Wednesday, August 14, 2002

Shalom has removed the letter from Donald L. Hughes, Editor at, at their request. That is odd, as it was posted at their request. thinks I'm nasty.

It's true. The evidence is over at Shalom, She's reprinted's reply to why they won't remove her link. (Me I'm waiting for them to kick us out)

Here is the section where their editor thinks I'm nasty.

We did not intentionally Spam. We visited each Blog we found and collected information, including email addresses when available. We
did put them into our emailing program to send them out for efficiency, and so farwe have had 5-6 complaints about that. We apologized to each of those
people, except one who was so nasty, that we just ignored. There are a few people out there who are hell-bent on attacking us, but we seem to be
getting overwhelming approval for our ministry.

OK so I've sent four emails complaining about getting spamed, and not goten an apology from them. Now I've posted the text of two of them previously. So I'll add my original note when I got their spam

From Dave King
Sent Thursday, August 8, 2002 10:24 am
Subject NO SPAM


Shocking, I know.

And my last email, with the exact text:

Subject: Re: Code of conduct
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 08:01:37 -0600
From: Dave King
To: ""

I think you missed the camel in that email. I don't like geting spam from you. What are you going to do about it? I don't like sites that just suck content from other sites with out giving credit. What are you going to do about it? I'm so glad that the gnat of the broken email has been taken care of.


Truly Down and Nasty!

There are other options:

1) Don Hughes doesn't know what he's talking about when he says he apologized. He seems to have great difficulty with the common accepted definitions of spam and intentionally, so he may not understand the word apologized.

2) He may not be referring to me and my apology has gotten lost in the mail. That's the great thing about the type of gossip being spread by Don, you can't check on it. Don says 'Someone out there is being nasty'. But Don hasn't told them, and hasn't named names, so you can never check the facts, and they can never defend them selves.

His logic of only apologizing to people who are nice to him seems odd. He expects other people to turn the other cheek, but please don't expect it of him. I'm also having trouble with the 'we just found these people on the net, and we didn't find them via Martin Roth or' line he's pushing. Plunk IdeaJoy into google and all you get is, and until recently we were scoring zero on Who Links Who. And it seems like lots of other obscure blogs from all showed up at the same time. Odd that.

And finally Don cleary doesn't understand

Martin has said his list at MartinOnline was only 200 names. Ours is
over 400 and we will be adding many more soon. We have simply done a better
job of finding Christian Blogs has said in the FAQ that they are not looking for Christian blogs. We find and ask to be included.

Yeah I think it's time to dust the sandals off again.

I think I'll head over to and rate IdeaJoy as nasty, and quote Don.

No comments: