Rupert wrote:
> On Aug 2, 5:30 am, Dutch > wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Aug 1, 7:29 pm, Dutch > wrote:
>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 1, 5:47 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>> [..]
>>>>>> Take it down, rupie. You are not authorized to post
>>>>>> personal references and photos on your site.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> Okay, well do you want to talk this over from the legal point of view?
>>>>> Initially all I did was post a short excerpt from one of your posts in
>>>>> the context of your full name. It didn't occur to me that it would be
>>>>> an issue.
>>>> Now that he has specifically requested that you not publish personal
>>>> information about him, you should just take it down.
>>> I've taken down the later changes I made. As for taking down the
>>> actual name, we'll see. It's kind of an interesting concept, Jonathan
>>> Ball asking me for a favour. We'll see how his negotiating skills
>>> develop.
>>>> What's more you
>>>> ought to stop responding to him, it's not doing any good, he's just
>>>> mocking you.
>>> You've got the idea that I'd be better off not replying to him, well,
>>> I'm having fun making fun of him for the moment, actually, so thanks
>>> for the advice but I think I'll ignore it.
>> This unseemly exchange just shows that your claims to moral and
>> intellectual high ground are nothing more than a charade.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Why don't you, just once, make some comment about Ball's moral
> character, instead of being his good pal all the time? Sheesh. Give me
> a break.
>

I see nothing wrong with his moral character. He's got a down and dirty
usenet posting style and makes no bones about it. If you can't take the
heat stay out of the kitchen, it's trivially easy to killfile someone.