John,

You just can't resist inserting yourself into the limelight, eh? <g>

Personally, I think the reason we haven't seen you is that you went to a county fair and decided to stay a while in the house of mirrors. <g>

John, you're obviously a bright and dedicated fellow. You got all over me once because I dared to express my personal thoughts vis a vis my faith - as though I was trying to cram that down the throats of everyone here. I admit my faith but there's no way I have ever been as obnoxious in expressing it as you have with some of your opinions, or as duplicitous. Pot calling the kettle black to me it seems. What is this; the "Fifth Coming of John the Petersen"? <g>

You keep saying that you're going to leave (as though anyone really cares at this point) and then you come back in some sort of fabricated manner - all of which seems designed not to make a cogent argument but to bring attention to yourself. That's all well and good and I'm sure that everyone certainly wishes you well in your lawyerly quest but Ken can take care of himself I dare say. I'd hate to think that in your lawyer school all you've learned is style over substance...



>I created the account in response to what I thought was unfair treatment of Ken. How Fox is marketed and its future are largely out of his control. Whether you like it or not, Fox's lot in life is pre-determined and the ill's of the product's place in the world at large should not be laid at his door step.
>
>Unfortunately, I took the opportunity to lay some pot shots at people - Walter Meester to name one. For that, I would like to take this opportunity to apologize. The purpose of the account was not for that purpose. I guess some old habits die hard. In some respects, it was a joke that at times, got out of control.
>
>Don't worry, I am not going to cause any more distrubances here. However, I feel that I need to set the record straight. It is/was not my intention to cause Michel any problems over this. In keeping with my philosphy that at times, you have to be man enough to take the medicine and if you are going to talk the talk, you have to walk the walk, I am making this post.
>
>Also, while it is/was fairly clear that Joe Bob was a fake account, I did not want to see speculation going on about who it could be. I believe it is important that who it is comes from me.
>
>I have asked Michel to take the Joe Bob messages and re-direct them to my account.
>
>Regards,
>
>< JVP >