Print

---

Please , everyone, stop this thread.

Best,

Michael
-------
Michael H. Goldhaber
SftP list moderator


On Aug 23, 2011, at 9:05 PM, Michael Balter wrote:

It's unfortunate that Larry did not follow his better instincts and refrain from sending his email, because he is simply wasting list members' time with it. But I won't let personal attacks on me go unanswered, especially accusations that I am a liar, which is a very serious charge that I obviously deny.

If Larry wants to continue to obsess about me on this list, I guess there's nothing I can do about it. As he said to me privately and now publicly, he is on a "mission" to expose the nefarious Michael Balter. Perhaps he could make a religion out of it. This might be a mission that a few list members could appreciate, but I doubt very many.

 I said to him privately what I have said to him publicly: Concentrate on making a positive contribution to this list and don't worry so much about what I say. I'm just one person here and I can be ignored if anyone doesn't agree with me.

I stand by my characterizations of Sam's comments and also of George's. In Sam's case, declaring without qualification that the leaders of the rebels will sell out the insurrection, something that he cannot know ahead of time, assumes that those leaders are now beholden to the US, France, Britain etc just because NATO helped them win. We have the example of Iraq's Shiite leaders, who were helped to positions of great power by the US war there but are now more closely aligned with Iran, to show that this does not follow; also the case of anti-Soviet forces helped by the CIA who later became the Taliban, bin Laden, etc in Afghanistan. Such a blanket statement shows contempt for the entire Libyan people, as I said, because it automatically assumes that those leaders do not represent the people they are leading, and it automatically assumes that the people of Libya are blindly following them.

As I said earlier, no one likes having the full implications of their statements reflected back at them, but there is a difference between allegations that a viewpoint is being mischaracterized and distorted and the much more serious accusation that someone is a liar. Sam was a gentleman, as he always has been, and simply tried to clarify his position on Libya in a subsequent post; it is Larry who is engaging in obsessive invective by repeatedly calling me a liar and trying to "expose" my "lies" (and also George.) It is unfortunate that our moderator does not object to one list member calling another a liar, but if it continues I might have to consult an attorney about it.

MB



On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Larry Romsted < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

All:

I want to deconstruct Michael Balter's email below a bit.  I thought seriously about not sending this email, but decided that I must because the character of our interaction offline was completely misrepresented by what he wrote in his email at about 9 AM this morning.  I hope that this will be the end of these exchanges between he and I, but I suspect he will respond.

When he writes:  "As I indicated privately to Larry yesterday, some people on this list seem to have formed an obsession with Michael Balter." and "PS--I hate to have to predict it, but very likely at least one person will respond to this message by wanting to talk about Michael Balter again," Balter is talking about me beginning at PS, if it is not obvious.

The word "indicate" in his opening phrase: "As I indicated privately to Larry yesterday…" suggests Michael was almost pleasant  to me.  Below are our recent exchanges in reverse order.   The first, 1, is Michael telling me I was getting obsessive (but he is not???).  I then responded to him offline to avoid continuing on the SftP list.    After receiving email 6 (top one), I stopped responding.  But, then Michael decided to continue picking at me, albeit a mild tone, on the list the next day.   So, you can compare how he addresses me offline "how he indicated privately to me," with how he write on the list. I think it is yet another  example of how Michael deliberately distorts meaning and is quite hostile.  I confess, it makes me angry.

As far as I am concerned his periodic pleasantries are a ruse. I think he is attempting to dominate the SftP discussion list.

When he writes:

"I am proud of my role on this list, and of the fact that I initiate a significant percentage of the discussions that take place here; but nevertheless:

There are supposed to be about 100 members of this list, but only about 10% of them make their views known or participate actively. That is unfortunate, and leads to a domination of the list by a small number of people."

He neglects the not so small detail that often much of the discussion that follows is either about trying to explain to him how he  distorts other people's meaning or telling him he is using smarmy, pejorative or ad hominem attacks—again.  He also forgets to mention that he is responsible for driving a number of people off the list, e.g., Cliff Connor, Louis Proyect, and others.  He has told us at various times how he is proud pushing people off.  I assume he will try to dry off someone else that upsets him sometime in the future.

Michael:  Stop attacking people, address them civilly when you disagree with them, and send your informative emails and all will be good.

Larry

________________________

Balter's last response to me.  Below that are earlier ones in reverse order.

6  Oh yeah, I'm really shook up.

You told me long ago you didn't like what I say on the list, so what makes you think anything is going to change? Why don't you focus on making positive contributions to the list and not worry so much about me? Like I said, you're obsessive.

MB

5  On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Larry Romsted < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

Looks like I have touched a nerve.

I actually regret that it has come to this, but I think it is time for you to stop trying to dominate the Science for the People list.

Larry

4 From: Michael Balter <[log in to unmask] >

Reply-To: <[log in to unmask] >

Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 19:54:10 +0200

To: Larry Romsted < [log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: The Great Tripoli Uprising

If it makes you feel better about yourself, knock yourself out. But it doesn't change the fact that you are a damn fool.

MB

3 On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Larry Romsted < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

Michael:

Off line.

I have a simple mission.  To show that you routinely distort and lie when you characterize others and what they say.  Get used to it.  Shape up and I will quit.

The others understand, although they are probably tired of all the gratuitous crap.

Larry

2  From: Michael Balter <[log in to unmask] >

Reply-To: Science for the People Discussion List < [log in to unmask]>

Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 19:34:37 +0200

To: < [log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: The Great Tripoli Uprising

Give it a rest, Larry. You're getting obsessive.

MB

1  On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Larry Romsted < [log in to unmask]> wrote:

Michael:

Two things.

1.  You badly distort in your email below what Sam Anderson wrote.  Sam wrote:

"But what is coming is going to be far worse for the masses of Libyans because these folks are going to put the entire nation up for sale in a period where the Western Capitalist are in desperate need of supercheap human and natural resources. The Libyan progressive forces are NOT going to be part of the mix because of the collapse of any form of a global organized Left Force to act as a deterrent or counterforce to Western Capital."

You change that to:

"Sam shows his contempt for the Libyan people by declaring that they are now sure to sell out to Western interests;"

This is not what Sam wrote but a manipulation of it.  Sam's "these folks" is about the leadership of the opposition in Libya selling out the Libyan people.  I have no idea if Sam is right.  I hope not actually, but who knows.  You certainly do not know the future either.

2.  I am waiting for you to: "Reproduce my earlier email that insisted that no one on the list takes the position of supporting Qaddafi.  If you do that I will admit I am wrong.  If you cannot do that, then stop mentioning me with anything that I have not written about and stop instructing me on what not to say."

 

Larry

From: Michael Balter <[log in to unmask] >

Reply-To: Science for the People Discussion List < [log in to unmask]>

Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:07:07 +0200

To: < [log in to unmask]>

Subject: Re: Michael Balter`s window. It's true of course that I detest Balter, but for one reason only

PS, and to make things clear--What George is calling a lie is actually an accurate characterization of what he said and its implications; same goes for what Sam said. People should not call others liars to cover up their discomfort at having a mirror put in front of their faces.

MB

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Michael Balter <[log in to unmask] > wrote:

As I indicated privately to Larry yesterday, some people on this list seem to have formed an obsession with Michael Balter. I wish they would get over it and make their own contributions to this list. Larry, who not so long ago posted nearly always only to criticize me, has been getting a little better lately and occasionally posts original material for discussion.

George, since he has been back on the list, has posted only on the subject of Michael Balter, unless I am forgetting something (if I have forgotten, it should not be construed as a lie, but simply a lapse in memory.) He, too, seems to have an obsession, which goes back to his earlier time as moderator when he temporarily kicked me off the list for my political statements (which led to a walkout by several list members.)

Unfortunately, that leaves only a small number of list members who actually keep this list going by posting material of relevant interest. They include myself, Robert, Sam, Mitchel, occasionally Michael G. and Larry, and no more than a few others. Then there are list members who usually only respond to others' posts or participate in discussions once they have started; these include usually very interesting comments from Claudia, Mandi, Herb, and a few others.

I am proud of my role on this list, and of the fact that I initiate a significant percentage of the discussions that take place here; but nevertheless:

There are supposed to be about 100 members of this list, but only about 10% of them make their views known or participate actively. That is unfortunate, and leads to a domination of the list by a small number of people.

Some people here, like George and Larry, think that I am some sort of a problem for this list and seem never to tire of talking about Michael Balter. But I am just one person, and I can be ignored, deleted, or spam filtered if people don't like what I say and feel that they can't tolerate being exposed to my comments and thoughts. What would be great is if more people participated on this list, posted their own materials, and engaged in discussions. That might help the small number of obsessives on this list get over their fixation with Michael Balter.

MB

PS--I hate to have to predict it, but very likely at least one person will respond to this message by wanting to talk about Michael Balter again. Nevertheless I hope that some lurking list members will respond by participating more actively in providing interesting posts.

******************************************

Michael Balter

Contributing Correspondent, Science

Adjunct Professor of Journalism,

New York University

Email:  [log in to unmask]

Web:    michaelbalter.com

NYU:    journalism.nyu.edu/faculty/michael-balter/

******************************************

“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."

                                                  --John Kenneth Galbraith

--

******************************************

Michael Balter

Contributing Correspondent, Science

Adjunct Professor of Journalism,

New York University

Email:  [log in to unmask]

Web:    michaelbalter.com

NYU:    journalism.nyu.edu/faculty/michael-balter/

******************************************

“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."

                                                  --John Kenneth Galbraith

--
******************************************
Michael Balter
Contributing Correspondent, Science
Adjunct Professor of Journalism,
New York University

Email:  [log in to unmask]
Web:    michaelbalter.com
NYU:    journalism.nyu.edu/faculty/michael-balter/
******************************************

“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."
                                                  --John Kenneth Galbraith