Web site Moderator … dePassed on; now does a dePasse of his own

[mirage]

Web site Moderator … dePassed on; now does a dePasse of his own

Strange tofind posts deleted on this site that tend to provide honest insight into BB,Motown, the Motown original family members and Detroit history. Motown originals are irreplaceable. [[Made in Detroit has a certainauthenticity to it.) And the City of Detroit,an auto-hungry town, needs to resurrect its future in the competitive musicindustry. The Motown Center was touted bythe Motown powers-that-be as a world class interactive music center. Detroitwould be back.

WatchingMotown grow-up and move to LA was a sad requiem for Detroit. Many Motown family members leftbehind were being labeled as castoffs. Certain individuals on this site constantly imply via their posts thatmany of the original Detroit Motown family are losers. Perhaps, these posters should be dePassed.

Unfortunately,little lies always turn into bigger lies and eventually they create a web oflies … nothing stays buried forever. There are always links to the past and Motown has plenty of buried past.

ThedePassed posts that openly asked about the missingmillions that have seemingly disappeared from the Hitsville USA museum coffersover decades coupled with the pick-pocketing of Detroit’spublic Economic Agency to fund a phantom Motown Center project is bothbaffling, disturbing and amusing.
[[The linkto the Motown Center renderings … was also dePassed bythe site administrator. Go figure.)
Bottomline is that the city’s funds were abused by those put in charge of the Motownproject.

I don’t take the removal of my posts personally;I take it as a compliment,

Again,McCartney restored a second-tiered Steinway that raised millions for the Museumin NYC and was to be railed back to the MotorCity and Hitsville USA late Fall 2012. Guess interactive tickling of those ivoriesare not a Museum board priority. Maybethey are waiting for McCartney to also pay for its train ticket home? The status of this now infamous Steinway isMIA.

The sayingwhich states that one should keep friends close and keep their enemies closeris inaccurate when it comes to political and million dollar music industrygamesmanship. The fact is that duringone’s lifetime friends and enemies meld into one and can become interchangeableterms at any given point. It’s reallybest as an astute individual to comprehend that loyal friends become yourenemies; loyal enemies become your friends.

A Web siteadministrator’s job is to moderate fairly … so it is believable that Mr.Terrano actually thinks that it is his dutiful job to hit the dePasse buttonwhenever he determines that a posting might hurt the LA entourage or members ofthe Museum board and their feelings. Detroit’s common peopleand those “down and out” original Motown family members also have feelings …but who the hell needs to consider those feelings.

AlthoughTerrano made the call to delete these posts; unfortunately he can’t deleteMotown’s real history. And Motown historyis very important. Berry Gordy is thecreator and catalyst for Motown history. Fortunately, BB, Smokey and never a Motown original dePasse are not theonly Motown historians.

On anothernote President Obama’s inauguration was lower keyed than his first. Attended the PresidentialInaugural Ball [[DC Convention Center) Nice - but crowded from security lines tothe special guest section; drinks were free where we were at as opposed towaiting in long lines to purchase tickets in the main section. Glad we went to a pre-Ball dinner. Cheese andpretzels are not my ideal appetizers. Fascinating people … and some interestingpolitical conversation that centered upon Biden and Hillary and the 2016Dem-Dilemma Drama.

Again Mr. Terrano ...… thanks for thedePasse. You’re making me look credible.

[ralpht]

Mirage,
First of all, the name is TERRANA. I'm somewhat confused with your position regarding my stance with Motown L.A.. Anyone that knows me is well aware of my position regarding the move west by Motown. I have always said I thought this a major blunder. With regard to Ms. DePasse, I'm sure you must have heard somewhere that there was no love lost between us and to think I may have been thought of as an ally of hers horrifies me.

[jobeterob]

For just us ordinary joe fans that don't get invited to Inaugurations but got a job and worked hard for the money............you need to speak more clearly Mirage. Shorter posts, bring the cleats out, and tell us what you really mean and who you really are.

Even I know, Ralph wasn't taken with Suzanne!

What I would suggest is somewhat of an issue is ~ while there can always be criticism of Motown, Berry, and various artists ~ how far do you go in denigrating it and reducing it to rubble? In the end, every one of the artists still sings the praises of Berry and Motown in the end ~ at least they do so publicly.

[zebop]

I'm dyslexic, Mirage's post is killing me.

[144man]

Shorter posts... tell us what you really mean...who you really are.

I agree with Rob. Have the courage of your convictions, Mirage, stop hiding behind your pseudonym and give your name if you want us to believe you're not just s***-stirring.

[BayouMotownMan]

What the hell is this about?

[tmd]

Anyone who is serious about Motown comes to this site to become more educated about the greatest music of all time and having a living legend give his insight on the history of Motown is invaluable.
I feel honored to have actually communicated with some of the all times greats such as Mike Mclean, Bob Babbit and of course Ralph T.
I love Motown and the continued history that is discussed on this great site.
Keep it alive for all of us.

Motown Junkie from 9-mile and Mound.

[sophisticated_soul]

I don’t take the removal of my posts personally;I take it as a compliment

IMHO, perhaps the higher compliment of being banned is in order here.

[ralpht]

Thanks for the kind words tmd. I stay in touch with George McGregor and we feel the reality that there are so few of us left from the old days. Kind of sad, but we consider ourselves so very lucky to have been able to participate in what was going on, musically, in Detroit all those years ago.

[jobeterob]

but we consider ourselves so very lucky to have been able to participate in what was going on, musically, in Detroit all those years ago.[/QUOTE]

That line perfectly expresses how fortunate these people were to have been at Motown.............and generally, all the people that were there say they were SO fortunate. Even those that have complained love Berry, love Motown, love Smokey and sing the praises of the family. And so many of the stars have never uttered a word of complaint and they weren't necessarily the biggest stars ~ for example Scherrie and Susaye.

Most of us posters would have given their eye teeth to be Ralph or Dennis or Pete or Ronny or Marv [[T not 2) or Russ or any Temptation or Contour or Top or Supreme or Vandella and they were so lucky to be part of that dream.

[soulster]

Web site Moderator … dePassed on; now does a dePasse of his own

Strange tofind posts deleted on this site that tend to provide honest insight into BB,Motown, the Motown original family members and Detroit history. Motown originals are irreplaceable. [[Made in Detroit has a certainauthenticity to it.) And the City of Detroit,an auto-hungry town, needs to resurrect its future in the competitive musicindustry. The Motown Center was touted bythe Motown powers-that-be as a world class interactive music center. Detroitwould be back.

WatchingMotown grow-up and move to LA was a sad requiem for Detroit. Many Motown family members leftbehind were being labeled as castoffs. Certain individuals on this site constantly imply via their posts thatmany of the original Detroit Motown family are losers. Perhaps, these posters should be dePassed.

Unfortunately,little lies always turn into bigger lies and eventually they create a web oflies … nothing stays buried forever. There are always links to the past and Motown has plenty of buried past.

ThedePassed posts that openly asked about the missingmillions that have seemingly disappeared from the Hitsville USA museum coffersover decades coupled with the pick-pocketing of Detroit’spublic Economic Agency to fund a phantom Motown Center project is bothbaffling, disturbing and amusing.
[[The linkto the Motown Center renderings … was also dePassed bythe site administrator. Go figure.)
Bottomline is that the city’s funds were abused by those put in charge of the Motownproject.

I don’t take the removal of my posts personally;I take it as a compliment,

Again,McCartney restored a second-tiered Steinway that raised millions for the Museumin NYC and was to be railed back to the MotorCity and Hitsville USA late Fall 2012. Guess interactive tickling of those ivoriesare not a Museum board priority. Maybethey are waiting for McCartney to also pay for its train ticket home? The status of this now infamous Steinway isMIA.

The sayingwhich states that one should keep friends close and keep their enemies closeris inaccurate when it comes to political and million dollar music industrygamesmanship. The fact is that duringone’s lifetime friends and enemies meld into one and can become interchangeableterms at any given point. It’s reallybest as an astute individual to comprehend that loyal friends become yourenemies; loyal enemies become your friends.

A Web siteadministrator’s job is to moderate fairly … so it is believable that Mr.Terrano actually thinks that it is his dutiful job to hit the dePasse buttonwhenever he determines that a posting might hurt the LA entourage or members ofthe Museum board and their feelings. Detroit’s common peopleand those “down and out” original Motown family members also have feelings …but who the hell needs to consider those feelings.

AlthoughTerrano made the call to delete these posts; unfortunately he can’t deleteMotown’s real history. And Motown historyis very important. Berry Gordy is thecreator and catalyst for Motown history. Fortunately, BB, Smokey and never a Motown original dePasse are not theonly Motown historians.

On anothernote President Obama’s inauguration was lower keyed than his first. Attended the PresidentialInaugural Ball [[DC Convention Center) Nice - but crowded from security lines tothe special guest section; drinks were free where we were at as opposed towaiting in long lines to purchase tickets in the main section. Glad we went to a pre-Ball dinner. Cheese andpretzels are not my ideal appetizers. Fascinating people … and some interestingpolitical conversation that centered upon Biden and Hillary and the 2016Dem-Dilemma Drama.

Again Mr. Terrano ...… thanks for thedePasse. You’re making me look credible.


You'd look more credible if you would proofread your posts before you submit them. Much of your post contains misspellings, run-on words, and incoherent statements. Learn to format your posts. Keep your thoughts focused. Seriously, your post looks like you had one too many.

BTW, I don't personally know anything about Suzanne DePasse, or anyone's issues with her, and, frankly, don't care.

[tmd]

What I would give to have been a small part of the Motown sound. At least I get to live a bit vicarious with all of the Motown alumni comments.
I feel very privledge to have been part of the site since 2001. I have asked a lot of questions over the year and have learned so much from the Motown alumni.
I wrote my high school senior paper on the History of Motown, this from a white kid from Warren, Michigan. I did not even know who the Funk Brothers were back in the day and had no idea of all of the greats behind the singers that made Motown click .
I hope someone takes all of these great answers that we have recieved over the years and make it into a book.
RT, I think you are the man for this postion. You could just call it the Soulful Detroit forum.

[ralpht]

it would be quite a book tmd, that is for sure. Your story alone makes the promise of SD good and that pleases me.

[juicefree20]

Mirage,

Having been MIA for awhile, I can't claim to know what deleted postings you're referring to. With that said, let me present another viewpoint from a person who has heard a lot of back door stories from people, family members & friends whom were actually there in those days.

As regards deletions of negative things said about certain Motown artists, I feel compelled to point out that having been here a decade this December, we've seen all sort of things written here about folks ranging from Berry Gordy, to Diana Ross to Mary Wilson & usually, it's the more over-the-top comments that have gotten deleted under Ralph's watch.

Beyond that, it would seem to me that any allegations of inappropriate behavior would be best addressed to the proper authorities. Soulful Detroit is not a crime agency, nor a watchdog. From a legal standpoint, if not fully substantiated, Ralph nor the owners of SDF can allow posts like that to stand without incurring the wrath of the same authorities whom should be investigating the claims that you've discussed.

A larger question would be exactly why would you seemingly believe that Ralph, Lowell & SDF at large should be responsible for investigating matters best left to the authorities & play out those type of allegations here on a music forum which has NO legal power to do anything about any of this?.

It would seem to me that your gripe would be more effective & understandable if this were a blog for say the Free Press, rather than a music forum. On the surface, it would seem to me that your questions would be far more effective & bear more fruit if they were directed toward a newspaper which might be inclined to investigate the charges or perhaps a governmental agecncy designed to crack down on fraud.

I see no reason why any reasonable person would expect Ralph & Lowell to risk people coming after them with lawsuits in hand because they are foolish enough to allow anonymous people to post allegations with absolutely no corroborating evidence to support such claims. For them to allow it would be foolhardy & ridiculous.

I realize that the anonymity of the internet has led most to believe otherwise but there are laws that the owners of forums & websites must adhere to. And to prove to you how most here DO understand this fact is that while Ralph & Lowell post here, they do so using their REAL names & as such are responsible for what goes on here. Unlike them, none of us have any legal stake over what goes on here & the vast majority here & on the internet post under a pseudonym, for rather obvious reasons.

Now if you really want to be fair about this, then it's only fair that you come here as they do...under your own name. And when you do that & present the same allegations that you make while using your OWN name as opposed to a screen name, your criticism might hold more water & appear to be more sincere, as you'll be putting your own self under the same scrutiny & microscope that you freely place them under.

When you write these same questions & allegations under your own name & are willing to take the same legal risks that you believe that they should place themselves under, then I'll understand where you're coming from. But until you do that or at least pose the same questions to the Free Press, Mayor Bing or any agency who can actually do something about it, why would they bother to address that here when it appears that you haven't followed the proper chain of command as regards these "crimes"?

And where investigations are concerned, why not address these claims to that reporter who seems to love to go after this kind of malfeasance? What's his name again, the guy who followed Martha Reeves around for awhile? I believe it's Steve Wilson or something like that. Something like this seems more up his alley & he can even get some spotlight for it on his news reports. Why put the responsibility for doing so on Ralph, as though he signed on for that, which if you read the terms here, you will see that what you want addressed here doesn't exactly adhere to the tenets of which this site was created.

And no, the moderator of SDF has no legal authority over any of this & I question why anyone would place more responsibility on the moderator of a music forum than they would people whom are paid & sworn to address crime.

Sorry, but NO moderator can allow people to post unsubstantiated claims of criminal conduct without risking problems for themselves. And surely you know that, as I don't see your government name appear anywhere in your post.

Which means that you are aware of the potential for reprisals & recriminations. So why ask or expect Ralph to do something that you yourself are not willing to do?

Doesn't seem quite right to me, but that's just my opinion.

[ralpht]

Thank you Juice.

[Roberta75]

Mirage,

Having been MIA for awhile, I can't claim to know what deleted postings you're referring to. With that said, let me present another viewpoint from a person who has heard a lot of back door stories from people, family members & friends whom were actually there in those days.

As regards deletions of negative things said about certain Motown artists, I feel compelled to point out that having been here a decade this December, we've seen all sort of things written here about folks ranging from Berry Gordy, to Diana Ross to Mary Wilson & usually, it's the more over-the-top comments that have gotten deleted under Ralph's watch.

Beyond that, it would seem to me that any allegations of inappropriate behavior would be best addressed to the proper authorities. Soulful Detroit is not a crime agency, nor a watchdog. From a legal standpoint, if not fully substantiated, Ralph nor the owners of SDF can allow posts like that to stand without incurring the wrath of the same authorities whom should be investigating the claims that you've discussed.

A larger question would be exactly why would you seemingly believe that Ralph, Lowell & SDF at large should be responsible for investigating matters best left to the authorities & play out those type of allegations here on a music forum which has NO legal power to do anything about any of this?.

It would seem to me that your gripe would be more effective & understandable if this were a blog for say the Free Press, rather than a music forum. On the surface, it would seem to me that your questions would be far more effective & bear more fruit if they were directed toward a newspaper which might be inclined to investigate the charges or perhaps a governmental agecncy designed to crack down on fraud.

I see no reason why any reasonable person would expect Ralph & Lowell to risk people coming after them with lawsuits in hand because they are foolish enough to allow anonymous people to post allegations with absolutely no corroborating evidence to support such claims. For them to allow it would be foolhardy & ridiculous.

I realize that the anonymity of the internet has led most to believe otherwise but there are laws that the owners of forums & websites must adhere to. And to prove to you how most here DO understand this fact is that while Ralph & Lowell post here, they do so using their REAL names & as such are responsible for what goes on here. Unlike them, none of us have any legal stake over what goes on here & the vast majority here & on the internet post under a pseudonym, for rather obvious reasons.

Now if you really want to be fair about this, then it's only fair that you come here as they do...under your own name. And when you do that & present the same allegations that you make while using your OWN name as opposed to a screen name, your criticism might hold more water & appear to be more sincere, as you'll be putting your own self under the same scrutiny & microscope that you freely place them under.

When you write these same questions & allegations under your own name & are willing to take the same legal risks that you believe that they should place themselves under, then I'll understand where you're coming from. But until you do that or at least pose the same questions to the Free Press, Mayor Bing or any agency who can actually do something about it, why would they bother to address that here when it appears that you haven't followed the proper chain of command as regards these "crimes"?

And where investigations are concerned, why not address these claims to that reporter who seems to love to go after this kind of malfeasance? What's his name again, the guy who followed Martha Reeves around for awhile? I believe it's Steve Wilson or something like that. Something like this seems more up his alley & he can even get some spotlight for it on his news reports. Why put the responsibility for doing so on Ralph, as though he signed on for that, which if you read the terms here, you will see that what you want addressed here doesn't exactly adhere to the tenets of which this site was created.

And no, the moderator of SDF has no legal authority over any of this & I question why anyone would place more responsibility on the moderator of a music forum than they would people whom are paid & sworn to address crime.

Sorry, but NO moderator can allow people to post unsubstantiated claims of criminal conduct without risking problems for themselves. And surely you know that, as I don't see your government name appear anywhere in your post.

Which means that you are aware of the potential for reprisals & recriminations. So why ask or expect Ralph to do something that you yourself are not willing to do?

Doesn't seem quite right to me, but that's just my opinion.

We have the voice of reason back among us. Thank you dear Juice and happy New year to you and yours.

Yours, with every good wish.

Roberta

[Methuselah2]

Juicefree - Please don't get me wrong because I do not agree with or endorse Mirage's position. But I'm not sure your position is tenable or that your central point of criticism is sustainable because of the moniker you have chosen to use. Does my position seem reasonable?

[sophisticated_soul]

Juicefree - Please don't get me wrong because I do not agree with or endorse Mirage's position. But I'm not sure your position is tenable or that your central point of criticism is sustainable because of the moniker you have chosen to use. Does my position seem reasonable?

I am not speaking for Juice, but personally I find your position unreasonable for two reasons. First, as you can tell by his post and the number of his posts Juice is very well known here. He is not someone here with 39 posts that nobody knows. Second and more important he is not making wildy incoherent, unsubstantiated public accusations against a specific forum member. Statements that I agree do have potential legal ramifications. Aside from the fact that these statement also go against the forum rules against making personal attacks. I think you may have missed the point Juice was making. It's not the moniker it's the content of the message.

[ralpht]

I have to agree with Sophisticated Soul on this one. Juice has been here a very long time and has the reputation for being a thoughtful, Sane [[as opposed to his alter ego, Barely Sane) and intelligent contributor to these boards. I wouldn't have a problem with him if he called himself Godzilla.

[Methuselah2]

Sophisticated Soul & Ralph - You may have misunderstood my reply and exactly what I was taking issue with about Juicefree's post. Running throughout his remarks, he makes various references to comments being weighty and worthy based on whether the person writing them does so in his own name or via pseudonym. Juicefree is certainly entitled to his opinion and to express it. But based on what his pseudonym-related remarks are saying, how can Juicefree expect his remarks to be weighty and worthy since he, himself, uses a pseudonym? His own use of a pseudonym invalidates his whole point about using one, as far I'm concerned. That's all I was referencing to in my earlier response. I thought I had made it clear at the beginning of that response that I did not support Mirage's position. How did you miss that?

Is it possible that you might have missed it because of how you personally feel about Juicefree? When one of you brings up the length of a person's membership, you bring up your own bias. When another of you mentions another's sanity, you reduce your argument to name-calling. I realize that may not have been the intention of either of you but, for me, that's the effect of what both of you have said.

And with that said, I can also say I appreciated your responses to my earlier remarks because in such a forum as a chat board, I want to know how my comments are being taken. It's important for me to say what I feel moved to say, and it's just as important that I be made aware of how you took my comments.

So, here's a personal scorecard in my estimation:
Mirage's comments: Didn't agree with them. Couldn't quite follow much of what was said. Didn't support the position.
Juicefree's comments: A studied, well-written perspective that gets negated by a recurring standard he invokes for one member but not for himself.
Sophisticated Soul's comments: Careful but biased; based on familiarity with someone rather than the current reasoning being displayed. Disappointing.
Ralph's comments: Undignified and unnecessary name-calling. Highly disappointing.
My comments: Didn't get my thoughts across very well. Yet again, no doubt. None of my relentless attempts at humor, so, naturally, I'm disappointed.

[ralpht]

Methuselah,
I'm not saying I disagree with you. Your point was very well taken. I suppose if Juice hadn't been here all these years your point would be all the more valid. I suppose I can be guilty of letting certain things, or people, slide on one thing or another, but that is only because they have earned my trust and I know I can rely on their performance on the forum. Still, your point is well taken. Juice's opinions are definitely his own and if someone wants to take issue with him, they might want to know who they are talking to.

[ralpht]

Name calling? Where?

[ralpht]

But...on a further note. I don't see anything good furthering this conversation. A new member posted a rather strange message aimed, mostly, at me. No big deal. I had my say with the poster. I'm cool with it.

[sophisticated_soul]

Possibly because we [[Methuselah and I) both happen to post a great deal on the Nightflight thread I am a little more familiar with Methuselah's posting style so I believe I took Methuselah's post exactly as he intended. So my post stands. It's not that the original poster used a moniker [[nearly everyone here does) it's what he said, the extreme and personal nature of his message. I believe that is what Juice was responding to. Again, as with the original post as with the response, it's not that a moniker was used, it's what was said in the message. My post stands whether Methuselah agreed with the original poster or not, which I did see he stated he did not. My point was that I did not think Juice's post and point in response was invalid becaused Juice [[like almost everyone here) also uses a moniker. Again, for me it's what a poster says not whether they use a moniker or not.

[ralpht]

Now you're confusing me, dude.

[Methuselah2]

Ralph - Thank you for these latest replies.

I do appreciate this forum and all that you do for it and to maintain it. It's terrifically informative, ever interesting, and a whole lotta fun. And here and there, yeah, a pain. A groan. A roll of the eyes. But it's still worth it. Absolutely, completely worth it. I look forward to it every day.

[ralpht]

I do try and please but realize I can't please everyone. But I do my best. Thank you for the response, Methuselah, I have always appreciated your posts to the forum.

[sophisticated_soul]

Now you're confusing me, dude.

I edited my post, Ralph. I should have been more specific by who I meant by we. Or did I miss your point?

[Roberta75]

Sophisticated Soul & Ralph - You may have misunderstood my reply and exactly what I was taking issue with about Juicefree's post. Running throughout his remarks, he makes various references to comments being weighty and worthy based on whether the person writing them does so in his own name or via pseudonym. Juicefree is certainly entitled to his opinion and to express it. But based on what his pseudonym-related remarks are saying, how can Juicefree expect his remarks to be weighty and worthy since he, himself, uses a pseudonym? His own use of a pseudonym invalidates his whole point about using one, as far I'm concerned. That's all I was referencing to in my earlier response. I thought I had made it clear at the beginning of that response that I did not support Mirage's position. How did you miss that?

Is it possible that you might have missed it because of how you personally feel about Juicefree? When one of you brings up the length of a person's membership, you bring up your own bias. When another of you mentions another's sanity, you reduce your argument to name-calling. I realize that may not have been the intention of either of you but, for me, that's the effect of what both of you have said.

And with that said, I can also say I appreciated your responses to my earlier remarks because in such a forum as a chat board, I want to know how my comments are being taken. It's important for me to say what I feel moved to say, and it's just as important that I be made aware of how you took my comments.

So, here's a personal scorecard in my estimation:
Mirage's comments: Didn't agree with them. Couldn't quite follow much of what was said. Didn't support the position.
Juicefree's comments: A studied, well-written perspective that gets negated by a recurring standard he invokes for one member but not for himself.
Sophisticated Soul's comments: Careful but biased; based on familiarity with someone rather than the current reasoning being displayed. Disappointing.
Ralph's comments: Undignified and unnecessary name-calling. Highly disappointing.
My comments: Didn't get my thoughts across very well. Yet again, no doubt. None of my relentless attempts at humor, so, naturally, I'm disappointed.

Will all due respect how can you call Ralph undignified. Ralph is one of the fairest gentlemen and one of the most decent. He treat everyone with respect so I have to say think your comment is undignified IMO.

Roberta

[Methuselah2]

Roberta - I was refering to Ralph's comments, not Ralph. Even with a heading preceding my remarks to make that clear. Well, I tried.

[Methuselah2]

Sophisticated Soul - My original reply to Juicefree's post was merely to let him know that he had lost me. Once he brought up Mirage's use of a pseudonym as a conclusive and absolute rationale for dismissal of Mirage's comments, it was impossible not to hold a mirror up to him because Juicefree's argument reached a point from which there is no return: The ol' boomerang; the pointed finger is also pointing at oneself. Logically, there's no way out. And the chipping away and invalidation of any salient points that may have been made begin and take over. A premise has been set up that, for me, ends the game.

And then, of course, another game starts up. It's unavoidable because this is all being played out on a public stage, and that, in itself, invites audience participation. The tennis match is on!

Please let the record show that I looked pretty darn good in my white shorts with traditional cable-knit sweater. But that's only my opinion.

[Methuselah2]

Sane [[as opposed to his alter ego, Barely Sane)

Ralph - Please accept my apology regarding the name-calling. I see now that I was very mistaken. I had thought you were talking about Juicefree and Mirage being two sides of the same coin, with Mirage being Juicefree's alter ego Barely Sane. Clearly, I was mistaken--you were talking only about Juicefree. My haste; my error. I sincerely apologize for any unwarranted grief I may have caused.

[144man]

The only reason I have a user name is because that is the accepted practice. I have no desire for anonymity. I don't post anything here that I wouldn't be prepared put my name to, and on a couple of occasions I have indeed felt it necessary to disclose my name.

When it comes down to it, giving one's real name is one of the few ways to distinguish fair comment from gratuitously offensive remarks.

[ralpht]

No problem Methuselah.

[sophisticated_soul]

Sophisticated Soul - My original reply to Juicefree's post was merely to let him know that he had lost me. Once he brought up Mirage's use of a pseudonym as a conclusive and absolute rationale for dismissal of Mirage's comments, it was impossible not to hold a mirror up to him because Juicefree's argument reached a point from which there is no return: The ol' boomerang; the pointed finger is also pointing at oneself. Logically, there's no way out. And the chipping away and invalidation of any salient points that may have been made begin and take over. A premise has been set up that, for me, ends the game.

And then, of course, another game starts up. It's unavoidable because this is all being played out on a public stage, and that, in itself, invites audience participation. The tennis match is on!

Please let the record show that I looked pretty darn good in my white shorts with traditional cable-knit sweater. But that's only my opinion.

I believe I understand what you are saying. I disagree with you, that's all. You stated an opinion, I disagreed with it. No more, no less. What I see on this thread is fairly unanimous agreement that mirage's original post was off base. I also see a lot of support for Ralph and finally I see appropriate agreeing to disagree. No more, no less. It's a forum and that's what happens on a forum. And I felt it was all done with civility and respect. End of story.

[ralpht]

Works for me, Sophisticated Soul.

[sophisticated_soul]

Works for me, Sophisticated Soul.

It's all good.:)

[Methuselah2]

Sophisticated Soul - I can go along with your "End of story" idea. But please remember how my entrance to the story got started: I wrote a response specifically addressed to Juicefree. It was written solely with him in mind, intended for him. Each subsequent posting that I wrote throughout the thread was addressed to specific recipients. So, I think that's a very important aspect to recognize. I certainly understand that this being a public forum allowing commenting by any members can always open things up and expand some issue or concern. But it involves a choice to do so.

The opportunity for anyone to jump in is always there and, perhaps, tempting. I certainly did it with Juicefree's first message that was specifically addressed to Mirage. This thread has been a very valuable one to me because I've learned a variety of things from the way it progressed, from what members said and how they said it, what I said and how and where I erred, and that each person's view of it and any response he or she makes can have a life of its own. I didn't quite know that until now.

[oldiesmusicfan]

I've been posting on this forum for about 8 years now, and I wanted to thank each of you who maintained your dignity and manners in responding to each others' posts.

I don't know what was deleted, but don't much care, and didn't quite figure out what the original poster was getting at anyway!

Oldies

[sophisticated_soul]

^Thank you Oldies.:)

[Penny]

Roberta - I was refering to Ralph's comments, not Ralph. Even with a heading preceding my remarks to make that clear. Well, I tried.

Roberta, my dear friend, I hope you will pray over this thread and this site. You are always so fair and loving.

I got a copy of Ralph's book and it is very interesting. He did so many things and knew everybody.

Pray for the AVON business, too. I am just kidding on that part. Your order will go out on Monday.

Lover of Motown;
Penny

[Roberta75]

Roberta, my dear friend, I hope you will pray over this thread and this site. You are always so fair and loving.

I got a copy of Ralph's book and it is very interesting. He did so many things and knew everybody.

Pray for the AVON business, too. I am just kidding on that part. Your order will go out on Monday.

Lover of Motown;
Penny

Thank you my dear kind friend and my feet thank you as well. I always pray for ralph and you Penny and all the members of this site. Ralph is a real good man and runs a very fair and decent forum.

Have a blessed weekend Penny.

Roberta

[ralpht]

Penny and Roberta,
You are making me blush...Thank you.

[gordy_hunk]

I have no idea what point the OP was attempting to make. But, here's my view.

Since Ralph created this forum, many distinguished people who have had a substantial input at Motown have posted on here [[whether they are producers, writers or singers).

I have learned a massive amount about Motown because of this forum. I may not post frequently, and I don't always agree with some of the posters, but without this forum, collectively, we would all be poorer with our knowledge of Motown.

Keep up the good work Ralph - it is much appreciated.

[ralpht]

Thank you, Gordy. It is nice to be appreciated.