ONTAC FORUM, (01)
I have made an effort to talk to Paul Prueitt and received his negative
response (see below). As I result, and since I am the responsible Federal
government official, I am taking the following actions, and ask for your
support, because in my role I cannot overlook or fail to respond to an email
that mentions suicide, threats of law suits, etc.for the safety and welfare
of all concerned: (02)
1. I am asking Paul Prueitt to not send anymore emails to this or related
Collaborative Wiki Forums. His rights to post will be terminiated. (03)
2. I am asking members of this and related Wiki email Forums to not respond
to any more emails from Paul Prueitt not matter what the content. We cannot
be part of anymore correspondence that would further inflame the situation.
Should your receive any further correspondence directly from Paul Prueitt
that raises concerns please forwarded them to me because we have proceedures
in place for dealing with this type of situation. (04)
3. I am requesting the counsel and intervention of mental health
professionals in this situation as required of me. (05)
Thank you for your support in this matter, (06)
Brand Niemann
SICoP Chair (07)
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul S Prueitt
To: 'Brand Niemann'
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 11:25 AM
Subject: with respects (08)
I could see why others might see the philosophy that John was continuing to
talk about as not being relevant, but the distinction that Patrick made
regarding what the forum was to talk about seemed to be designed to remove
me from the forum - because the issues that I raised were issues that he
(and several others),, (09)
Never mind. (010)
The unfairness of this whole thing is simply beyond belief. (011)
I am not interested in talking any further, the apology to the group - but
not to me was posted. (012)
Brand, there is no need to talk on the phone. (013)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---- (014)
From: Brand Niemann [mailto:bniemann@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2005 3:34 AM
To: Paul S Prueitt; cmenzel@xxxxxxxx
Cc: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: with respects I ask that slanderous messages be removed from
the ONTAC forum (015)
Paul, I am very concerned about your message and want to contact you. Are
you in Taos, New Mexico, or Northern Virginia and is there a phone number
where you can be reached? (016)
Thank you, Brand (017)
----- Original Message ----- (018)
From: Paul S Prueitt (019)
To: cmenzel@xxxxxxxx (020)
Cc: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx (021)
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 6:29 PM (022)
Subject: with respects I ask that slanderous messages be removed from the
ONTAC forum (023)
I might have missed this, but your nice note about me was not posted to
the ONTAC forum. What is posted are two very slanderous notes that you made
in your anger about my mistaken reference to your first name . (024)
These two notes and several slanderous notes by Patrick are still present
in the forum archives. (025)
Chris, I simply mistook your name for someone else who does have a resume
with the G14 - G15 remark. (026)
Furthermore, you know also that the GSA groups that Susan Turnbull and
Brand Niemann work with have many business consultants whose behavior is
nicely characterized by self promotion. It is just part of the reality of
IT procurement. (027)
I should not make comments about this reality, because of the types of
defensiveness that occurs. (028)
There has been a specific consequence to the treatment I received from
Patrick and your notes. I understand because of our private communications
since then that you did not mean me harm. You did not really know me nor I
you. (029)
However, it is unfortunate that harm has occurred. I have indicated that
I do not hold you liable for this harm as it was not your intent to really
harm me. You were just flaming. (030)
One of the executives of a firm that had negotiated a 48,000 contract for
my services was lurking on this forum, and has taken my treatment as an
indication. Those who wanted my services were told that I would not be
retained because I did not have the support of those people in power..
(this they infer from the treatment that was handed out by Patrick). (031)
I am away from my main computer where I remember receiving a note from
you, Chris, to the forum indicating that you were sorry for the flaming
messages that were posted by the moderator. (032)
The moderator, Patrick, took responsibility for banning my communications
and this also has contributed to a sense that I was not someone who the
company should be involved with. (033)
I saw his efforts to ban my communications very early in the current
discussion as being an abuse of his power as moderator. (034)
In his Nov 21 posting he said (035)
" (1) there is no possibility of silencing him. He has for years posted
the same material to any number of different listservers, where his
comments are as irrelevant to them as they are to our efforts. Every
listserver has a purpose and people who use listservers to push their
opinions on people who don't want to hear them are not performing any
constructive purpose. (036)
Which I took as being professional slanderous and libel. But I wanted to
have a technical discussion about upper and ocre ontology to see where John
Sowa and the others in this type of forum are at, if anywhere. (037)
The loss of the contract means also a final straw in my hoped for repair
of economic losses around the struggle to deal with the situation with the
behaviors that I am not supposed to talk about. This is really meaning a
dissolving of my marriage, and perhaps leading to my taking of my own life.
I think a lot about this nowdays as my wife's loss in confidence about my
ability to earn a living was unexpected and is devastating . (038)
I do not know if this is what will happen, my life has been dedicated to a
mission; which can be so terribly treated without any sense of balance or
respect. We live in a time in which many feel betrayed by the degree of
what-ever where rationality and normalcy seems missing. What is there to
live for? (039)
I again ask that the two posts that Chris posted in anger be removed and
that his posting of am apology be allowed to be posted (as was indicated in
Chris's post to the forum that was not posted). (040)
Failure to do this may result in a law suit, by myself or someone else. (041)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (042)
|