Open letter to Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to **** you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

On 22 May 2006 16:10:17 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, wrote:


Ozark Bicycle wrote:
Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to **** you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.

It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public, but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing. If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.

If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

wrote:


Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Trying to fathom the ravings of the anonymous ones is beyond the scope
of human endeavor.

wrote:
On 22 May 2006 16:10:17 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Don't be coy. You sent me an email wherein you made certain allegations
regarding an RBT regular. I replied in earnest, and soon found that you
had leaked some info to other RBT posters "offline" (via private email)

For the curious: Carl sent an email in which he said an RBT regular
might "just be replying to the voices in his head". he also included a
private email between himself (Carl Fogel) and another RBT regular
(we'll call him "RA" in a Kubrickesque slant), wherein "RA" said the
other RBT regualur in question was "seriously mentally ill".

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Beware.

Cheers,
Ozark

wrote:
On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, wrote:


Ozark Bicycle wrote:
Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to **** you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.


No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.


It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.



but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.



If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.


I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.


The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.


If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.


Are you "entertained", Carl?

On 22 May 2006 19:35:38 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:


wrote:
On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, wrote:


Ozark Bicycle wrote:
Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to **** you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.


No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.


It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.



but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.



If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.


I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.


The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.


If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.


Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

wrote:
On 22 May 2006 19:35:38 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:


wrote:
On 22 May 2006 16:26:59 -0700, wrote:


Ozark Bicycle wrote:
Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

While I'm not privy to exactly what Carl did to **** you off, it's just
as bad that you chose to berate him publicly without first bringing up
with him directly, first.

Your post above is just as egregious as anything he may have done to
you. Sounds like you two need to share apologies and get over
yourselves.

Fred

Dear Fred,

I'm baffled, since I haven't mentioned the email that I sent Oz, which
was about a completely unrelated thread.

He thanked me for warning him about a potential problem, but now he
apparently thinks that I've mentioned the matter on the newsgroup,
which I haven't.


No, Carl, not "on the newsgroup", but behind the scenes, via private
email, in what I now understand may be your SOP.


It's odd to receive blackmail threats in public,

"Blackmail"? Hardly. Just a poblic warning shot across the bow of your
sleazy, backhanded methods. I prefer to operate out in the open, not in
the shadows.



but Oz may just be so
confused that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Trust me, I know exactly what I'm doing: exposing a behind-the-scenes
sleazebag.



If he wants to publish
my email and his reply, I can't complain.


I am not ashamed of my reply, Carl, it was made in earnest, thinking
your email was a genuine attempt to be helpful, not the behind the
scenes character assassination it really was. Are you issusing me an
invitation to post a link to the email?

But I hope that he either explains what's going on enough for me to
figure out why he's upset, or else figures out that he's grossly
mistaken.

In any case, I hope that he considers the two other people involved,
just as I did.


The "other two people involved" are the only factors that have stayed
my hand to this point.


If nothing else, we're entertaining everyone.


Are you "entertained", Carl?

Dear Oz,

You wrote:

"It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email
to me."

(Then you issued a bizarre public blackmail threat.)

What did you read on RBT today--from anyone--that made it "apparent"
that I breached whatever "confidences" you imagine were contained in
your private reply?

Here's your private reply in full, barring a name. You thanked me for
taking the trouble to warn you about a problem that another bicycle
dealer had revealed to me. I didn't like doing it, but I'd have felt
bad if I'd said nothing and let you go through the same miserable
experience:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I
just naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

What on earth did you feel you were confiding in me when you thanked
me for giving you a private warning about a wretched problem?

And where did you see your "confidences" being "breached" today on
RBT?

Incidentally, a public blackmail letter is amusing, but not terribly
effective.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel


Dear Carl,

Since you continue to try to BS your way through this, here is a link
to the email you sent to me:

http://tinyurl.com/edfxs

They say a liitle sunlight eliminates maggots, what do you think?

Cheers,
Oz

On 22 May 2006 19:23:46 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:


wrote:
On 22 May 2006 16:10:17 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

Dear Carl,

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

So, here's the deal: the next time I see a smarmy insult from you,
directed toward *anyone*, I will post a link to the underhanded, back
stabbing, gossipy email you sent to me. This will not only embarrass
you, but also "RA" (as Kubrick might put it ;- ).

You decide.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Can you provide your curious fans with a link to whatever you read on
RBT today that led to your mistaken conclusion?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Dear Carl,

Don't be coy. You sent me an email wherein you made certain allegations
regarding an RBT regular. I replied in earnest, and soon found that you
had leaked some info to other RBT posters "offline" (via private email)

For the curious: Carl sent an email in which he said an RBT regular
might "just be replying to the voices in his head". he also included a
private email between himself (Carl Fogel) and another RBT regular
(we'll call him "RA" in a Kubrickesque slant), wherein "RA" said the
other RBT regualur in question was "seriously mentally ill".

The bottom line is that Carl fogel communicates behind the scenes in an
underhanded manner, violates privacy and engages in character
assassination.

Beware.

Cheers,
Ozark

Dear Oz,

Despite our differences, I wrote to warn you about considerable
difficulties that another bicycle dealer had suffered, since you were
about to step into the same mess.

I'd tell you that the bridge is out if I saw you about to head out in
the dark.

Writing to you was no fun, since the problem was a person, not a
bridge, but I didn't want the two of you to get into trouble just
because I wanted to avoid the whole unpleasant situation.

You replied and thanked me for warning you. Here's your reply in full,
except for a name:

Hi Carl,

It was always obvious that X "marched to his own drummer", but I just
naively assumed it was his way of having fun. Now, it is apparent
something very different is afoot. How sad. Seriously disturbed people
have miserable lives and more often than not, inflict that misery on
those around them.

Thanks for the head's up.

Richard

Today, out of a clear blue sky, you wrote:

It is apparent from reading RBT today that you have breached certain
confidences contained in my private reply to your sole private email to
me.

What "confidences" do you see in your thank-you note?

What on earth could you confide in me?

Where do you feel that it became "apparent" that they were "breached"
today on RBT?

What did I (or anyone else) post on RBT today that "breached" your
"confidences"?

Are you abandoning your original public blackmail threat in favor of
incoherence?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel