As it turns out, the Ripper Cabal is real...it's just not who you thought it was

[Monty]

Monty, I've tried to make it a point NOT to find out...

All the best

Dave

Ignorance is indeed bliss.

Monty

[Ally]

Monty, I've tried to make it a point NOT to find out...

All the best

Dave

Ignorance might be bliss but it doesn't make the for the most solid ground on which to take a stand.

[Cogidubnus]

No one is worth it.

However, I will say, you really havent a clue what goes on. I envy you.

Monty, I've tried to make it a point NOT to find out...

All the best

Dave

[Monty]

The idea of any cabal involving anyone is ludicrous. Trevor meant it seriously because he thinks a group of Ripperologists are deliberately witholding source material because it disagrees with their beloved pet theories. I doubt that Ally seriously believes that anybody else forms a similarly motivated cabal, but she may fairly note collective common traits. She has accused Simon, like Trevor, of making claims which he doesn't support. Phil spouts much the same stuff as Trevor and sometimes goes even further, even managing to see something nefarious in the publicity surrounding the loan of the marginalia to the crime museum. I don't know how Lynn's involved in the debacle. SO, no, not up to shady business, Tom, but sharing a common - what shall we call it, ethos?

Damn right,

The idea of such a group is nonsense indeed, anywhere. However, as Paul stated, Trevor kept calling one, and called and called and called until it didnt get funny anymore.

So I then called him upon it, asked for the evidence. Got the A-typical cute posts but I carried on asking for evidence.

And guess what, Im still waiting.

Monty

[Monty]

Fine Monty...so why waste your time posting on a thread like this about them? I'd venture to suggest it doesn't achieve much and, as stated above, rather than enlightening the rest of us, it's the least attractive feature of an otherwise brilliant site.

You know what Dave. I had a long drawn out post completed and ready to go but yep, you are right.

No one is worth it.

However, I will say, you really havent a clue what goes on. I envy you.

Monty

[PaulB]

No less than Paul Begg has corrected me about the intentions of Ally's first post, which he seems to feel is completely honest and legit...that being that Trevor and Phil have a cabal; and since Phil is notorious as the hanger-oner of Simon and Lynn, the suggestion seems to be they are collectively up to some shady business. Perhaps all of this is true, but all I can say is that they've completely kept it from me.

The idea of any cabal involving anyone is ludicrous. Trevor meant it seriously because he thinks a group of Ripperologists are deliberately witholding source material because it disagrees with their beloved pet theories. I doubt that Ally seriously believes that anybody else forms a similarly motivated cabal, but she may fairly note collective common traits. She has accused Simon, like Trevor, of making claims which he doesn't support. Phil spouts much the same stuff as Trevor and sometimes goes even further, even managing to see something nefarious in the publicity surrounding the loan of the marginalia to the crime museum. I don't know how Lynn's involved in the debacle. SO, no, not up to shady business, Tom, but sharing a common - what shall we call it, ethos?

[Ally]

Hi Dave,

Why are you seeking approbation from Ally?

Regards,

Simon

Hi Simon. I am still waiting for you to back up the insinuation you made on this thread of a time when I have lied, slandered or behaved in any way that was deceitful in regards to your person as you appear to believe I did.

You made the accusations and I would very much like to hear the evidence that supports it.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Dave,

Why are you seeking approbation from Ally?

Regards,

Simon

[Ally]

Oh Ally

I was trying so hard to tread carefully ...If I defend a proposition on a thread in which a debate is taking place, it is one thing. If I start a thread specifically to attack other posters that's another...and before you contend that's not the case:-



is pretty much a giveaway...you may feel that in this particular case it's a justified reaction to events that have taken place...I can't comment on that, but I hope at least you will concede that there is a distinction

All the best

Dave

Ah I see. So posting multiple posts to criticize the behavior of others is okay.

Posting a post that starts a thread to criticize the behavior of others is where the line must be drawn. A fine distinction I completely miss.

I mean i could always have derailed someone's thread with my criticisms, but then that would have been off-topic, wouldn't it? Damned no matter what I do it seems.

[PaulB]

She probably very sincerely feels she is Paul - But in speaking out against injustice, isn't there a moral duty enshrined in how one chooses to do so? If one party is seen to descend to the level of the other, does this not tend to tar them both with the same brush? It's certainly not very elightening - I think most of us get bored when folk start slinging personal mud...

Obviously one shouldn't hypocritically do what the other person does, and one certainly shouldn't do worse than the other person does, but don't you think one has to speak out against injustice in whatever way one feels necessary in order to be heard?

Ally had tried reasoned argument. She'd laid the arguments before Trevor. He refused to respond. He resorted to his usual one-liners. And this isn't a man who is peddling an outlandish theory, but someone who is setting out to challenge others. He calls one a thief, he refuses to apologise and blames someone else, he tried to ridicule and humiliate someone else because he found what he thought was a video of him backtracking on his theory. He damns the theories of others without even having read their books, all but accused a dead man of forging or otherwise tampering with a source document, and on top of all that his ignorance is such that everyone who has seen his show comes away with a catalogue of basic mistakes.

Ally didn't do any of that. She mocked. Scorned. Made fun of. What that really so bad.

I'm glad you've been given an easy ride. I don't like to hear stories such as Errata's. That's not what any of this is about.

[Cogidubnus]

Oh Ally

I was trying so hard to tread carefully ...If I defend a proposition on a thread in which a debate is taking place, it is one thing. If I start a thread specifically to attack other posters that's another...and before you contend that's not the case:-

wanted to smack the crap out of a certain little arrogant pissant who recently decided to state that Neville appeared on the documentary before any "serious questioning" of the marginalia occurred.

is pretty much a giveaway...you may feel that in this particular case it's a justified reaction to events that have taken place...I can't comment on that, but I hope at least you will concede that there is a distinction

All the best

Dave

[Ally]

Do explain the difference. What precisely is the difference between you posting on this thread to tell me my methods, motives and behavior is wrong, and me posting on this thread to complain about that exact same thing in others?

What makes your position superior to mine?

[Cogidubnus]

See and isn't that interesting. I'd wager both you and Fleetwood would defend your comments on this thread in very similar ways, that you would not feel comfortable if you hadn't said anything. It's a very interesting double standard, isn't it? Everyone believes that when THEY are the ones speaking out against perceived injustices they are on the side of the right. It's only when OTHER people are speaking about against perceived injustices that it becomes divisive and purposeless and wrong.

Really, interesting contradiction that is.

No Ally...no contradiction...of course I'll defend a proposition I put forward in a thread (though not I hope with any personal animus) ... but I'm afraid if you can't see the difference between that, and what has happened here....

All the best

Dave

[Tom_Wescott]

Okay, there's obviously a backstory here I missed. I was not aware of some Ally/Phil argument in which Admin became involved. Any of my posts on this thread were motived only by what has been written on this thread. I was more concerned that Simon and Lynn - whose posting etiquette typically outshines the rest of us - were being painted with the wrong brush. But Phil, God bless him, does have a history of trying to bait people in order to report them or further attack them. He went through a spell like this with me a long time ago, but we're past that. Phil and Ally are like oil and water, so this is to be expected from time to time.

No less than Paul Begg has corrected me about the intentions of Ally's first post, which he seems to feel is completely honest and legit...that being that Trevor and Phil have a cabal; and since Phil is notorious as the hanger-oner of Simon and Lynn, the suggestion seems to be they are collectively up to some shady business. Perhaps all of this is true, but all I can say is that they've completely kept it from me.

And yes, I'd say the boards are generally harmonious.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

To some extent you're right of course Ally...on one level I wish I hadn't...but on another I'd not have felt comfortable with myself if I hadn't said anything...and whilst I'm afraid I'm sometimes no angel myself when it comes to a heated debate, I still think this thread's a wrong'un...Sorry!

Best wishes everyone
(And I mean that!)

Dave

See and isn't that interesting. I'd wager both you and Fleetwood would defend your comments on this thread in very similar ways, that you would not feel comfortable if you hadn't said anything. It's a very interesting double standard, isn't it? Everyone believes that when THEY are the ones speaking out against perceived injustices they are on the side of the right. It's only when OTHER people are speaking out against perceived injustices that it becomes divisive and purposeless and wrong.

Really, interesting contradiction that is.