For more recent information about Area 51, see the new Area 51 Research Center maintained by Don Emory.
|
From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 11:14:37 -0800 |
[I know I promised to bring the Spader/Huff thread to a close, but this response, just posted to a.c.a51, is pretty general. -- GC] From: campbell@ufomind.com (Glenn Campbell, Las Vegas) Subject: General Response from Glenn Campbell Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51 Date: 10/8/97 I understand my name has been bandied about a lot on this newsgroup lately. I do not monitor the newsgroups, so I haven't read all the messages. (The bandwidth here is stunning and there is no way I can keep up.) Previous flame wars have pretty much desensitized me to anything anyone can say, and past experience has shown that it isn't wise to jump into the fray, even to deny obvious falsehoods. The Glenn Campbell discussions can play out without me. There are a few interesting responses on the Glenn Campbell criticism page: http://www.ufomind.com/ufo/people/c/campbell/criticism/#link8 Otherwise, the whole Campbell thread seems, well, a bit off-topic. It isn't a good idea for me to respond to individual messages, because that prompts even more debate and flames. I can, however, make a few comments _in general_ about any lurid charges made about anyone on the newsgroups. -- On the newsgroups, there is no moderator. Anyone can post anything without any requirement that it be relevant. -- Anyone can make up any story they want, without any requirement for proof. -- Anyone can claim to be anyone else simply by switching the email address in their header. Thus, one person can pretend to be a lot of different people, all of whom support the first person's contentions. (Hint: Look for similarities in style.) -- By posting a lot of irrelevant messages, one person can completely dominate a debate, distracting people from the original issue. Regarding CHILD MOLESTATION claims, in general... -- If someone is making such claims, they ought to offer some sort of confirmable evidence. (The best evidence would be a court record or evidence of formal complaint.) If they don't offer any substantial evidence, it could be called slander. -- If someone has current evidence of child molestation, it is their responsibility to report this to the appropriate law enforcement authority. If they do not, this could be considered obstruction of justice or something similar. If someone claims to have such evidence but isn't reporting it, we ought to wonder why. -- In courts of law, unlike on the internet, a person is considered innocent until proven guilty, and there are strict rules about the admissability of evidence. (A message posted anonymously on the internet is certainly _not_ admissable.) On the internet, once charges start, you can never prove yourself innocent, because once you respond to one charge, others emerge in its place -- anonymously posted, of course. For an alternative to the alt.conspiracy.area51 newsgroup, see the Area 51 Mailing List at http://www.ufomind.com/area51/list/. This list covers about the same topics as the newsgroup, but it is moderated. Irrelevant messages are kept to a minimum. There are about 1100 email subscribers at present, and all messages are immediately archived on the website. Glenn Campbell +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | U F O M I N D - M O T H E R S H I P | | "World's Largest and Best Organized UFO Website" * | | *** | | GLENN CAMPBELL - Moderator & Webmaster ***** | | ******* | | Area 51 Research Center campbell@ufomind.com ********* | | Las Vegas Annex http://www.ufomind.com | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ Index: Criticism of Glenn Campbell
|
Created: Oct 8, 1997