Jack the Ripper Writers

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks for the prompt, Ally, I can say that neither Spirogyro nor Joe were able to supply a dignified or rational answer to why my posts were deleted, or other posts were altered at a later date to make them appear as original posts.
I guess I just caught 'em with their pants down, and they too shamed to own up to it.

[auspirograph]

Boy with brains like yours I am surprised you can manage to write a single sentence much less a whole...wait a minute, what was it you wrote on the Ripper again that made you qualify as a "Jack the Ripper Writer"?? I don't think that question was ever answered either.

Ask Tom Wescott, he should know as he reviewed my writing for Ripperologist back in 2005 on Casebook.

[Ally]

Wow...so one whole article in a magazine that will take pretty much anything to fill the pages is enough to qualify you as a member of your premiere and imminent website....

And you made it sound so elite.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ask Tom Wescott, he should know as he reviewed my writing for Ripperologist back in 2005 on Casebook.

Apparently my review was more memorable than your essay, because I have no memory of it. So, you've had nothing to say on the Ripper case in 4 years?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[auspirograph]

It would seem that whatever you say or do, some people are never satisfied, oh well, that's life I suppose...

Perhaps the last word should be left to the authorities on the subject and to welcome anyone from Casebook who may be interested, to visit Jack the Ripper Writers at your leisure.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Spiro

[Tom_Wescott]

Why is this thread under 'Books'? A forum is not a book, Spiro. You would think a webmaster might know how to properly place a forum thread.

By the way, Joe Chetcuti sent me an e-mail June 6th that I only today saw and read. He's very eager for me to know what he posted on Howard's site. He also wants me to post it here, so I will do so later. It is in response to a post of mine on this thread, and the second part seems to be a response to AP Wolf's post on this thread. Joe has not posted on the Casebook since 2007, which is presumably why he e-mailed it to me and did not post it himself.

I imagine most posters don't have a clue who Joe Chetcuti is. Don't feel bad, because there's no reason you should. However, if you're a psychology major, Joe is a thesis waiting to happen.

WARNING: If you're a loyal Casebooker, as I am, and consider Stephen Ryder to be the most fairminded webmaster ever to grace the internet, then you will be greatly offended by what Joe has to say. One thing I can say for Joe is that at least he's not pretending to like people and websites that he doesn't like. His lack of a frontal cortex allows him to say openly what many of his associates feel but are too scared to say.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Tom,

If Joe won't post, why are you willing to be his errand boy and post for him. Frankly getting someone else to post his character assassinations of Stephen on his own website makes both him and his errand boy the height of sleazy. And frankly the fact that you are willing to do his dirty work makes me doubt your sincerity.

I do love how he and auspiropgraph are supposedly the "authorities" in Ripperology and yet no one even knows who the heck they are.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ally,

I should think my loyalty to the Casebook is beyond doubt. Personally, I feel that all posters here should know how the other sites think of us, particularly since they use the Casebook as a recruiting grounds for their own tiny empires. Call it education.
But I also considered your point, and kind of tested the waters by posting my warning before actually posting the e-mail, to see if dissent was raised. Since it was, I'll forward you the e-mail and you can let me know what you think.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

It is well known that all dissenters here are shot at dawn….

There is only one rule…obey the rules…

It is however, good to hear you all shooting each other in the foot

Pirate

[Ally]

Well then by that typical display of your logic, I would have imagined you'd have been banned weeks ago since you do nothing but slag this site while sucking up its bandwith.

You are a hypocrite. And if you had any dignity at all, you'd refuse to post on this site since you have such an issue with it. But oh wait, that's right, your hypocrisy is a lot stronger than your convictions.

[Ally]

Ally,

I should think my loyalty to the Casebook is beyond doubt. Personally, I feel that all posters here should know how the other sites think of us, particularly since they use the Casebook as a recruiting grounds for their own tiny empires. Call it education.
But I also considered your point, and kind of tested the waters by posting my warning before actually posting the e-mail, to see if dissent was raised. Since it was, I'll forward you the e-mail and you can let me know what you think.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,

I don't think it's going to come as any surprise to anyone that other sites are vehemently anti-Casebook no matter what they publicly state. No one here is stupid and everyone has either had the surreptitious email or PM (usually using Casebooks own PM) slagging it off.

People like Chetchuti, Spiro and the like aren't new, they aren't subtle, and they don't need to be given a platform on Casebook to slag it off. But that's my opinion only.

Obviously the powers that be see it differently since this thread is allowed to remain.

[Tom_Wescott]

Well then by that typical display of your logic, I would have imagined you'd have been banned weeks ago since you do nothing but slag this site while sucking up its bandwith.

You are a hypocrite. And if you had any dignity at all, you'd refuse to post on this site since you have such an issue with it. But oh wait, that's right, your hypocrisy is a lot stronger than your convictions.

I assume this was in response to Pirate Jack's odd interlude and not my post to you?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom,

I don't think it's going to come as any surprise to anyone that other sites are vehemently anti-Casebook no matter what they publicly state. No one here is stupid and everyone has either had the surreptitious email or PM (usually using Casebooks own PM) slagging it off.

I would like to think so too, but a remarkable number of Casebookers (and not newbies, either) continue to frequent and support these sites no matter what they see occur. A bunch of Israel Schwartz's, they are.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Tom,

Free market enterprise. McDonald's and Burger King are bitter enemies, but some people like both.

And of course, let's face it, some people do like the ass kissing and sucking up that they can find on other sites.

[Jeff Leahy]

Well then by that typical display of your logic, I would have imagined you'd have been banned weeks ago since you do nothing but slag this site while sucking up its bandwith.

You are a hypocrite. And if you had any dignity at all, you'd refuse to post on this site since you have such an issue with it. But oh wait, that's right, your hypocrisy is a lot stronger than your convictions.

Paranoid Megalomania anyone?

Everyone knows that I only hang around to make sure you or Tom don’t tell any porkies

Pirate

PS no doubt this thread will mysteriously disappear fairly soon anyway...