Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tt00345)

JHE-------
No time now to
respond to posting.
But will answer part of
1.  Ms Eklund maybe private
person but she's posted
on this public forum.  She
answered months ago to queries
on Judge Case.  I couldn't
find her email so I asked for it
on same forum.  Her email add.
was no secret to subscribers.
I didn't have it so I asked.
Is that improper?

Since posting Neresheimer----Judge
letters, some readers have
emailed thanking me for posting what
they knew nothing about.  What's
negative with that?

In regards to context, what
earthshattering context info would
change major points of
letters?  I'll go over this soon.

D Green


>Dear David,
>
>I'm sorry that you feel that I have insulted you, or have been
>condescending.  This has not been my intention.  However, I must admit
that
>my failure to communicate with you has been frustrating to me and
hurtful to
>others.  Instead of asking me what is the problem, and accusing me of
>insulting you, perhaps you ought to take an honest look your behaviors
that
>I have specifically expressed concern and attempted to get you to
change:
>
>1. You have been soliciting the addresses of private individuals who
may not
>want to be contacted.  Case in point:  I specifically told you that Mr.
Goes
>is a private individual and does not want his address given out, let
alone
>have it broadcasted over the internet.  I told you that if you want to
>contact him,  I would forward a message for you.  That way it would be
up to
>Mr. Gomes to decide if he wants to answer your letter. You ignored my
>suggestion and found someone who was willing to break Mr. Gomes trust
and
>send you his address.  Worse yet, in trying to help you, this person
>published the address on theos-talk for everyone to see.  Several
people
>were hurt as a result of your careless behavior, including Mr. Gomes.
>Apparently you learned nothing from that incident because you more
recently
>publicly solicited Ms. Eklund's email address.  Did it ever occur to
you
>that she may also be a private individual?
>
>2. You have on several occasions solicited students on this discussion
group
>to send you Judge documents under the pretext that you are thinking of
doing
>a thesis on the subject.  I applaud your four or five months study of
>Judge's writings, and encourage you to keep going.  But evidently it
hasn't
>occurred to you that the serious students you have been soliciting have
>sacrificed many years in the collecting and studying these documents.
>Through many decades (not months) of hard researching and pondering,
these
>students have achieved their own understanding of these materials.  But
you
>post documents to a public site, materials generously given to you that
you
>have not taken the time to understand yourself.  What is your point of
doing
>this?  IMO, this is a very distasteful and an inappropriate use of
those
>documents.  Further, it is not by any stretch of the imagination the
>behavior of someone who is doing serious research.
>
>3. Your above actions leave me to guess that your behavior is
essentially
>motivated by the expectation that others are to do your research for
you.
>Do you tell your Professors to give you all the documents they have on
a
>subject when they ask you to research it?  Of course not.  They will
tell
>you to do your own research and find your own documents, because it is
in
>the research and writing processes that you really begin to learn about
the
>subject.   Case in point:  someone generously sent you a document from
the
>O.E. Library Critic.  Your post lacked any surrounding information
>concerning the document.  In fact, you knew so little about the
document and
>the publication that you had to ask the meaning of the initials "O.E."
>What is your point of publishing documents you know nothing about,
unless it
>is with the expectation that others will explain them to you.  i.e. to
do
>your research for you.
>
>4. Regarding my "new accusation" that you are trying to manipulate me
into a
>debate with someone unknown to me: since you evidently don't understand
what
>I'm saying, I will spell it out again.  Friday, you posted on
theos-talk a
>portion of a private letter written to you suggesting that I don't know
what
>I'm talking about.  What am I to make of  your making public a private
>letter sent to you that criticizes me?  My only two guesses are that
you
>either posted it to passive aggressively lash out at me for for calling
you
>on your shit, or because you want to manipulate me into a debate with
this
>person.  I told you that I will not be suckered into your games.  They
are
>not constructive.  They are not friendly, and I assure you that in the
long
>run, you will not benefit from them.
>
>Regarding my library and archives--yes we have some 15,000 volumes of
rare
>theosophical books and journals here and another 50,000 pages of
unpublished
>documents, most of which are not available anywhere else.  I have
announced
>the existence of this resource on the various Theosophical discussion
groups
>and advertised its existence in Theosophical History.  I have also made
it
>known that the materials and books are available to any student who
wishes
>to see them.  As a matter of fact, we receive several researchers a
year
>from all over the world who make use of this material.  Some of them
are
>working on their Ph.D. Thesis.  One frequent visitor is a university
>professor who is engaged in writing a book.  I am yet to deny access to
this
>material to anyone who has inquired.  The rules for using this material
are
>exactly the same as the rules that you would follow if you were to
visit any
>University special collection.  This collection exists because I
personally
>collected, housed and preserved this material, at a tremendous personal
>cost  in time (thirty-five years) and money (many tens of thousands of
>dollars).  Over the years, I have made this material freely available
to ALL
>students whether they share my beliefs or not. Further, my wife and I
have
>been in the process of  taking legal steps to make this collection a
public
>trust so that it will continue to be preserved and be available to
students
>after our deaths.  This is being done at the cost of our entire
personal
>estate.  Considering the above, I suggest that your accusation that I
have
>not been generous to you or to others might be a bit misguided..
>
>I hope this clarifies and brings an end to this conversation.
>
>JHE
>
>David Green wrote:
>
>> JHE,
>> What is problem?  Since last
>> fall I've been reading & studying W
>> Judge.  I've purchased books, recd
>> material thru inter-library sharing,
>> & yes, I've asked for help
>> in locating material
>> on this forum. Persons senting
>> public & private messages to me
>> have been helpful.  Some extremely
>> generous.  But you are exception.
>> You dislike my questions
>> & accuse me of wanting
>> you to do my research. Now you
>> give new accusation. If you
>> dont want to share info then
>> DONT SHARE. But why do you write
>> what appears to me as insulting &
>> condescending comments.
>> Several theosophists have copied
>> rare books on W Judge for me.
>> No charge. They
>> didn't lecture me but helped.
>> One man emailed me you have library &
>> archives of Judge material.  I
>> wonder how open & accessible your
>> material is when you can write such
>> unfriendly postings?
>>
>> I close unpleasant subject.I thank
>> everyone who's given info &
>> material & I'll continue to
>> post documents as I find & rec. them.
>> I also plan to create web site
>> when I learn HTML.  Any recommendations
>> on good web site provider?
>>
>> D Green
>>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com