on beth, the new york times and the common ills

i had a post planned but i'm going to postpone it to instead focus on the common ills.

a number of you caught the interview that beth did with c.i. and before i go further, i don't know if it's x or z but 1 of those two, both reporters for the new york times, is going to have a reply up at the site. i got that confirmed from c.i. it'll go up as soon as c.i. gets home. c.i. wouldn't say which 1.

i'm hoping it's z. if you missed beth's interview (and it's in rough draft form currently), x wrote to dispute the type of sources that were utilized in x's story. x has a difference of opinion. you know that the times isn't big on activists so great if x wants to go on record but i really hope it's z who sounds like a real nut job.

z thought that since gossip was passed to c.i. about love in the green zone (rumors that dexter filkins and john f. burns were having affairs - not with each other) that z would get a pass from criticism. i'd love to read that.

but i'm guessing z would want to say 'hey keller, fire me!' to decided to go public so i'm guessing it will be x. that's still cool.

it's better than cool. c.i.'s doing criticism if some 1 doesn't like it, fine. but if you want to dispute it, why not do it publicly?

c.i. will do 1 of those 'in fairnesses' and say that there are guidelines and that certain remarks might get them in trouble at the times due to those guidelines the paper has.

that's c.i.'s way of looking at it. my way is put up or shut up. you've had your say in print, i get my say here. you want to say something else on the matter say it on the record.

the other big thing in my e-mails was 'beth?'

for those who don't remember, beth had a problem with claiming things were said at the common ills and it was all part of an effort to trip c.i. up and figure out clues about c.i. beth only tried that with me once and i called her on it. she was pissed at me. she was pissed at c.i.

beth e-mailed me at the end of april and we are fine. when i read her interview, i e-mailed her and asked if she wanted to call me and we'd deal with some topics she was tabling for now.

i thought i knew what beth was tabling and when she called i was right.

as most people who come by here know, c.i. and the common ills were trashed by a potty mouth named dopey. he did it not once, not twice, but three times.

he's really tried to ride those posts to fame but no 1 really reads dopey because he makes so little sense on any topic.

c.i. commented on dopey 1 time only. dopey trashed c.i. and while c.i. was working on an entry, c.i. learned of it from dallas. c.i. thought dopey has misunderstood and tried to contact dopey by e-mail repeatedly. when dopey finally responds he offers no response. just 'oh it's late i'll reply tomorrow.' as readers here know i posted that night that i told c.i. post about dopey and do it now, dopey's a chicken shit asshole who will burn you tomorrow.

sure enough dopey did. dopey went on to mock c.i.'s illness, to mock everything about c.i.

if you're new, dopey e-mailed c.i. twice in 1 evening - the only time dopey ever e-mailed until c.i. learned of the trashing and e-mailed dopey to ask what the problem was. dopey did not ask to be quoted. c.i. didn't quote dopey. (i've seen the e-mails and yes, i discussed them at length with gina and krista so they could inform in their round-robin. that's the 1 time c.i. was every seriously mad about me but the common ills and c.i. were being trashed. the community was given the back story on that but i thought they needed to know exactly the type of person dopey was in e-mails - not the big brave screamer at his dopey site.)

dopey then blogs that c.i. is a liar and that he was not quoted at c.i.'s site and blah blah blah.

nut case.

at some point, dopey decides to try to bring me into it and starts spreading rumors that i'm going to his dopey site because some 1 posted in lower case and i, apparently, hold the copyright on lower case.

dopey's just an idiot.

but c.i. dealt with that and was too nice in my opinion (kat's too).

so then dopey feels the need to trash c.i. again and to make these insulting remarks about women and gay men. he's apparently a sexist and a homophobe.

which is probably why his attempt to ride c.i. to fame failed so miserably.

c.i. was nice about it. c.i. tried to take the high road. when dopey's latest slam on c.i. and the community got back to c.i., c.i. was pissed. it was a week after the fact (no 1 reads dopey) and c.i. said, 'you know what, becky, fuck the bastard. i don't care now that you went into those e-mails with gina and krista.'

but dopey's name or site will never be mentioned at the common ills. c.i. outlined that to gina and krista in 1 of their q&a sessions.

dopey will never be mentioned at that site. dopey's a stupid little shit and i don't blame c.i. 1 bit.
that's why i call the idiot 'dopey' because i won't give him further publicity. he's a little p.r. whore trying to make a name for himself and playing 1 way in e-mails and another way at his dopey site.

he tried to push me around in e-mails, big brave dopey. i put a stop to that.

so that's the background for any 1 late to the soap opera of dopey.

here's what happened with beth.

she was preparing her kiss of to the community. and then the trashing of the common ills went up. then the lie that c.i. was a liar for not posting dopey (who didn't ask to be quoted). by the time dopey was mocking c.i.'s cancer - what a big brave man that dopey is, huh? - beth had already decided the community was too important to her.

she wrote c.i. an e-mail and said she was staying with the community. that's all she said except to ask if she needed to apologize to stay with the community. 'i'd said quite a bit already including "asshole" - which was about the nicest word i'd used. i get this e-mail back that c.i. is not the community and that i should feel to free to ignore c.i.'s remarks and just focus on what i want covered and what other members are highlighting. there was a p.s. that said 'by the way, i probably am an asshole and much worse, no apology needed.' i read that 3 times before i wrote back that i was looking at it as fun and a parlor game and i was sorry about that. and then i get back "no apology, just take from the community what you can use and give back with things that you see." i wanted to talk about that because i did treat the community as fun and games to find out about c.i. and it's a community not a parlor game. but c.i. asked me to table it because the interview would be read by outsiders.'

i understand that and support it. so does beth.

while i am a community member of the common ills, sex and politics and screeds and attitude is my site and if any 1 wants to start a war with me, go for it.

mocking some 1 who's just had surgery, someone with cancer is not cool. bring on your little war dopey because i'll happily bury you.

c.i. is very protective of the community and i would be the last to fault that.

but on 1 thinks dopey is 'cool' or 'edgy,' they just think he's sick. they just think he crossed a line that shouldn't have been crossed.

hopefully by having her say here, beth got it off her chest. a number of people who e-mailed about the interview said 'i thought beth had left the community.' she's been mentioned a couple of times in the last month when she's sent some link in. but she knows c.i.'s feelings about having had enough of dopey and she respects those feelings.

i respect them too. i wouldn't e-mail something to be posted on the common ills about the idiot.
but at my site we can talk about it because i still find it all so disgusting and vile. dopey lied, bad enough.