Friday, 10 February 2017

Jeff Seiler: Dave Sim & Me

To: Jeff Seiler
From: Moment of Cerebus
Feb 4, 2017


I'm axing your 'Dave Sim & Me' feature. Here's why:

Here's a rare example of somebody broadly sympathetic to Dave Sim's world view and an academic/artist who actually knows what he's talking about, able to bring a whole new perspective when it comes to critiquing Cerebus... and you and Erick simply try to shout him down over nonsense you've imagined in your own heads. I would love more people to submit their own Cerebus Re-Read reviews, but how is that going to happen when they can see the treatment they're going to receive?

I disagree with about 99% of everything you say, but that's fine. I can accept that a diversity of opinions exist and should be reflected on AMOC. But you've crossed a line for me. Rather than argue against Carson, you and Erick just tossed personal attacks in his direction. That's just unacceptable.

I sacrifice my limited free time to keep AMOC on track and I'm not prepared to waste it giving you a platform any longer if you're set on sabotaging the goals I have for AMOC.

Under the current AMOC Comments policy, you're free to participate in discussion there, but do me a favour? Before you hit 'send', ask yourself if anyone else is interested in this drivel.



To: Moment of Cerebus
From: Jeff Seiler
Feb 5, 2017

Tim, you are overreacting. All I did was tell Carson that I thought his comments about Gerhard's art were "indelicate". That was/is not a personal attack. It was a critique of his critique. I was defending Gerhard who, admittedly, doesn't need defending.

And, my comment, "don't get ahead of yourself" stands. He was coming across as doing that; to me, anyway. And, I got the sense, to a few others here.

Censoring my doing what Dave asked me to do is not, I don't think, the right approach to this and is going to leave people wondering WTF? I think before you "axe" (or, censor) me for good, you should run it by Dave and the regular readers here. I would appreciate it if you would.

BTW, I thought you quit being the moderator.

I am not sabotaging your goals for AMOC. I was participating in what I thought was a free and open discussion. You'll note that Dave, who could conceivably have the most reason to get mad at me if *he* had thought I was directing a personal attack at Carson, simply wrote "Welcome to the Big Leagues, Carson."

If you'd like, I could forward a copy of your email and my response to Sandeep for him to let Dave read.

BTW, I review every one of my comments before I hit send. And, also BTW, that weekly feature that I post is not a platform for me, it's mostly Dave's words and all I do is type them up and add clarifying notes. That does not in any sense make it a platform for me. And, I don't cherrypick. I post every letter Dave wrote to me, as he asked me to, in chronological order, to the best of my ability.

And further BTW, I notice you don't chastise Damian Lloyd for his *truly* personal attacks on me.

Please respond to this email.



To: Jeff Seiler
From: Moment of Cerebus
Feb 5, 2017


Overreacting? Don't think so. I waited a week to calm down, but was still very annoyed.

This is not a democracy, so no vote required.

I don't moderate the comments any more, so you have the same right to abuse others as everyone else. Knock yourself out.

I'm not censoring any one. You have the same access to Blogger as I do. Set up your own site and exercise your freedom of expression there.

I don't think you appreciate that AMOC is an unpaid, volunteer thing for me (and others). I'm just not going to waste my time on this nonsense.



To: Moment of Cerebus
From: Jeff Seiler
Feb 6, 2017

Tim, you are overreacting. You don't like my viewpoints on politics and religion and feminism, so you jumped at a chance to "axe" or censor or block me. I did not personally attack Carson. Period.

And, if *you* don't put this out there publicly at the site, if you don't ask Dave what he thinks of your decision (and the suspicious reason you gave for it), then I will.

God forbid anyone else at AMOC annoys you. I know it's unpaid and time-consuming, but you choose to do it. I am just flabbergasted at your reasoning, given all the crap I take from Damian on a semi-regular basis.

You're making an example of me and doing Dave and AMOC readers a disservice.



To: Jeff Seiler
From: Moment of Cerebus
Feb 6, 2017


If it'll make you happy, I'll post this email exchange on to AMOC on Saturday. I couldn't be less interested in anyone else's opinion on this topic though.




Travis Pelkie said...


I'd like to state again (as I did later on in that thread) that while I did make comments that appeared to support Jeff and Erick's, and did make the "Ger's replacement" comment, I do not believe that Carson should therefore "watch himself" or shouldn't be able to (brutally, if he thinks necessary) critique the artwork in Cerebus, particularly if he brings an interesting perspective, as it appears he does, from what I've read.

And while Jeff's feature was occasionally interesting at times, it also tended to steer the conversation away from Cerebus per se and into ... other waters. As Dave's responses are/will be available in Collected Letters, this feature may be redundant anyway.

As to Damian vs. Jeff: I tend to fall on Damian's side of most arguments, although I think he can go too far at times. As Jeff tends to find offense fairly easily, I'm not sure how much weight to give to his charges against Damian. Damian can be harsh at times, but without specific examples, I'm not sure I'd "rule" in one or the other's favor.

I'd like to thank Tim for his thankless job in posting all the cool stuff he posts here at AMOC, and say that I will continue to visit, read, and comment here, and I hope Tim continues to post stuff for us. Thanks, Tim!

Tim P said...

Agree with everything Travis just said. Also find the Damian v Jeff exchanges hilarious

Jeff Seiler said...

Well, I'd like to thank Tim W. for posting our email exchange *almost* exactly as it happened. I say *almost* because, to the last email you see posted, in which Tim wrote that he was not interested in anyone's opinions about this matter, I responded, "Even Dave's?". Tim responded, "Including Dave's."

Anonymous said...


I strongly suggest you let it go and don't remove "Jeff Seiler: Dave Sim & Me"

I could elaborate... but it would ultimately end up with the above sentence.


George Peter Gatsis

Jeff Seiler said...

BTW, the proofreader in me has to add that where I wrote "and your suspicious reason for doing so", I actually meant "specious". But, I suspect you all already figured that out.

Kit said...

It's Tim's site, and ludicrously entitled of anyone to insist that he should publish what the same or other anyones send in. (Especially if they act like snotty, self-involved, bloviating, crazy racists when they're posting on the site every other day of the week. But also if they're not.)

Bill Ritter said...

I routinely tire of Jeff's endless sycophant idolization of Dave and inclination to serve as attack squad against anyone not also a sycophant or holding similar philosophy as he does.

I was disgusted by his attacks on Carson, and his various posts reflect my personal final straw of tolerance regarding Jeff (such final straw being so much as one might have upon a total stranger known only through internet posts and posits).

I encourage Jeff to kickoff his to continue his agenda. I shall not miss his moment to wax poetic here.

Jeff, for what it is worth, I truly believe you are a sincere and likely a nice guy. I absolutely respect your dedication to Dave and admire your friendship (if I might go so far) with him. My view of you is solely from your internet/AMOC persona, as are basis of my above comments.

My final thought is somewhere along in life and AMOC you went extreme, zealot, and it made many uncomfortable as well as created an overall toxic environment. Degree you are aware, that you care, is known to you. However, you have continued unapologetic regardless of what lines your zealotry crossed.

Carson Grubaugh said...

Since this is a "for the record" kinda crowd, when Tim informed me of his decision I told him I enjoy reading Jeff's communications with Dave and did not take any offense at one week of him being riled up. The only thing that really bothered me during that whole chain of replies was the accusations of racism, and those did not come from Jeff.

The last two weeks have proven to me Jeff's point that I play a larger role in the minds of people on this forum than I see for myself. Going forward I need to be more careful with that perception. That said, I still stand by my commentaries as they were originally written.

I would also hate that one week of people expressing displeasure with my words could lead to an action that causes discontent towards Dave's major avenue of communication with his fan base. Dave has plenty to worry about besides whether his few remaining active supporters can stomach the new guy or not.

It is Tim's site and I respect that he can do with it what he wants, and really appreciate the support he has expressed to me in many different ways, but I am sorry to see he still felt this way after a week of thinking it over.

Also, if people were uncomfortable with the personal nature of that thread a few weeks ago, lets not go there ourselves now by attacking Jeff for his long-standing support of Dave.


Dave Sim said...

Uh. I'm definitely of the point of view that this is Tim's site and he can -- and should -- do whatever he wants with it. Particularly in that he's not getting paid for this (which he isn't), so we're all, basically, sitting in Tim's "cybernetic living room" (as it were).

That (sensibly, I think) has to extend to his being able to take whatever action he wants to take with anyone who irritates him. Particularly if it's something that bothers him for a whole week.

And that has to, I think, include Carson's reaction to what bothered Tim as being "beside the point".

The Point is to me, again, that this is a "cybernetic living room" so the host's sensibilities have to be foremost in all of our minds. If your host is unhappy with you (and, Jeff, your host is clearly unhappy with you) then you are perceived (accurately or not) to be a bad guest. Miss Manners would recommend, I think, erring radically on the side of caution in that instance. Arguing with your host about whether or not you're a bad guest is "Not On" as the Brits say.

At AMOC, that's TimW's call to make.

Jeff Seiler said...

Okay, then. George and Carson (especially you, Carson), thank you for the well-reasoned support. Dave, you're right. It's Tim's website, so, having gotten some feedback, I withdraw. I don't think I was a bad guest, but perception being nine-tenths of the law, I withdraw.

But, good news! That box full of letters (that still had a good six or seven years worth of letters to go) can now be transferred to a plastic storage container and into the storage unit so that it will no longer take up space in the middle of my living room. And! It leaves me more time for proofreading the remastered volumes.

Oh, and further good news! Each one of those signatures, according to Dave (based on Wizard), is valued at $5, so that's at least a trip to Florida some day... :)


Steve said...

Hi Y'all -

My two cents on the 'Dave Sim and Me' posts boils down to, what have I personally found interesting?

The posts dealing with artwork, storylines, inspirations, and similar subjects I find interesting.

The posts which have delved into the feminist theocracy , well those I barely understand.

From my point of view I don't understand them as it's a subject I have no interest in, place no value in, and see no reward from holding.

But I'm certain that other regulars here at AMOC find those very posts to be enlightening and rewarding.

Anyone remember Jeff's ... response to Brian's unwillingness to scan his artwork treasure for the remastering project? It simply seems to me that every so often a situation like that rolls around and Jeff's vehemence kicks in where some thoughtfulness could be better served.

Would I miss the Dave & Jeff Show postings?

Only in that they are one more reoccurring feature here which helps keep the wheels of the site rolling.

And let me say, Dave I certainly appreciate your own level-headed response here.

I do believe at times Jeff and Damon simply need to get a room; they bait each other and then cast blame when the bait gets bit.

And honestly I don't have the education or erudition to follow any number of trails Carson takes us on in his posts.

I just thought I was reading one of them there funny books!


Jeff Seiler said...

BTW, and for the record, it pretty much blows my mind that so many people are equivocating my ex-AMOC feature (as Tim so eloquently phrased it) with it being a "platform" for me. I rarely posted up my own letters to Dave (and only did so when that was the best way to clarify what he was responding to). I mean, some people, during this kerfuffle, have referred to the "Dave Sim and me" feature as my having used it to post my own views on various topics.

It was, again, only my transcriptions, word-for-word, of the letters Dave wrote to me, transcribed directly from the original letters or faxes. If anyone doubts that, Dave has copies of them all and they will, eventually (as Travis pointed out) be reprinted in the Collected Letters or already have been. I did no editing here, except for clarifying notes as to context.

NOT *my* words. Dave's words.

How anyone can think that that was me pushing an agenda, or using a platform, or being self-aggrandizing just boggles my mind.

Twelve years ago, I started writing to Dave when he announced that, in retirement, he would answer every letter he received. It turned out that we had a fairly lively correspondence for about eleven years. And then he suggested I post those letters that he wrote to me, first via Twitter (which was a disaster), and then here at AMOC (which went fairly well for, well, until now).

But, people, all it was was Dave's letters.

Erick said...


Tim, it's your site and you can do with it as you please. I have no dog in the 'Dave and Me fight' and i never read it anyway - sorry Jeff, but I do think you are over reacting. First of all I never called Carson a racist. The proof is in the posts and I do not need to defend myself over that. Carson and I strongly disagree over matters relating to BLM. Carson also likes to re-frame arguments to suit his own purposes. See the 'racist' bit. You can say that someone believes an organization or a person is racist without accusing that someone of being a racist.That is called an honest disagreement. The argument was a continuation of two previous encounters I had with Carson over BLM. I stand by every word. As for Jeff, I think he is unctuous, but harmless. If you remove his column, you are being vindictive. Still it's your site.

Carson Grubaugh said...

From now on, when Erick makes the claim that I believe BLM is a racist organization I will post the following language:

I have never claimed that BLM is a racist organization. You cannot provide quotes to support your claim that I have. Thinking a piece of rhetoric was poorly crafted is much different than not supporting a cause or calling an organization's motivations into question. I 100% support the efforts of BLM to expose the problems of structural injustices. I do not think they crafted their slogan wisely, which is a problem for pretty much every agenda on every side of the political spectrum these days. I sorry I lack the command of the English language it takes to make this simple distinction between these very different claims any clearer to Erick.

Get used to this bit of language, because I am sure he will persist, whatever his reason may be.

Erick said...

That's fine Carson. You post that. I will post this about your 'demonizing language'. And I defy you to post anything i ever said that accused you of being a racist.


What you deem inherently divisive, others find uplifting. I never once called you a racist or a white supremacist. Those are your words. For the record, I do not think that you are a racist. Your condescension and dissembling, are a different matter. If you are so concerned about your future career, perhaps you should refrain from blasting your more uh, controversial views which others can and will find disagreeable across the interwebs?

Read on

Jim Sheridan said...

Didn't the expression "Let's take America back" basically DECLARE a whitelash? The Trump campaign was eagerly divisive, and its followers eagerly bought into it. To suggest otherwise seems disingenuous.
9 November 2016 at 11:34
Carson Grubaugh said...


Yes, but the Left has been generating these kinds of inherently divisive terms/slogans for a while now: white/male privelage, mansplaining, manspreading, Black Lives Matter, etc. If there was a 'whitelash' it was, in large part, a reaction against the exact kind of demonizing language from the Left that 'whitelash' itself is. "I was with you until you told me you don't want me."

Also, exit polls are showing that Clinton received LESS women, hispanic and black votes than Obama, whereas Trump gained in the hispanic and black relative to Romney. So the white-male backlash narrative doesn't hold up as representing anything near the entire picture. To simplify down to that is just going to push even more people away from the Left. I am one of those who was pushed away. Berkeley-educated Liberal through-and-through, who was forced into abstaining from casting a vote because of this mess.
9 November 2016 at 16:58

Carson Grubaugh said...

Me: I never called BLM a racist organization. I was making points about the unwise choice of slogans coming from The Left because I identify as part of it and want it to succeed. Please prove otherwise.

Erick: *quotes me talking about the unwise choice of slogans coming from The Left being a major factor in Trump's election*

Me: Yeah, just like that. Thank you.

It is hard not to condescend to someone who is making personal attacks against me with the full force of their 2nd grade reading comprehension skills. This ain't dissembling, this is what saying exactly what you mean looks like.

You did, in a post following my Rick's Story commentary, call me both a sycophant and a white-supremacist. I can't directly quote it because I used my access to the back-end of this blog to delete it. At the time it seemed better to just delete your personal attacks than waste my time engaging them. However, I felt so guilty about going against my own support for freedom of speech that I have chosen instead to clarify my position every time since. I know that gives you an easy out to say I am making things up. So be it. We both know the truth.

Erick said...

You are a piece of work Carson. I will give you that.
You have back-end authority to edit and delete posts with no one the wiser, and you admit to doing just such a thing to one of my alleged posts, and then you try to preempt any claims of false accusations by 'admitting' that you did something to an alleged post of mine, thereby rendering any proof i might present impossible to obtain.

Tim, if you have the ability please restore all deleted and or edited posts of mine and Carson's that Carson has had his hands on.
Then lets see who is telling the unvarnished truth. I trust Tim not edit the truth.

Erick said...

And one other thing Carson, words matter. Phrases matter.
What they mean an stand for matters.
Ever hear the phrase States Rights?
Innocuous, harmless. And yet when muttered in certain company, it's dog whistle code word for segregation rings very loud.
People in the know, in the good, abhor the phrase. They fight against what it stands for. Not just because of the two simple words, but because those words having meaning and power on both sides. To oppose on one side and to support on the other. To demonize and be divisive on one side, and to fight against those who would accuse you of the same on the other, because of words. Words that matter.

Erick said...

I never, ever, ever said that Carson was a white supremacist or a racist. If you can produce anything that has me accusing Carson or being a racist or white supremacist then I will gladly leave this site and never again darken its doorstep with my online visage.
But you can not produce a complete lie from Carson's fevered and over wrought imagination. Such a text does not exist, not because Carson allegedly deleted it - he only has authority on the blog, not the servers so if any such thing existed it could easily be retrieved. I am long time IT so yeah I know how these things work. It can not be produced because it does not exist.

Dave Kopperman said...

Tim should change the name of the blog to "A Moment of Gaslighting"

Steve said...

Anybody seen any Cerebus around here recently?


Jeff Seiler said...

Steve, the earth-pig-born is over in the corner, getting his drunk on and sharpening his sword.

Jeff Seiler said...

Two things about the Carson/Erick dialogue: 1) Why does Carson have the capability and freedom to edit other people's comments? Or, am I misunderstanding this?

2) Erick, "states' rights" (as I suspect you know) has a storied and important tradition of being a legal (or quasi-legal) method by which state governments circumvent federal oversight or mandates which interfere with "local" governmental initiatives. That it has been misused in the name of racism and segregation is a true miscarriage of justice, but it does not and should not diminish the importance of "states' rights" as an essential part of good governance. It seems to me that your blanket equation of the term with segregation and racism is irresponsible. Sorry.

Erick said...

Jeff, stick to being unctuous and leave the heavy lifting to the big boys.

Here is the relevant part that you completely cherry-picked and or overlooked

"And yet when muttered in certain company, it's dog whistle code word for segregation rings very loud."

Carson Grubaugh said...


Tim gave me access so I could put together the image heavy posts myself. I deleted a comment that was entirely off topic and contained false accusations that, in the unlikely instance that a potential employer were to see it, could have ramifications to my current search for tenure-track employment. (I do mention SDOAR when accounting for my current activities. Search committee members do search the web for further info on candidates). The other option was to take the time to deny the accusations and derail the conversation.

Deleting the comment did not sit well with me. I support free speech and this a fan site for a man who has consistently taken the time to answer public accusations. So, from here on out I am stuck answering this stuff and derailing the focus of this blog.

I talked to Tim about this a couple of weeks ago because felt like I had abused the privilege he granted me. His response was "For quite a while I used to police the AMOC comments and delete any with personal abuse. xxxx and xxxx tested this to the limits quite a few times, and, with Dave's encouragement, I gave up even trying." So Tim and I are on good terms about it and I don't have any plans on doing that again, as should be obvious by my recent engagement.

Erick said...

That is a bunch of self-serving, happy horse hockey.
And I defy you to produce the alleged posts that you allegedly edited and or deleted. You can not because they do not exist.

I once again ask Tim to pull from backup the alleged posts of mine AND yours that you allegedly deleted and or edited.

A simple keyword search, for sycophant and white supremacist should suffice. I know i used the phrase 'sycho as in sycophant', you can google that right now and find it. I never said who i was calling a 'sycho' and I never ever called anyone a white supremacist. Not you Carson and not anyone else either. You have made this up from whole cloth. Which is really disturbing. You need help.

You are digging yourself a very deep hole here Carson.
I never ever said that you were a white supremacist or racist, and you can not produce any proof of me saying so or any proof that you deleted any alleged posts.

Whether you have noticed or not, I have not followed you around these boards and just unloaded on your every post.

It is one thing for you and I to lob personal insults and to question the character of the other.

It is an entirely different ballgame to manufacture out of whole cloth an elaborate lie alleging that I said something about you that we both know I did not say. Then having the gall to wrap yourself in the cloak of a 'freedom of speech' lover who 'regrets' that he deleted the alleged evidence, but that 'you should believe it really existed because i feel guilty about doing so'.
Right. Well, I am not naive enough to believe that all who post on this site will see through such a sham, but I truly wonder why you felt the need to go so far.

One other thing, in my original post when I responded to you by saying that BLM was not racist, when i read the entire exchange it makes no sense that I would say that in response to your post about BLM slogan being 'inherently divisive' and 'demonizing language'. What makes more sense is that I said to you that BLM was not racist in direct response to a claim of yours that it was racist and you edited the word racist from your own post. You have that authority.
See where all this leads?
You are digging a serious hole to your credibility.

Good luck with that

Erick said...

And let me add, that I will accept any and all results on face value with no qualms of any alleged edited/deleted posts of mine and yours if Tim has restored them.

Michael said...


Deleting or editing of the posts of others is a troublesome wormhole

I think you would have been better served to reither ignore or reply to the words of another, rather than delete them.

The revelation that you deleted a post because "you" thought it was off topic and which you thought contained false accusations which " the unlikely instance that a potential employer were to see it, could have ramifications to my current search for tenure-track employment." troubles me.

I would suggest you should be more concerned what your words and actions reflect about you.

Peace Out


Mouse Skull Entertainment said...

NOTE: I don't done be thinking that that there Davey Sim is a He-Man woman hater-Matt Dow (Hi Dave!)


Just wow.

It's like I'm back on the Cerebus Yahoo Group again...

During the BAD OLD DAYS.

(Not too infrequently on the C.Y.G., discussions would get heated over various topics to the point that I'd be reading and I'd hear the voice of The Humungus from Mad Max: Road Warrior saying, "Walk away, just walk away..." in my head. And I'd know it was time to take a little break.)

I DON'T think Jeff's letters from Dave should be removed as a feature here on AMOC.

I DO think that Jeff's..."comments" on Carson's re-read commentaries were out of line. (There was a moment when I was going to post a comment to Jeff asking him to turn around and look were he had come from so he could see the Line, and maybe amble his way back over it.)

I know Jeff (he's been to my apartment.) I know him to be a genuinely nice guy.

BUT! (and of course there is a but,)I'd say Jeff's least appealing feature is that he is a Dave Sim Chauvinist. He truly believes that Cerebus and Dave are the toppermost of the poppermost of the world of comics. Cerebus and Dave are #1, that's it, final (in Jeff's view.) Which is wonderful, sometimes.

Other times, Jeff writes scathing letters to (I believe it was) The New Yorker regarding an article about Neil Gaiman, wherein the author had the gall to suggest Neil writing 75 issues of Sandman was some kind of Herculean task. Said letter championing Dave and Cerebus all the way. (When he read the letter to me, I commented that for most of the 60s, Stan Lee wrote 8 comics a month. And that a 75 issue run by a single writer (while impressive,) was not exactly rare in the comics medium.) Jeff, on these occasions makes arguments which can be boiled down to: "Dave Sim ├╝ber alles." Which, while a wholly valid viewpoint, isn't the ONLY valid viewpoint.

Jeff is the nicest, sweetest, most rapid wolverine of a Cerebus fan you will ever meet. I mean it. He will gnaw your face off if he believes you've insulted Cerebus (the comic, not the character), Dave, or Gerhard. But he'll do it with the best of intentions. He truly believes in Cerebus and Dave and Ger. Above all else.

Jeff and Dave have a relationship. I don't know that I'd say they are friends, but there is SOMETHING there.

The letters from Dave hold insights into Dave's worldview and the creation of 300 issues of one of the neatest comics series ever created. There is something there for everybody.

And I think they should still be allowed on AMOC.

Now Chris W and Rainmandu...sorry, that was the Cerebus Yahoo Group, I mean Carson and Erick can continue their "discussion",

Matt Dow
(But seriously Shecky, when you are reviewing your comments before posting, don't just proofread, ask yourself, "Does this sound like I'm talking out of my anus?" 'Cause sometimes buddy? You are...)

Carson Grubaugh said...

For anyone worried that the actual content of their posts can be edited, it doesn't work that way. They can be deleted, moved in and out of "spam", and now that I am looking at it "removed," which basically leaves a notification that the content has been removed by a moderator. I would not feel so bad if I had used this function, because that is a public acknowledgement of what has happened. Ahh well, too late now.

No edit function. If your words show up they are as you wrote them.

I agree with the consensus that deleting a post was the wrong move and am fully willing to accept any ill will I get because of that. Mea Culpa. Won't happen again, as will be evidenced by the continued expenditure of my time on completely irrelevant and off topic subjects until such a time as people get bored and move on.

Jeff Seiler said...

Gee, Matt! Nobody's ever called me The Wolverine before! T'anks!!

And, FWIW, I do occasionally self-edit or even self-delete before I hit "send".

Thanks for the kind words.

Erick said...

Once again self serving horse hockey.
I am not interested in dragging this out any further. It is obvious that you have serious issues. At first I was attributing it to simple hubris on your part. Far more intelligent and accomplished men than you have been tripped up by their inability to separate their pride and overweening desire to always be considered the 'winner' from telling the truth.

The irony here is that your stated desire to appear pristine in front of any potential tenure-track position inquiry that might look this way - as if, has revealed your true character and nature.
I am not throwing stones because none of us is flawless.

I will digress for a moment and shock you: I owe you an apology. Not for the BLM stuff or questioning your character. I owe you an apology for taking Jeff S. at face value when he accused you of slamming Ger. The truth is that I did not read your comments about Ger and Dave until after I had weighed in. If I had read them before I posted I would have realized how long ago your wrote them and exactly what you said about Ger. I would no have taken you to task for that. But the BLM stuff would have raised it's head again sooner or later.

That does not excuse your execrable behavior with what I strongly suspect was your editing of your own posts to remove language which you knew was offensive. And the absolute lie alleging that i said you were a white supremacist followed-up by the additional lies that you deleted said alleged post and that you 'felt bad because you are a freedom of speech lover'. You are a piece of something, but it aint honest.

I will not pursue this conversation any longer as long as you don't. No one want's to wreck your future endeavors. But you really need to look in the mirror and reassess.

You have been exposed, and you tried to cover-up. Best to just put on a new suit and move on.

Travis Pelkie said...

Nice to hear Matt Dow's view on Jeff (you let him in your living space? WHA?!) ;) Seems pretty accurate just from what he posts here.

What's scarier, that Jeff doesn't self-edit, or that he does, and he STILL posts what he does? ;)

Jeff Seiler said...

Aah, ya daffy bastid, Travis, ya made me larf.

Tony Dunlop said...


(I'm going to start every post with that from now on!)

Erick, please go away until you demonstrate that you can do anything anywhere near as sell as Carson can draw. Ok? And no, bitching doesn't count.

Tony again said...

Damn! As well as…Oh for an "edit" button.