Cliff High view on Bill Ryans accusations

[Average Joe]

Originally Posted by Myplanet2

There's always got to be one, it seems. "I gots dis here opiniun, and wants to shares it wit chew all (scratch-scratch)". Nothing wrong with sharing opinions, but kind of useless when accompanied by a "facts" vacuum. I guess the wedding interrupted by the quake, and the northeast power outage were "coinkydinks"

I'm sorry, but there is always "lots" it seems, that believe any old BS, any old BS site, and then when it is pointed out, resort to pseudo intellectual character assassination of the said "one"

I have said that site has never been right in its predictions. I have said that it is an entertainment site. How many more facts do you want, you people that accuse me of being a troll and of not using facts? There are TWO big fat facts for you to chew on right there.

I still await somebody, anybody, to provide me with solid facts that show it is a serious site and has gotten predictions in the past right. Until then, I think people should lay off the character assassination OK? I'm here to discuss, this took my interest, on this occasion I oppose, so what is the big problem. People just can't take opposing views on sites like this can they?

And yes, the vague co-incidences about the wddding and power outage, need more than that. Where is the link predicting the wedding interrupted by the quake, with time, date, location? Where is the news article confirming time, date, location after the event? They have to match to be a fact not a "coinkydink"

[Luana]

AJ, I wonder if you have bought and read any of the alta reports? If you have, then you are able to be part of the webbot discussion forum. They have been keeping track of bot hits. There are way to many to post here. Which is one of the reasons Clif is so highly thought of here.

[truth and integrity]

Originally posted by franciejones
You’re being hotheaded and impetuous again!

I can hear you franciejones. It is so frustrating when people can not accept our needs or a different opinion but use judgment or name-calling to discredit our needs or point of view. Very immature stance, indeed.

Best regards,

[YinYangMind]

Originally Posted by Luana

AJ, I wonder if you have bought and read any of the alta reports? If you have, then you are able to be part of the webbot discussion forum. They have been keeping track of bot hits. There are way to many to post here. Which is one of the reasons Clif is so highly thought of here.

And that's the real point isn't it! It seems that AJ has taken the same sorry tack that Bill has on this issue and franciejones post/issue... seems more like the AGW crowd throwing questionable and demonstrably blatant incorrect 'facts' around for some 'cya.'

AJ, you by your own admission have seen that the 'disclaimer' regarding 'entertainment' has been removed from the site (it's now included in each report with very detailed reasons) and as stated by the quoted post, you probably have never spent any time reading any of them. Additionally, HPH states specifically that they 'do not make predictions' as you accuse, they make 'forecasts' just like the jolly ole weathermen in the UK. Do you understand the difference between the two? Do you give them the same disregard in their profession you give HPH?

As stated, there are plenty of 'bot hits' if you care to objectively review them. You stating that the 'predictions', which they are not, have never had one hit supported by news articles, etc, is just plain ignorant!

As many of us here have stated many times, there are some very intelligent and thoughtful people here who hold Clif in high regard because we have spent the time analyzing his body of work. The latest childish and nefarious non-sense that has come from the latest PC/PA interviews/interviewees/protection & defection of 'whistleblowers' and their questionable pasts have raised serious concerns for those of us who have followed both PC/PA & HPH. It's funny that you don't see any of these types of issues surrounding HPH...except when Bill stumbled and created a reason for Clif to clarify facts from fiction...which by all accounts, was done very well and Bill hasn't even attempted to address what Glif wrote...where's the truth in that AJ?

We are trying to get to the bottom of the truth. If you have 'facts' that support your position, bring it on. Otherwise, stop wasting your valuable keyboard and internet time with your negative, factless, agenda driven drivel so the rest of us can continue pursuing the truth!

Oh, one more question...do you believe in AGW?

Peace,

YinYangMind

[Myplanet2]

Originally Posted by Average Joe

I still await somebody, anybody, to provide me with solid facts that show it is a serious site and has gotten predictions in the past right.

No proof would serve when your opinions are set as facts in your mind. I won't waste my time debating.

[Carol]

I do not understand why franciejones was banned. She shared an email not an Avalon PM which would have been a reason for a ban. She had the right to share it and Bill responded in a very open manner. What is the problem here? I thought openness was something this forum strived for and Kerry certainly set the standard when she stated her opinions last year with respect to Henry Deacon/Art Neumann, their own whistle blower and the moderators. What is it about putting the truth out in the open that is so offensive? Bill stands behind what he wrote. We all know this is where he stands as he is very clear in stating his opinion. Franciejones' post just revealed that Bill is consistent in his opinion at a personal level in his communication with her as well.

[Dood]

I HAVE to 2nd what Carol just posted.
Trust me on this...Carol and I have not always saw eye to eye on things but, I HAVE to agree with her on this wholeheartedly!

Carol stated it better then I could so I will just simply 2nd what Carol posted!

In the spirit of Openness:
I will say since I have met Francie way back when she was made a moderator here on Avalon without her knowledge or anyone asking her if she wanted to be a Mod was when I got to meet her and know her.
(long story there)
She has aways been dead honest and forthcoming.

She has integrity in spades! I am honored to have had the opportunity to have met her.
She is a true Lady. I do not see anywhere on how she broke any rules regarding the Terms of Service here!

[Argante]

Originally Posted by Dood

I HAVE to 2nd what Carol just posted.
Trust me on this...Carol and I have not always saw eye to eye on things but, I HAVE to agree with her on this wholeheartedly!

Carol stated it better then I could so I will just simply 2nd what Carol posted!

In the spirit of Openness:
I will say since I have met Francie way back when she was made a moderator here on Avalon without her knowledge or anyone asking her if she wanted to be a Mod was when I got to meet her and know her.
(long story there)
She has aways been dead honest and forthcoming.

She has integrity in spades! I am honored to have had the opportunity to have met her.
She is a true Lady. I do not see anywhere on how she broke any rules regarding the Terms of Service here!

I also agree with what Dood and Carol have said regarding Francie.

Very sad to see a senior member silenced because they were trying to get to the truth. Francie was a valuable member , and I will miss her unique input and posts.

[metaw3]

Originally Posted by Argante

I also agree with what Dood and Carol have said regarding Francie.

Very sad to see a senior member silenced because they were trying to get to the truth. Francie was a valuable member , and I will miss her unique input and posts.

To those who didn't see it... She made 2 posts and the second one is deleted. It was an email from Bill Ryan forwarding to her his reply to Cliff High and asking her to "not post this letter anywhere". That's why she is banned I think. When I read this post I knew it would be deleted.

[eleni]

Originally Posted by metaw3

To those who didn't see it... She made 2 posts and the second one is deleted. It was an email from Bill Ryan forwarding to her his reply to Cliff High and asking her to "not post this letter anywhere". That's why she is banned I think. When I read this post I knew it would be deleted.

Yes, upon review of that post which I deleted it was brought to other mods who all agreed it was grounds for a ban.

[Bobbie]

I see two problems here. Both involve trust. Bill should have never trusted anyone with info that was not suitable for public viewing and she should have not betrayed his trust. I'm just putting in my 2 cents even though I don't know the banned party because that gives me a somewhat fairly objective view.

[tacodog]

I have great respect for Cliff High's work as well as Kerry and Bill's. What is going on here? Every whistleblower should be investigated as much as possible to determine their legitimacy. My opinion: Cliff High did what we all should do...google and research these people. How else do you sort out the frauds? She did what she felt was necessary, in the process betrayed Bill's trust. That trust factor is between her and Bill. I disagree with the banning of FrancesJones. All the whistleblowers were entrusted with information, should they banned? What happened to the openness and integrity of this site?

[eleni]

Posting private communication asked to be kept private will result in a ban. It's that simple.

[Dood]

Originally Posted by eleni

Posting private communication asked to be kept private will result in a ban. It's that simple.

Let me get this straight! You are saying she broke the Terms & Conditions of this forum?
I would agree with you IF both parties AGREED to whatever information was shared would remain private.
But, that was not the case here....She was never given any CHOICE to say yes or no to this.
It was just sent to her freely and without her asking for this information.

For example I cannot PM you and say: "Here is something on the side...blah..blah...blah..." and then expect you to not say anything unless you agreed to it.
I cannot just decree that it is confidential unless you agree with me. You have to have that choice.

Both parties have to AGREE in order for something to be private.
It was freely given to her without her asking for this information.

So, in that respect she did not break ANYthing regarding the Terms & Conditions that we all (Staff included) agreed too.

I have seen emails shared on this and many other forums.
It is not privileged information unless both parties agree to it...

Even if said information is 'uncomfortable' in order to keep one's integrity one must live by the rules that were set up.
Since Francie Jones was not given any choice about anything being confidential then she did not break any rules.
She was simply told this information without her ever asking for it....
That is the difference here! She did not agree to this being 'private' because she was never given the choice to agree or not.

Now if an Email at the beginning of ALL of this stated:
"Francie I want to share something with you privately. Will you agree to keep this strictly confidential?" and if she replied: "Yes, I do..." then that is a whole nother story all together.
Then I would say you had grounds for a suspension of privileges.

Anything different ruins the integrity of the forum.

[morguana]

Originally Posted by Dood

Let me get this straight! You are saying she broke the Terms & Conditions of this forum?
I would agree with you IF both parties AGREED to whatever information was shared would remain private.
But, that was not the case here....She was never given any CHOICE to say yes or no to this.
It was just sent to her freely and without her asking for this information.

For example I cannot PM you and say: "Here is something on the side...blah..blah...blah..." and then expect you to not say anything unless you agreed to it.
I cannot just decree that it is confidential unless you agree with me. You have to have that choice.

Both parties have to AGREE in order for something to be private.
It was freely given to her without her asking for this information.

So, in that respect she did not break ANYthing regarding the Terms & Conditions that we all (Staff included) agreed too.

I have seen emails shared on this and many other forums.
It is not privileged information unless both parties agree to it...

Even if said information is 'uncomfortable' in order to keep one's integrity one must live by the rules that were set up.
Since Francie Jones was not given any choice about anything being confidential then she did not break any rules.
She was simply told this information without her ever asking for it....
That is the difference here! She did not agree to this being 'private' because she was never given the choice to agree or not.

Now if an Email at the beginning of ALL of this stated:
"Francie I want to share something with you privately. Will you agree to keep this strictly confidential?" and if she replied: "Yes, I do..." then that is a whole nother story all together.
Then I would say you had grounds for a suspension of privileges.

Anything different ruins the integrity of the forum.

this is not up for debate, a pm or email is by its very nature private
and to post an email or pm without consent is not cosher......end of

m x

[Seashore]

Originally Posted by morguana

this is not up for debate, a pm or email is by its very nature private
and to post an email or pm without consent is not cosher......end of

m x

I don't believe that is true when there is a public issue involved that is being discussed in a public forum by a public person who is putting out very public information for general consumption by the world at large.

[Zeddo]

Originally Posted by eleni

Posting private communication asked to be kept private will result in a ban. It's that simple.

Not entrusting private messages that are not meant to be shared would have circumvented this, and Bill Ryan should know this. I have no idea of the content or even the topic concerning this whole issue (presuming it's the whole Cliff High - Bill Ryan charade, which is all it is, 2 kids in a sandbox sulking over who has the best toys) but what I can say is that somebody who should have known better caused the final outcome. 2 wrongs don't make a right presuming that the banning is what would be construed as "right" in this instance, and the giving and sharing of the info the 2 wrongs.

Yes, in total simplicity the banning was correct, but was it moral? How quickly we cast aside our morality in protecting them we feel to be infallible, our "guiding lights" so to speak.

Once again, I will pose this question. Are we illuminated? Are we awakened? I think not. Struggling infants in a brave new world perhaps, but we have a long way to go before we can class ourselves as anything more than that, this includes both Kerry and Bill. We are all in this together and we need to look out for each other. The time to stop criticising, persecuting and generally damaging one another needs to stop, and stop NOW. We are starting to look like a bunch of christians here, the only people I know who bury their wounded.

I was hoping to see a change in the tide of pettiness that has been washing the shores of avalon especially in the past month, but I am afraid this is a mere pipe dream. I am hoping to be proven wrong. What was that old saying, "united we stand - divided we fall"? Oh yes there is something else and it was mentioned in a post in this thread....NEVER share writing in private what you do not wish to have aired in public. This is not a new precept, so Mr Ryan, take more care in future, you are not infallible. None of us are. The fact that Bill Ryan even shared something he wanted to be kept private needs to be questioned.

That's my petty tuppence worth.

Z

[eleni]

Bill Ryan asked her not to post it. franciejones posted it. I removed it and the other mods and I discussed this behavior, all were in agreement. It had nothing to due with the subject being discussed.

[sjkted]

Originally Posted by Zeddo

Yes, in total simplicity the banning was correct, but was it moral? How quickly we cast aside our morality in protecting them we feel to be infallible, our "guiding lights" so to speak.

Of course it was not moral. It was a decision from the mind based on policy -- not a decision from the heart based on expanding consciousness.

As JFK said, I find the idea of secrecy repugnant in a free society.

--sjkted

[ellie]

Originally Posted by sjkted

Brightest Light: is this your view and writing or are you reposting from elsewhere?

--sjkted

Oh gee, because the evolved souls here didn't buy into the smurf world die hard stuff the people who live under the mushrooms have gone all nasty.

It's a shame really it is, but there you go.

Hey Brightest Light, I will take my chances with the beings that protect me and you can follow your path okay.

Go to it fella. Good luck with that in 2010.

[sjkted]

Ok. If you read the above message and do a search on messages by The Brightest Light, it is quite obvious he is acting as a provocateur here.

It seems like this is attempting to be made into quite a heated thread. I'm not going to name any other names here, but if someone is trying to incite division, check their profile and history of messages posted and see if there is a pattern of posting almost exclusively messages about I doubt this or You're wrong and such. Some of this is so obvious it's not even worth responding to these people.

--sjkted

[Moxie]

If emails are considered private by their very nature...
then why did Bill air Cliff's? ... tho he did, subsequently, appropriately apologize for citing the term "researcher/investigator" as "private investigator" not to mention over private bank accts<<<< (but still has not apologized for his name calling). That's the part that was so embarrassing.

And now this w/FrancieJones... deep sigh!
ok, so all you mods agreed, that doesn't make you correct, not to mention that it wouldn't do any good to consult the "founder" Bill on that matter for he's already demonstrated very poor manners all around.

Bill answered the Q & A on Cliff as though he was speaking casually with a dear friend over cocktails... when in fact he was airing himself on the worldwide web (maybe having had one too many, hmmm?< just joking but you get the drift).

Francie? You hang in there. I've always admired your spirit and good sense!

[Dood]

Hello Moxie....

By the Way: I like your 'Moxie'!

[Majorion]

HOPEFUL
371 /AKA/ DONJUAN
ARCORA /AKA/ SCARAB /AKA/ ALOE /AKA/ THE BRIGHTEST LIGHT


The funny thing is, I think I had a conversation with all these people (or, one person).




Scarab, Brightest Light, whatever... you're a seriously troubled individual and I genuinely wish help for you.

Peace

[Northern Boy]

I`m waiting for you Maro

YES. WE FOOLED YOU. and guess what? we laughed like hell at your sorry asses while we did it. it was FUNNY AS HELL. but you're going to find that HELL isn't funny at all.

Oh yes I fell for it and was just getting ready to accept your friendship offer

then I saw this wonderful loving angelic post and thought thats what has been missing good old fashion Astro Vera church sermons and it brought back so many memories .

you have had plenty of time to post info here why haven`t you ? Since you are banned I`ll help you out and answer for you . History Circus posted the second life thread , you are here to recruit more people to surrender access to their email address`s access to all files from their pc`s allowing you clowns in. This is why you are here you need them to go to your site to grow your flock and that is where you will show them what it is you want to . and not here

Your group has a simple flaw to it you can`t accept questioning you can`t accept being told your way is not the only way you can`t even infiltrate a forum with out being detected the only one you got fooled from what i saw in your post was you SOME TIMES THE BRIGHTEST LIGHTS HAVE THE DIMEST BULBS

....you are going to BURN and YOU KNOW IT.

The only one I see here doing any type of burning is you guys if you are up front and tell those who are here what you are doing then they accept it or reject it and you go your separate ways but thats not how you want to do it its about control with you