation - you call me a liar, I can prove that I am not, but you will have to pay. I thought making people put their money where their mouths are was a time-honored American tradition. And it is very effective too - her answer immediately shows everyone who is who.

Sasha.

Oh, I like that. I'll definitely be adding it to the list.

This is a very good point - and an issue I frequently run into when discussing online relationships (academic interest). The use of an alias to protect one's privacy is not equivalent to anonymous, anti-social behavior.

However, assumptions that one is vindicated by the public record are often untenable positions from which to justify one's actions to others. This is particularly true when one half of the "dispute" has "X-no-archive: yes" in her headers.

The problem I have with your "simple and effective" solution is that it gives every appearance of being a set up.

You offered a solution in order to protect your own reputation, but one which anyone who's using more than a handful of neurons would know that she would not take. And then you have used her refusal to take you up on your offer to further criticize her.

Justifiably indignant or not, that still smells of a set up.

Sometimes what we write shows everyone things we don't intend to reveal.

1. A "set up" is (as I understand) a situation that one creates to lure someone "innocent" to take advantage of that innocence later. That requires at least me knowing of her existance when that "set up" happened. However my story of my experience in Siberia was several months ago, way, way back. Also me stating that I have certain knowledge of rural Chinese cultural life can ne construed as a "set up"? Because she called me LIAR based on these two incidents. I hope that demostrates that I did not lure her into calling me a liar.
2. I very much despise your comment "You offered a solution in order to protect your own reputation, but one which anyone who's using more than a handful of neurons would know that she would not take". Why would she not take it? I offered to deposit same sum myself. If she is confident enough to call me a liar publically why would not she make some money in the proces sof proving herself right? Before I named the price I looked at her resume and her claims on her writer's income. She can definitely afford ,000. You call people liars, you should take some responsibility for that action. I have a reputation in business and scientific world and I cannot afford people calling me a liar without a proper counteraction. She has a right not to believe a word I say and express that disbelief. And ask for proof. She may have said that certain words I said went against her knowledge and asked me to offer some support to my claims of my Chinese travel. etc. That is fine and perfectly acceptable. But she did not. And her arrogance pissed me off. And I think its is healthy that we all now know who she is. And her students and peers at the Temple and Drex too. Its healthy to have one's claws get clipped once in a while.
3. I would actually take your words more seriously if you were AT LEAST as critical of her calling me a liar as of me defending myself. But you didn't. may I ask why? Why are you so eager to protect her right to attack me that my right to make her pay for that attack? You have posted already three times on this thread and not a one word on her attacks on me (and others, BTW, too). Can you elaborate on that?

I pity you, buddy, if that is really what you were beaten into believing.

Sasha.

If I had $5K lying around, I would put a new roof on my house.

I did have $15 to spare on a new Chinese grocery store oolong, so the day wasn't completely wasted. I find I like heavy roasted oolongs.

Googling on this name will tell you who I am, but who I am and all that isn't about tea.

A set up is also when you give someone two choices, both of which work solely to your own advantage.

To offer someone a choice you have no reason to think they will take and then criticize them for not taking it also is a set up.

I did not, nor do I, think this was your intention. I was attempting to point out that it APPEARED that way.

You are free to despise the comment. But I stand by it.

What on earth would make you think that she WOULD take the offer? You have something to gain (or preserve). She doesn't because she doesn't care.

Obviously, you thought this a more pressing matter than either she or I did. But if I were in a similar position, I wouldn't put up the money either - even if I had it.

This is just USENET, after all. And I find it hard to believe that your professional opinion is weak enough that it can be undermined by the uninformed opinions of a single crank.

Again, I acknowledged your justifiable indignation. And I know that I would be offended - in fact, in similar situations, I have been.

And I never said she didn't deserve a little "claw clipping".

I'm not critical of you defending yourself. I'm critical of the way you chose to do it - because it appears to be dishonorable, and I don't believe you to be a dishonorable guy.

You and I have had our disagreements in the past, but they were always minor. And I've found you to be a fairly reasonable fellow. That is why I bothered to comment to you, and not to her.

You see, I no longer bother to throw my pearls before swine, either online or off.

Yes. I haven't seen any of her posts in this thread save the last one. It's been a while since I read RFDT on my laptop and her previous posts are no longer on my NNTP server. Additionally, because she uses the X-No-Archive header, any posts older than 6 days are no longer available on Google.

I haven't criticized her "attacks" because I haven't read them. I won't critique on hearsay. Her subsequent response to your "solution" suggests that it wouldn't have been worth the time anyway.

Ok, haven't you and I already gone through the misinterpretation of a .sig quote discussion?

That's rhetorical.

Excuse me? She could have taken the offer, and if I would not be able to supply the proof of me being truthful get $5,000 of MY MONEY. What do you mean "she does not care"? She claims that she is so-oo poor that all she can spare is meager $15! This was her chance not only to prove that she was right calling me a liar but also afford some very good tea!

And that would show people that you are an irresponsible flamer who does not stand by his words.

I am sorry, but this is bull. This is how it goes: A question in a board room "Mr. Derek, is it true that you were publically accused by a member of an academic community of knowingly publishing false of fabricated information?". Mind you, this is not court, where you can investigate, call you lawyer, etc. This is academic or business community and you would start to explain what happened and how and what I said and she said... No, what you say is "Yes, and I offered an accuser to put up or shut up and she chosen the latter". End of story. Now you can choose a different strategy, but I was attacked without provocation and that is how I respond to such attacks.

Well, in that case you have to tell me what would be an honorable way. But do not tell me to just let it go, because then you have no idea what honor is. The last thing I want to do is to insult you here but your quote "If you want to get to the top, prepare to kiss a lot of the bottom." already make me worried if we ever will understand each other on wsuch issues.

That is your choice and I can respect it. I prefer to whip up the swine that had an audacity to question my honor and expose its ugly mug to the public. Personal choices. Free country, you know.

They are still available on the USENET, that is how I found them a month later. Use your MS Outlook Express. But if you have not read them, you could have asked and I would provide you with the links.

It is a very troubling approach - to critisize one side for something minor (you yourself admitted that) and let the swines (your words, not mine) to have a pass just because they are swines. Makes swines proliferate.

Respectfully, Sasha

In defense of that quote. It's from a 'demotivational' poster on

It's a realy cool site, especially if you're A. a dissafected college student B. a disaffected cubicle worker, or C. are just plain sick and tired of pretty posters with 'motivaitonal' sayings on them. A couple of my faveorite are: Potential Not everyone grows up to be an astronaut (the picture being an artfully lit box of french fries) and Customer Service If we stop taking care of our customers, maybe they'll stop calling (featureing an artfully lit telephone covered in cob webs. I was particularly attracted to this one when I worked as a phone slave for Yahoo!)

Marlene

Could and would are two different things. That is probably where we diverged.

And nothing says your estimation of what she "could" pay is accurate.

Yes, it would. It would also look like you're someone who uses money to win arguments.

And so your answer to the question is "Yes. I offered to provide evidence if she'd put up $5k as a deposit, and I'd put up the same amount. If I was lying, she'd get the escrow account. If she was wrong, I'd get the account. She chose not to."

Next question: "So do you always hide information by requiring people to put up money to see the evidence of your claims?"

You could just as easily say, "Yes. One individual decided that I was lying about my trips. I offered to show her a copy of my boarding passes and hotel bills. She declined, which showed that she really didn't care about the truth and was interested merely in her own opinion."

The only point I want to make is that by requiring that money be put up, it looks like you're interested in the money and not simply in clearing your good name.

In my opinion, the honorable thing to do would be to simply present the evidence and let her publicly look like a fool. But as soon as you added the monetary gain component, it gets a little questionable in my book.

Granted, nobody says you have to live by my book.

Another option is the old "Post proof or retract" statement. Obviously, she made the claim. In fact, it is not up to you to prove her wrong. She is required by all rules of debate to provide proof of her claim.

And her opinion doesn't cut it.

And please stop with the comments about the .sig quote already. You don't get the joke. Fine. But stop using the quote as a basis for character judgment. Even better, read Marlene's post which tells you not only where I got the quotes but also why some of us find them funny.

Free? Then why do I keep getting all these darned bills?

Switching from Dialog to Outlook Express is not going to suddenly make the information available to me on my NNTP servers. If it's not on my server, I can't read it regardless of my newsagent.

And you DID provide a link, remember? You gave the message ID - for a message which is neither on my server nor on Google any longer. She's got them set to not be archived.

You cannot reason with unreasonable people, so why bother? The only thing commenting to her about her behavior would do is escalate the flame war.

I didn't think a little constructive criticism would be this big of a deal. But I didn't realize how close to home she'd it. My apologies.

Derek -

I think we understood each other. I have to agree with you that an argument may be made by a convoluted mind of a NY liberal (for instance) that all I was after was not to punish her for insulting me, but to gain materially. In that case I change my offer - all remains the same, except that the judge(judges) will transfer the resulting sum of $10,000 to a charity. How is that for a greedy me?

Sasha.

OK, I realized that this arrangement would make an innocent party pay regardless, so I change it to a $5,000 from a side proven wrong to be sent to a charity.

Sasha.

Sounds good. Now you just have to get the folks in RFDT to agree upon which charity.

Have a great day, Sasha!

It couldn't be more wildly inaccurate.

For a writer to make $20,000 a year, the writer would have to sell

60,000 to 100,000 mass market paperback copies a year. The figures are lower for trade and hardcover, but figure 10% royalties at $10 to $20 a book = $1 to $2 a book (real figures vary by 2% in all directions) which means selling 10,000 (hardcover) to 20,000 copies (trade paper) per *year* to make $20K per year. 4,000 total sales is roughly $4,000 in royalties for a trade paperback.

Most potters in America do better than writers, and they don't have to sell so many units per year to make $20K.

There's a saying in writing circles, "Don't quit your day job."

Anyone who knows anything about publishing would know that 4,000 to

40,000 sales total is kinda lower end (and the top sales were Science Fiction Book Club, which is about a quarter the royalties one would get from original publisher hardcovers).

I *can* believe Chinese calligraphers only making $800 a year. :) Most PEN members (hardcover writers of non-genre work) make about $5K per year from their writing.

The people who make serious money write a book a year that sells 500,000 to several million copies and get movie deals. And the numbers of people doing that is around 200 writers in the US, tops.

So I can afford $15 tea sometimes, but not silly wagers in the days when boarding passes are printed on home computers.

One SF writer made claims of having all sorts of friends on an island off the coast of Honduras. A friend of mine lived there in the winter and knew all sorts of people (I knew she lived there because she brought one of the islanders home with her one summer). It was a small island. He didn't hang out there on any kind of regular basis, probably visited once and decided to make it part of his legend (his embellishments on his life story start with the year he claimed to have been born in).

The cross references between people, the "I've heard that before" and "I met someone who had the same experience" or "I met someone who remembers meeting you" is what gives anecdotes veracity.

I find Mydnight and Samarkand both credible -- just suspect that Mydnight didn't realize a serious Chinese scholar could make jokes at Mao's expense about the derivation of his name. (Mydnight, anyone who survived the Cultural Revolution or had older colleagues who did can make all the jokes he wants at Mao's expense without losing *my* esteem

-- I've met people who went through it).

I trust Mydnight's current observations about literacy rates in the places he's visited in rural China. I don't know if that can be extrapolated to all of China or not, but the real answer isn't something that will be determined by who verbally bullies who on Usenet. (snips the no-archive header so people can find this later).

Now, I'll start filtering this thread.

Rebecca,

If I could find some decent, reliable stats, I'd surely give them to the group, but since it is so far from anything having to do with tea and nearly impossible to find real stats in China, I don't want to bother. Literacy is as literacy is in most countries; around the larger cities and civilization, it is usually higher than the rural places. It's much more dramatic here, though, in that rural is reaaaaaallly rural. Some of the farm houses that I've stayed in don't have any books (let alone 4 walls) in them and if they could afford books, they would probably spend the money on something that has more relevance in their lives. I am an advocate for rural literacy and I spend much time volunteering, if I have any time, teaching in rural schools around China. I think I have a pretty good grasp of what's really going on around here in that I've been north, south, east, and west regardless as to how pointless and limited others view my experience as.

And, joke or not, I still stand by my understanding and explanation of his name. This isn't a country of absolutes or absolute understanding involving any topic; most people that have spent any time whatsoever here understand that. I thank you for your support in the former ridiculous flame war that I accidently started and then kept fanning.

Cheers from one teacher to another.