That is why I don't understand Michel's interest in starting a new rule that you cannot forward message content to banned members. I've seen UT messages referenced or cut/paste into other forums before. I would think he would want that to continue to promote new business and boost the image of the UT. Once something is in the public arena, it is available to all. I would think (and I'm not a lawyer) that he could only legally prevent a banned member from accessing the site themselves and posting content.


>>>Tamar,
>>>>
>>>>I'm only speculating here based on a single data point, but I have a reason to suspect that Kevin may have been giving JVP access to the UT. If that's the case, then I imagine that's why he would have been banned.
>>>
>>>I think Walter had it right when he decided not to speculate. I'd be happier if Michel spelled out the reason for the ban and/or somebody posted from a communication from Kevin clearly allowed to be made public - just to get both sides.
>>>
>>>"Reason to believe" I interpret either
>>>
>>>as you having received info from Michel about such an incidence, but in a personal communication only. IF such occurred it furthers the "old boy's <bg>" talk while not really clearing things up. IF this is the case Michel should state it himself and not rely on others not able to write "in the clear".
>>>
>>>or you interpreting some choice of words/speed of specific answer/knowlegde of certain events in some posts to give this a certain probability. But this is still speculation and IMHO worsens the scene.
>>>
>>>or (coming from PA) you saw both huddling in front of a keyboard with flags on screen. Then you should just state what you witnessed/believed to be seeing.
>>>
>>>But secondguessing "possible" reasons is the wrong way to go IMHO (even if they sound more true than my musings).
>>
>>None of the above. I received an email several weeks ago from JVP with a direct quote from a message I posted here. Though my message wasn't from that thread, it was during Kevin's campaign to reinstate JVP.
>>
>
>Even if Kevin did show messages to John (which I have no reason to believe he did), so what? This is a public forum, after all.