Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdcad!decwrl!ucbvax!dewey.soe.berkeley.edu!robinson From: robinson@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP Newsgroups: alt.flame Subject: Re: There IS a hoax at UCB Message-ID: <21891@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: Sat, 21-Nov-87 18:55:26 EST Article-I.D.: ucbvax.21891 Posted: Sat Nov 21 18:55:26 1987 Date-Received: Mon, 23-Nov-87 06:28:07 EST References: <5909@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <1842@chinet.UUCP> <5944@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <1851@chinet.UUCP> <1311@aurora.UUCP> <1876@chinet.UUCP> Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: robinson@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Michael Robinson) Organization: School of Education, UC-Berkeley Lines: 123 In article <1876@chinet.UUCP> rhonda@chinet.UUCP (The Rhonda Manifestation) writes: > >But given the fact >that there IS a real Mark Ethan Smith who doesn't know anything about this >net at all, Fact? What fact? All we have are your repeated petulant assertions. >we KNOW that some people are lying (namely sklyer and robinson). I sure am glad you've decided to make this personal. I don't feel good about playing hardball on someone else's behalf. >You might remember that the first accusations came from skyler and robinson >(and "Mark" of course) accusing me of not really being a woman because I >disagreed with "Mark" and "her" postings. I didn't accuse you of not really being a woman because you disagreed with Mark. I decided that you weren't really a woman because you came on to soc.women with your cliche male arguments, your stereotypical male style of argumentation, and your insensitivity and ignorance of any number of concerns of which it is inconceivable that any woman could not be aware, even if not from personal experience. Beth Eades came on soc.women and made many arguments contrary to the "ideological feminist party line" and was neither attacked as a traitor nor accused of being a man. I've studied writing, argumentation, and style for the last four years. I've analyzed any number of examples. Men have a different and distinctive style of writing and argumentation from that of women. The Rhonda Manifestation displays the former, not the latter. Furthermore, my experience in soc.women has shown me that there are certain arguments which almost ever single man who shows up in soc.women makes at one point or another. I made them myself. It comes from being ignorant of the issues and concerns faced by women in this society, and ignorant of the perspectives which develop as a result. The Rhonda Manifestation has made every every one of these arguments like it had a checklist. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and thinks like a duck, draw your own conclusions. It was this evidence which initially led me to suspect that the The Rhonda Manifestation was not female. The recent assertions of irrefutably incorrect "facts" have convinced me beyond doubt that The Rhonda Manifestation is a hoax. This is just my belief. I don't ask anyone else to believe likewise, or to even care. The falsehood of Rhonda's "facts" may be easily determined by anyone who does care, so there is no point in me pitting my word against Rhonda's. My only interest is in whether or not there really is a Rhonda Scribner, and whether or not she knows what's being done with her name. However, it seems unlikely that we will ever know, as the Rhonda Manifestation apparently considers even its state of residence a secret to be protected in the interest of privacy. From whom and for what reasons, one can only speculate. >Someone who is trying to play "pseudo" and yet pose some shred of evidence >that the "person" they were posing as is real, so that anyone questioning >her existence would be pointed to this stray random evidence. The charade >about Mark being a poor homeless person was part of the tipoff. A homeless >person, who supposedly is having a difficult time just surviving, has enough >time, energy and resources to post to the net? Is Berkeley that gracious in >giving out accounts AND terminal access? And what about the long distance >calls to public access machines in Chicago and New York, machines which "she" >A woman on "social >security" can afford those kinds of phone bills, even with PC Pursuit or >Telenet access? And why not? You wouldn't happen to have a cost analysis breakdown to support your incredulity, would you? The average amount of disability payments, and PC Pursuit rates are both public information. Do some research. >Give me a break. Yet despite the ridiculousness of the >homeless person story, it provided a nice cover. How do you supposedly find >this person? I don't recall anyone ever claiming that Mark was currently homeless. Only that he had been formerly. >You can't, you have no idea where to begin. That was where >Larry Lippman's information came in. Until this point, there was no point of >reference to find this Mark Ethan Smith. >Now there was, and for this skyler >and robinson flamed Larry hotly for having the "audacity" to post this >information (publicly available) to the net. I did no such thing. I flamed Larry for doing sloppy homework. I didn't even mention the fact that he posted the address. The record will show that. It was a non-issue, because the information was dated. Since I am the only one, to my knowledge, who has been to Mark's current residence, I was also the only one, besides Mark, who knew that the address was bogus. >That information helped break >the truth about the hoax. You still claim there is a "real" Mark Ethan Smith living at the address Larry gave. Some job of breaking the truth you've done. >Everybody agrees there is a real MES. By taking the trouble to actually >contact that real MES, anyone and everyone can find out that that is not the >same person who has been posting to the net. Brilliant observation. So, just out of curiousity, why didn't *you* take the trouble to contact the "real" MES? >Kenn, you seem baffled by it all, yet quite sure of certain things. One way >you can become sure of some of those things is to contact Mark Ethan Smith >directly. That should clear it up for you once and for all. Once again, I concur. By the way, are we ever going to get the opportunity to contact Rhonda Scribner directly? I thought so. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Michael Robinson USENET: ucbvax!ernie!robinson ARPA: robinson@ernie.berkeley.edu