Re: A delicate question
Subject: Re: A delicate question
From: Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com>
Date: 10/21/10, 11:10
To: Mark Thompson <mwthompson88@yahoo.com>
CC: matthewschmitz@gmail.com, Will Collins <williamf.collins@gmail.com>, Jason Kuznicki <JKuznicki@cato.org>, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>, David Schaengold <david.schaengold@gmail.com>, "Scott H. Payne" <scott.h.payne@gmail.com>, "Rufus F." <rufus138@gmail.com>, Ned Resnikoff <nedresnikoff@gmail.com>, "lisakramer1979@aol.com" <lisakramer1979@aol.com>, "Davidaruggiero1973@gmail.com" <Davidaruggiero1973@gmail.com>, "awhaleyb@gmail.com" <awhaleyb@gmail.com>, "williamrandolphbrafford@gmail.com" <williamrandolphbrafford@gmail.com>, Logan Wall <jlwall88@gmail.com>

Oh certainly. I'm on very good terms with Helen. It was all very much tongue-in-cheek.

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Mark Thompson <mwthompson88@yahoo.com> wrote:
FWIW, the "spat" with Helen was, as far as I know, almost entirely tongue-in-cheek. 

From: "matthewschmitz@gmail.com" <matthewschmitz@gmail.com>
To: Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Thompson <mwthompson88@yahoo.com>; Will Collins <williamf.collins@gmail.com>; Jason Kuznicki <JKuznicki@cato.org>; Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>; David Schaengold <david.schaengold@gmail.com>; Scott H. Payne <scott.h.payne@gmail.com>; Rufus F. <rufus138@gmail.com>; Ned Resnikoff <nedresnikoff@gmail.com>; "lisakramer1979@aol.com" <lisakramer1979@aol.com>; "Davidaruggiero1973@gmail.com" <Davidaruggiero1973@gmail.com>; "awhaleyb@gmail.com" <awhaleyb@gmail.com>; "williamrandolphbrafford@gmail.com" <williamrandolphbrafford@gmail.com>; Logan Wall <jlwall88@gmail.com>
Sent: Thu, October 21, 2010 11:02:45 AM

Subject: Re: A delicate question

If only we were more a more prominent site, we'd have Sullivan and others making wild conjectures and demanding explanations for Helen's vast and undisclosed influence on the site. Hilarious considering our old spat with her.

Also, uh, sorry to drag you into this, Rufus.


On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com> wrote:
In other words, there is no coordinated effort to do anything. I took down my post independently of any decision to remove the second post.


On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:55 AM, Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com> wrote:
I definitely wouldn't have cut the second post entirely - it was my understanding that there was simply a comment in the thread that was perhaps over the line? I don't know as I did not read the comment thread. I deleted my Helen post pretty quickly after it was written, and at the request of Helen's friend Dara Lind who was trying to minimize damage to Helen's career. Because I consider Dara to be a friend, I did gladly since it had only been up a short time. The second post had been up quite a while...I think it would have been okay to leave it up. Just my two cents.


On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Mark Thompson <mwthompson88@yahoo.com> wrote:
I second Will. 


Subject: Re: A delicate question

I'm a believer in comity, but two posts have just flat-out disappeared from the site in recent days. Can we stop doing that? For future reference, I'd prefer to delete the offending comments or add a note walking back any wrong-headed claims with the original post preserved below the fold.

- Will

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Jason Kuznicki <JKuznicki@cato.org> wrote:

Fair enough.  Let us be gentlemen even to those who court ungentlemanly behavior.  Perhaps it will piss them off even more.

 

From: matthewschmitz@gmail.com [mailto:matthewschmitz@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 9:12 AM
To: Jason Kuznicki
Cc: Erik Kain; Barrett Brown; David Schaengold; Scott H. Payne; Mark Thompson; Rufus F.; Ned Resnikoff; Will Collins; lisakramer1979@aol.com; Davidaruggiero1973@gmail.com; awhaleyb@gmail.com; williamrandolphbrafford@gmail.com; Logan Wall
Subject: Re: A delicate question

 

Hey Jason,

Here's the relevant email thread for context. Like I said to Rufus, I really didn't desire to censor anything or step on anyone's toes. So apologies if that's what ended up happening.

-MJS

----

Ah, I see where that post goes against the aim at gentlemanly behavior. It's gone. Not a problem.

- Hide quoted text -

 

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:05 AM, <matthewschmitz@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry again if this was out of line. I really don't mean to set myself up as hall monitor.

 

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Rufus F. <rufus138@gmail.com> wrote:

Sure. Why not? I'll kill it.

 

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:49 PM, <matthewschmitz@gmail.com> wrote:

Rufus,

I by no means to step on a co-blogger's toes. So please forgive what follows if I'm out of line.

Do you think it might be worth deleting at least that one comment that could be read as indirectly musing on Ms. Rittelmeyer's sex life? I fear we're playing into the hands of Mr. Seavey. I've never met Helen or him, and I'm not trying to make a chivalric gesture. But I thought you might want to see that her friend had already reached out to Erik, an indication that this situation is bringing a kind of scrutiny that is unwelcome even to a girl as thick-skinned as Helen.

Thoughts? (Again, sorry...)

Matt



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:31 AM
Subject: Re:
To: matthewschmitz@gmail.com


Definitely.

 

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:10 AM, <matthewschmitz@gmail.com> wrote:

Sounds good. I have to say that I really respect Helen's calm response.

 

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Erik Kain <erik.kain@gmail.com> wrote:

Dara Lind asked me to kill it, to let the story on Helen die out of respect for her - which I gladly did.

 

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 10:31 PM, <matthewschmitz@gmail.com> wrote:

Erik,

It seems your post on Helen disappeared. Any reason or is it a glitch?

-MS

 

 

 

 



--
Rufus F.

 



--
Rufus F.

On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Jason Kuznicki <JKuznicki@cato.org> wrote:

Are we deliberately pulling punches on the Helen Rittlemeyer thingy?   I know the thread didn’t bring out my

 kindest or most gentlemanly instincts.  But I did think that some of the points it raised were valuable, including (if I may say so) the idea that creating extra suffering was satanic rather than Christian.  The Fall being bad enough, as I’m given to understand.