Jeffrey Gibson

Now that you know his agenda -- and that he's not only provided false information about how many actual people have been complaining about the "apparently" rigged DSS exhibits and that his definition of anti-semitism is "not cowtowing to my father's ideas -- why would you let him? You'd be facilitating the felonies he's been charged with.

Now that you've incorporated, aren't you liable for such things?

Jeffrey

Toto

Raphael Golb has been charged with the felony of identity theft, but nothing he has posted here could be classified as "identity theft," and I suspect that his lawyer will challenge whether that can be classified as identity theft, since there was no theft of any personal identification, and no one seems to have been fooled.

The other charges are misdemeanors, but it's not clear what the crime is.

Posting anonymously has never been a crime. Posting annoying and baseless criticisms of academics is not a crime. Posting false information about one's support is not even a crime. We still have the First Amendment in this country.

We have tried to deal with Gadda by challenging his statements where they are wrong or illogical, because that is the purpose of this board.

PS - it's kowtowing, not cowtowing.

XKV8R

so then, may i now rejoin this discussion?
as i recall, the last time i posted on this board, i was getting slammed by 'charles gadda'.
where'd he go?

and yes, it's illegal to knowingly libel someone.

proof is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:IsraelXKV8R/Sandbox

(p.s. take your time. it took me two years to compile that. it will take you hours to read it properly.)

XKV8R

and 'cowtowing' is how you say it if you're cool.
like 'thanx'.
and 'nite'.
and 'prolly'.
and 'complicit'.

XKV8R

you're assuming all of the evidence has been released to the public...

mountainman

Dear Robert,

Perhaps a little off-topic but I noticed on your user page a reference to a presentation entitled:

“Does Archaeology Illuminate the New Testament?”
Presented at the “Give Me An Answer” Lecture Series
in Huntington Beach, CA, July 11, 2004.

I would be very interested to read a copy of this.
Is this possible?


Best wishes,


Pete

spin

Could we either get on with the topic of this thread or start another thread in some other forum? This is supposed to be BC&H. Thanks.


spin

Toto

Hi Mr. XKV8R, you're always welcome here.

I'm not assuming that all of the evidence has been released, but libel is not a criminal offense. The charges are identity theft and "aggravated harassment." There has to be something beyond mere libel to get the criminal authorities involved. Which there may be - but we'll see.

I think this case may push the boundaries of the law.

Are you working on a screen play

In any case, cowtowing would be towing your cow, which doesn't sound very cool at all. Kowtowing is bowing down so low that your head hits the floor, in the Chinese manner.

Toto

You are right, but is there any point to this thread without Charles Gadda? Is anyone else prepared to charge John Allegro with anti-Semitism?

Perhaps we should just close this thread and anyone who wants can start a new one on a better foot.

But I was hoping that someone could answer my question as to why a PhD in comparative literature with a law degree couldn't do a better job of promoting his father's ideas.

DCHindley

Because it is not just business ... it's PERSONAL! There are several subjects that seem to bring out the worst in otherwise intelligent rational people, and the big three are
1) Origin of the DSS,
2) The Relationships Between the Synoptic Gospels (aka the "Q" issue), and
3) The Historical Value of the OT (aka the Minimalism/Maximalism debate).

The displays of "righteous" anger, name calling and all-around displays of disrespect are, or were, legendary on lists like ANE (minimalist/maximalist), Orion (DSS) and Synoptic-l (Q). These are the lists I participated in (or occasionally still do at Synoptic-l) and there are several more that I chose not to participate in out of dread of "more of the same." These included several splinter e-groups from respected lists like Crosstalk2 (such as the one started by two well known scholars got so sick of the amateurs - who were apparently too much like their own students and even said so - that they erected admission barriers to limit participation to grad students or higher, yet then broke their own rules and admitted several rah-rah amateurs) or Orion (which closed due to change of focus at the sponsoring group, but again, the new list only wanted grad students or higher, thus shutting out the consuming public).

So here's "Chaz Gatta," who from the start had an axe to grind. Even here, where every kind of loose cannon gets some interest, he didn't seem to get much response. Look at the guy who keeps hounding Jeffrey Gibson, who posts countless messages in every forum and created elaborate web pages filled with rants. We have a couple members like that right here.

Why do some people feel compelled to do these kind of things (angry outbursts, "debate" tricks, name-calling, personal attacks, et cetera)? Maybe because my undergrad major in college was psychology, I tend to think that these folks have established certain "facts" as key to their understanding of the world. When confronted with challenges to these facts, they are unable to accept the new information and rearrange their psychological structure that allow them to cope, and instead take defensive positions which they will protect to any extreme rather than accept even the possibility of the alternatives.

A simple lookup of Leon Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance or even Sigmund Freud's psychological "defence mechanisms" will provide many examples of exactly these kinds of responses to "threat."

DCH