Re: I am who I am

On Tue, 13 May 2008 13:08:34 +0800, Jim Walsh
<jimNOwalsSPAMh3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>On Tue, 13 May 2008 08:14:21 +0800, Good soldier wrote
>(in article <e9nh24pgd0hka7ksogq4mv9si8at3gpmms@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 23:00:27 +0800, Jim Walsh
>> <jimNOwalsSPAMh3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 22:08:11 +0800, Good soldier wrote
>>> (in article <mijg2457eqdlartt5naa18r366hnabri0v@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 16:35:21 +0800, Jim Walsh
>>>> <jimNOwalsSPAMh3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, 10 May 2008 09:54:54 +0800, Good soldier wrote
>>>>> (in article <k0u924l8j893miobdu2qpu4vtopuul1t08@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>):
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't claim that I saw everything that happened after the Tsunami
>>>>>> but food and water labeled in foreign language was not evident and
>>>>>> there seemed to be little organized "foreign aid".
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> (Correct Address is goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Eye witness accounts posted under a fake name have no evidentiary
value.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Of course they don't. Just as a comment by "JimNOwalsSPAMh3REALLY"
who
>>>> posts through a news feed that hides his Internet address, is a
>>>> valuable addition to the debate..
>>> 
>>> My name, address, phone number, pass****t number have all been posted
on 
>>> these 
>>> newsgroups.
>>> 
>>> My name is Jim Walsh (James Earl Walsh, III, to be more specific).
Nothing 
>>> about my posting conceals my identity.
>> 
>> 
>> You can say anything you want to, but your post says something
>> different. 
>> 
>> It says that the post is from:   jimNOwalsSPAMh3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> and uses a Reply To: address of  JimNOwalsSPAMh3REALLY@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> 
>> You will note that your From: and Reply to: addresses differ so one or
>> both are fictitious.s
>
>my email address is jimwalsh3 AT (@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
) gmail.com.
>
>But you knew that already, didn't you.
>
>> Your message header also advises us that:
>> 
>> X-Proxy-User: $$fhrej2xgz
>> User-Agent: Hogwasher/4.3
>> 
>> It appears strange that an honest man makes such a determined attempt
>> to hide his identity. 
>
>Go back over the last decade or so, in soc.culture.china.
>
>You will see a long list of posts from me, Jim Walsh. You will find my
former 
>and current address.
>
>Currently 
>Jing Xing Road, Lane 202, #1, 1F Taipei.
>
>my phone number 0928619138.
>
>Call me or email me, if you doubt it.
>
>Or look at my blog (which I have neglected sadly) on mindsay 
>(jimwalsh.mindsay.com)
>
>> 
>> You can tell us in the body of your message that you are Santa Claus,
>> if you want to, but you should try to make sure that you are posting
>> from the North Pole if you want people to believe you.
>
>Of all the regular posters on scc, my actual identity is the most
well-known.
>I have even had lunch at Swensen's in Taipei with a regular poster.

I have no intention of "Going back over the last decade or so, in
soc.culture.china" as I am not interested in China nor am I responding
to a posting in a China newsgroup. I'm posting to a group called
soc.culture.thai, strangely enough.

Interesting you should post the comment "Call me or email me, if you
doubt it". I did email you using both the From: address and the Reply
to: address shown in your posts. Of course there was no response.

Again you say your identity is known to posters in scc but you are
also posting to sct where you aren't known and from looking at your
message headers do not appear to want to be known as you are using
false email addresses.

Using a false address and bragging how well known you are in the same
message smacks of hypocrisy does it not?

Cheers,

schweik
(Correct Address is goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)