[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: dual ID's
Nick Makris wrote:
>
> I don't recall Keith responding to the allegation that he and Thor are one
> in the same. Keith?
I didn't respond to it because it was ridiculous in the extreme..
The allegation stems from Christina remembering part of the history of this
whole Thor thing and not the other...
If you go back to the archives and search for posts by Thor you will find that
I am not the only person whom he attacked, although I am the only recent
target. He attacked among others, in the past, Judy...
I am probably the only recent target because both he and I were censored for
going over the top the last time he attacked me repeatedly.. Which was tied
into the whole mess in May of Viruses being posted onlist..
As for the dual IDs, I was not going to even dignify it with an answer.. BUT
since Christina obviously remembers only part of the story...
When I was being attacked last time in May..
Someone, possibly Thor, maybe not, set up an account "Keith_Krebs at
Hotmail.com" and began posting under that pseudonym. So, postings were coming
from me, at this address, AND that one.. In a lack of attention to the digital
end of things, I was suddenly accused by some, of posting from the Hotmail
account too.. People were confusing posts from this account and the Hotmail
account, exactly as Thor, or whomever, intended..
I have e-mail and phone conversation with Hotmail staff who began the process
of trying to track down who had opened the account in my name (as Gordon is
aware - and he did his own investigation of sorts too, I believe). However,
whoever opened the Keith_Krebs account suddenly unsubscribed it from this list
and closed the Hotmail account, that mooted the issue of who had it.. So,
Christina, there was never any proof that Thor was a pseudonym for anyone, the
only pseudonym we were aware of was for me at Hotmail. If someone can prove
where Thor's and my e-mail originate from (since he uses Hotmail his may not be
easy, if he uses a webpage interface), I would welcome that to put this to
rest...
I have my own website, my own full-time business, run my own digital list of,
over 560 members at e-groups, and am now writing for some digital oriented
publications, not to mention the fact that I had been handling up to 150
e-mail requests daily involving the EPSON printer problems.. I don't have the
time to start playing "ghost name" games, I have enough trouble keeping which
list I am responding to in mind...
Beyond which, I have always believed, that every professional signs with their
own name on a list like this, not under some pseudonym - I could go by "P.O.V."
since that is my e-mail address, but I choose to be honest, forthright,
direct, ann adult by signing my own name - It's just too easy to take cheap
shots you don't have to take responsibility for when you write under a
pseudonym (right Cowboy? - and if anyone is accused of being "Thor", maybe it
should be "Cactus", since they agree so much on both substance and the proper
style for critique, and are both pseudonyms - but I digress)...
When I have professional disagreements, or want a critique I handle them
professionally.. In the former case I was booted from Jack Reznicki's photo
lists for discussing the EPSON problem there (Jack is a PPA officer and PPA
endorsed the product I was questioning) - I made clear publicly my feelings on
that kind of censorship, but I did not return to those lists - not under my own
name, nor like some coward, under a pseudonym. In the latter case, if I want
critique I ask for it as I did here..
Now however, I want to thank those on the list who took time to critique the
work I posted, both positively and negatively. However, it seems that Thor has
accomplished his desired effect without having to make a second post. As Judy
said, I opened myself up for critique.. Some chose to give that.. Thor felt
nastiness and personal attack were more appropriate, and today I find myself
responding to vague and pointless accusations, defending myself in a missive
that could not be more useless as this has spun onwards in a manner reminiscent
of the kind of vague insinuations and rumor mongering the Tabloids are so good
at encouraging..
Given the turn this has taken, I am SURE others will be loathe to open
themselves up to ANY criticism on this list or present any opinion... It's
sadly rapidly reducing itself to a "coffee klatch" amongst those who share the
same opinions, with a bunch of vicarious observers subscribing to hear the
opinions of the self-proclaimed experts.. If that is the purpose of this list,
Gordon, it might be time to change the name from alt-photo-list to
alt-photo-answer-list and change the description from that of an open
discussion and exchange of ideas to one in which us "little people" write in
with questions for the "experts" to answer..
I cannot prove I am not Thor, if someone else can, or can at least prove the
mail is not coming from the same place, PLEASE DO... It won't change how I
feel about being pilloried here, but MAYBE it will prevent this kind of
campaign of rumor in future against another member on this list. For
"artists," who supposedly prize individuality and tolerance of diversity of
opinion, some of the members of this list have proven themselves to be exactly
the opposite.. to those of you, all I can say is "it must be nice to have all
the RIGHT answers."
To Judy, thanks for being an e-friend from when I first joined this list some
years back... I will still see you on the 4th and will bring what I can on the
water recycling systems.. To the rest of you, it is clear I have little place
on this list and much less usefulness to it yet...
So, as I said Thor wins.. I leave...
Adios...
Keith Krebs
--
{ For the latest on the 1270/870/875DC Orange-Shift Issue }
{ Head to http://www.p-o-v-image.com/epson/ or }
{ The EPSONx7x_Printers List http://www.egroups.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers )
{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }