Charles Gadda

Jeffrey, all I need say to you is that I'm still waiting to hear from him

And no, I will not publish the content of private emails -- it's none of your business. Please don't distort my words. I clearly said that any discussion of this issue between me and him would have to take place in public.

But if you're so concerned that Martin might not have been informed, why don't you send him an email yourself to make double-sure? You said this wasn't your "job," but after all, here we have a situation where you appear to be suggesting that Martin might still not know about this conversation about courage, cowardice and Martin in which you yourself are participating, so why not just make double-sure? Or perhaps you don't have the courage to write Martin?

Jeffrey Gibson

Given the question I asked ("yes or no, did you e-mail Abegg using the address I gave you?) what you "need" to say is "yes, I did e-mail Abegg using the e-mail address you gave me" or "no, I did not".

Anything else is non responsive and an evasion.

Jeffrey

Charles Gadda

Jeffrey, have you, or have you not, informed Martin Abegg on your own of this discussion concerning him? If you have not, then all of this is simply rhetorical rubbish on your part.

There is a discussion here about Martin Abegg. I say there is no reason at this point (other than the mysterious "unwritten" sort, the kind perfected in the "Virtual Qumran" script) to believe he doesn't know of it, yet he has apparently chosen not to participate. Surely Martin's not afraid of appearing foolish if he responds to me?

So I further say Martin's failure to participate could be interpreted as a sign of indifference, disdain, or even, perhaps, a form of cowardice on his part. Just so we can entirely set aside that possibility, don't you think it's your responsibility to make absolutely sure Martin is informed of the discussion, since my responses to you don't fulfill your "yes-or-no" dictates?

Go on Jeffrey, use that email address. Here it is again: abegg at twu.ca. Otherwise I, and no doubt others, might conclude that you would actually like Martin to be able to hide behind this little "yes-or-no" game of yours. After all, it's not really in Martin's interest to respond, is it?

So why don't you eliminate all doubt about it, Jeffrey? Just have the courage to inform Martin on your own and confirm you've done so here -- otherwise this is a false issue you've created so Martin can hide behind your own evasive inaction.

In the meantime, I will continue to answer "yes-or-no" interrogations -- what is this, the Inquisition? -- any way I like.

Jeffrey Gibson

So the answer is no. I thought so. Thanks for clarifying.

Jeffrey

Charles Gadda

Look, I thought we were supposed to stick to substantive issues here, right? As Toto said, Martin Abegg has no obligation whatsoever to register with this site or to participate in this discussion. If you're so concerned about the matter, why don't you just email him yourself?

As for your question, I certainly did not say "no," so let's not put words in my mouth. At any rate, anyone could always simply deny that I informed them, or that they received any message from me. That's why you need to contact Martin, so you can satisfy yourself that he has indeed been informed.

spin

Sorry, but Jeffrey Gibson seems to have issues with substance.


spin

Jeffrey Gibson

If you really want to find out the answers to these things, you should ask him, not us.

Here's his address: bobcargill at mac.com

(Anyone want to wager what excuse CG will use this time for not doing so?)

Jeffrey

spin

Oh, get off it, Jeffrey Gibson. You've pulled this before and it was split by the moderators. If you can't contribute to the thread, please don't post.

And Charles Gadda, we don't really need to go through all this nitty-gritty about this person or that, do we? I'm all for discussion about the scrolls, their itnerpretation and misinterpretation, but I doubt most people on this forum, ie 99.9%, could give one hoot for protracted carves of these people. It should be more the matter than the person. The more about people the less you'll get read.


spin

Jeffrey Gibson

I fail to see how providing the way for a questioner to get the answers he says he wants is not a contribution to the thread.

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

I can?? Why? Because you tell me that he "aware" of "this discussion??

You know for a fact not only that he reads this forum but that he has seen and read post 5261492 ?

Jeffrey