Re: fossil sales

[DragonFyr@aol.com]

Subj:  Re: fossil sales
Date:  Wed, Feb 1, 1995 3:48 AM EST
>From:  rowe@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu
X-From: rowe@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu (Mickey Rowe)
Sender: dinosaur@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu
Reply-to: rowe@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu
To: dinosaur@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu (Multiple recipients of list)


As you've recently seen from my addition to the welcome file:

       The list is not moderated, so its health depends upon the good
       nature of its participants.

I've attempted to throw some water on the fires beginning to burn now
by mailing to Larry Smith directly.  Since that hasn't worked, I'd
like to encourage others to write to HIM personally if you agree with
the sentiments I'm about to express.

Larry (larrys@zk3.dec.com) accused Merritt Clifton:

> YOU pulled that comparison out of a hat - a hat several sizes too
> small for your head, by the way - and posted soley to stick in some
> of your damned propaganda.

Larry, adding expletives and insults to your prose doesn't help to
reinforce your points.  As I told you before, I saw no propaganda in
the message that originally set you off.  You slanderously labelled
Merritt without giving any justification for your remarks.  If Merritt
sees a parallel that you don't, then fine, state why you think the
parallel doesn't exist.  As for now, I think it is ill-considered of
you to complain:

> AND KEEP YOUR GODDAMNED ADVERTISING OFF [the list], TOO!

If you made accusations about my "agenda", I would feel obliged to
offer in the same forum in which the accusations were made, samples of
publications so that people could form there own opinions about the
validity of said accusations.  In short, I think YOU brought it on.

And Larry, thanks for talking about dinosaurs.

-- 
Mickey Rowe     (rowe@lepomis.psych.upenn.edu)

**********************************

Bravo, Mickey......if one is unable to express one's opinion for fear of the
reactions of others then what is the use of stating anything at all....Larry
is entitled to his 'opinion'  as are we all.....but I agree about the
flaming..it is uncalled for, I have no idea what set him off (indigestion?),
and I wish it would stop.

BTW e-mailing him directly seems to have no effect either....he seems to
think this group is here only to espouse his opinions.

His response to me (or part of it)as if the conservation of animal
populations as well as conservation of historic/archaeological sites isn't
controversial)  }:>:  BTW I am ignoring his messages from now on as tho he
does have a few interesting theories I for one am no longer interested in
them.
(>>> The arguments against fossil sales strike me as being remarkably similar
to
>>> the arguments against permitting commercial traffic in wildlife and
>>wildlifean > resources.  --Merritt Clifton,  editor,  ANIMAL
>PEOPLE

And this is not that, in case you missed it the first time.  It is
a blatent and transparent attempt to link a legitimate issue with
a frankly controversial one and provide a figleaf for introducing
it into an inappropriate forum.  If _you_ want to discuss it, fine.
There are newsgroups for it.  This list _isn't_ the place.)