Latest Demands from Jim . . .

[Admin]

Hey Folks,

For the past several weeks, as some of you know, there has been a heated debate going on - and now 'negotiations' (such as they are) with Jim of AgencyScams and JimsLists.

You see, he has decided to write what I consider to be a pile of garbage with insulting, disparaging, and threatening comments about RWD and the other sites owned by International Relations. [Note: See the announcement about ownership and management of the various sites]

Anyway, since RWD was developed as a *COMMUNITY* site - this little anthill in cyberspace belongs as much, or more, to all of you - so when Jim decided to make his latest demands, I decided to put it out there to you all to make the final decision.

So here is the deal. Jim has written a variety of pages which contain disparaging and misleading (putting it mildly) information about RWD and me. In return for taking down those pages, he wants the following in return:

Removal of this topic - http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=3194.0 - which was started when Jim precipitously listed RWD on his Blacklist without any communication with me whatsoever. Let's call this "Topic (a)" for purposes of voting in the poll.

Removal of this topic - http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=3201.0 - which was largely an extension of the earlier topic, but contains some additional information/experiences from other RWD members which bear on this subject. Let's call this "Topic (b)" for purposes of voting in the poll.

Removal of the tag "Reliability Questioned" in the Anti-Scam Table found here -- http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?pid=3

So my question to all of you is - should we capitulate to these demands in return for having crap removed from Jim's sites?

If we elect to NOT capitulate, I imagine Jim will conclude that he should keep his material in-place, for whatever damage (if any) that may cause.

As I have explained to many - this all seems a bit of a 'tempest in a teapot' - but I guess it is important to some, so I am raising it as an issue to the RWD members for resolution.

Let me know your wishes.

- Dan

[ScottinCrimea]

My opinion is that one should never capitulate to blackmail. If he senses he has some sort of control over you, the demands will not stop.  What will he demand next time?

[Turboguy]

My own two cents worth is that I am sure he looks at the posts here as a lot of crap just as we look at what he says as a lot of crap.

I think it would be only fair if he is going to remove his crap for RWD to remove what he feels is our crap.   Tit for tat as they say.

Personally my feelings are leave our crap here and let him keep his crap there.  I have no strong feelings about it one way or the other.

I do think fair is either for both to go or both to stay.

[Kuna]

Dan,

I agree with Scott.  Giving in to blackmail solves nothing.  If Jim has the integrity he would like people to believe he has I should think he needs to look at tidying up his own house before making demands on anyone else.

RWD is your venture, but it is a forum made up of the opinions of many people.  It's democratic in nature and to delete the members posts or to silence discussion provides no benefit to the current and future members.

We debate many topics here.  I don't think I've ever seen Jim post in RWD but I'm sure he must browse the site.  Perhaps he could start posting and explain to the members what his grievances are. Maybe communicating with the people he would like to silence might help all parties develop some harmony.

Kuna

[Admin]

My own two cents worth is that I am sure he looks at the posts here as a lot of crap just as we look at what he says as a lot of crap.

I think it would be only fair if he is going to remove his crap for RWD to remove what he feels is our crap.   Tit for tat as they say.

Personally my feelings are leave our crap here and let him keep his crap there.  I have no strong feelings about it one way or the other.

I do think fair is either for both to go or both to stay.

In my opinion, there is one HUGE difference - and that is why I raised it to the members.

On Jim's sites, he writes everything himself. If there is anything found there, one can safely-assume it is Jim himself who contributed it.

On RWD, things are quite different. The vast majority of what is written here comes from OTHERS - not from me.

It struck me as grossly unfair for Jim to write a load of crap, and then expect legitimate experiences of others to be censored just because it was negative about him.

Think about that for a moment. Would we want XYZ Agency to be able to negotiate removal of material which is negative - just because they did not like it?

Anyway - I will leave it to you folks. It just gets me PO'd when I look at this - so I need to bow out and leave it to you all to make the decision. Admittedly, I have provided my bias - so hopefully, cooler heads and more rational decision-makers will contribute their opinions and votes.

Thanks,

- Dan

[Admin]

Dan,

I agree with Scott.  Giving in to blackmail solves nothing.  If Jim has the integrity he would like people to believe he has I should think he needs to look at tidying up his own house before making demands on anyone else.

RWD is your venture, but it is a forum made up of the opinions of many people.  It's democratic in nature and to delete the members posts or to silence discussion provides no benefit to the current and future members.

We debate many topics here.  I don't think I've ever seen Jim post in RWD but I'm sure he must browse the site.  Perhaps he could start posting and explain to the members what his grievances are. Maybe communicating with the people he would like to silence might help all parties develop some harmony.

Kuna

Jim made one or two posts here, quite some time ago.

He has been invited on numerous occasions and by numerous members to visit RWD - but with the latest vindictive flying about in our emails, my guess is he feels he would not be treated fairly here.

To address that - I will make this commitment. If Jim wants to come here to RWD, he is welcome - and I will commit to turning over any and all moderations of his posts to one of the other Moderators. Perhaps with that, he will feel more like coming to RWD and speaking up.

We shall see.

- Dan

[Rvrwind]

Its easier to silence us than to try to explain his idiotic behavior.
I am totally against deleting anything. This is a public forum, the opinions expressed here are the opinions of the boardmembers & not the owners or management. If 'Honest Jim' has a problem with that, then let him address the membership & try to change their opinion of him, not blackmail the owner or the management.
I would never give into blackmail, which is exactly what this is. It is contemptable & has succeeded in only lower my already low opinion of him & his site!!
What is really disgusting to me is that he is Canadian!! It truly digusts me! If he was any kind of real man he would take all the clues he has been given to change his site & the way he operates & maybe then he would garner a true following. But to resort to blackmail only proves exactly what everybody already thinks of him & his site & in my case has even lowered & multiplied those feelings.
Jim if your reading this site you will see this & I only have one thing to say to you - as a fellow Canadian you are a dispicable individual!!
Thats my opinion & I'm stickin' to it!!

[catzenmouse]

Wow! Looks like we've got a real heated debate going on here!!! Those saying "NO" to the blackmail have 9 votes so far. Those who say "YES" to the blackmail have.... well.... not shown up yet or more likely don't exist unless our favorite Scam List owner comes by to vote.

Didn't Nancy Reagan have a campaign about this... "Just Say No, to blackmail"

Ken

[BillyB]

Dan,

 You mention "negotiations", not blackmail, so I take it you desire International Relations to have a clean name too. I think what's said about you and Jim has been over the top just like how Jack's business takes a beating just because of his abrasive personality, not based on his business practices. You and Jim need to look past each others personalities and see if what is written on both your sites is warranted. I don't think Jack's business should be attacked just because someone got into an argument with him and now doesn't like him to the point they bad mouth his business. I know it's your goal to help people in this endeavor. How about Jim? Is he really trying to screw people over or is he trying to help people in his own way. I know I don't always like the way certain people help others but it is their way of doing something for the benefit of others. Just as you feel and I feel International Relations is unjustly criticized, I'm sure Jim feels the same way to about what's written at this site. I don't agree with every agency on his gold/white list or black list, nobody would, but that's his decision to make and for the most part, he is more accurate than inaccurate and he does help guys who write him for assistance free of charge.

You know what's happening behind the scenes more than all of us combined. I vote it's your decision to make and I'll be satisfied with whatever you decide.

[catzenmouse]

Billy,

 Have you been to Jim's site to read what he has written about RWD? If not, you should. And remember that his site is His Writing and Opinions where RWD is a commnity site with multiple members doing the writing. Big difference IMO.

Ken

[William3rd]

I think a negative notation on Jim's List does not affect RWD as badly as negative notations on RWD affects Jim's List. RWD is a community. Jim's List appears to be the work of someone who is demented.

As one particularly seedy agency owner used to say- "any news is good news-good or bad. It makes people go look." So, when people go look, what do they see? And what do they feel when they look? RWD may increase in membership, Jim's List will probably be increasingly ingnored.

I would not compromise with this person or his backers in any way. Take it to the mat.

[Kuna]

Jim made one or two posts here, quite some time ago.

He has been invited on numerous occasions and by numerous members to visit RWD - but with the latest vindictive flying about in our emails, my guess is he feels he would not be treated fairly here.

To address that - I will make this commitment. If Jim wants to come here to RWD, he is welcome - and I will commit to turning over any and all moderations of his posts to one of the other Moderators. Perhaps with that, he will feel more like coming to RWD and speaking up.

We shall see.

- Dan

Dan,

Because it's a public forum Jim could come here whenever he wanted and could debate if he wanted to or had to.  The point about fairness doesn't hold any water because it's each individual that will judge fairness... and this being a public forum gives an opportunity for all people in the future to read that thread and see if he is treated unfairly.

I would be surprised if he was treated unfairly but I think he won't post in this forum because he knows he cannot justify his position without making irrational threats.  Him coming to a democratic, public forum would provide too much risk for someone who didn't have the integrity they claimed to have.

Still... he would be welcome here I'm sure.  The crap going on can only be resolved through legal action or commercial competition.  I've actually got a few ideas on how Jim's bubble could be busted but to be honest I don't think it's worth the effort.

Anyone visiting both sites will make up their mind which is more credible and market forces will prevail!

Kuna

[Wayne B]

I think a negative notation on Jim's List does not affect RWD as badly as negative notations on RWD affects Jim's List. RWD is a community. Jim's List appears to be the work of someone who is demented.

As one particularly seedy agency owner used to say- "any news is good news-good or bad. It makes people go look." So, when people go look, what do they see? And what do they feel when they look? RWD may increase in membership, Jim's List will probably be increasingly ingnored.

I would not compromise with this person or his backers in any way. Take it to the mat.





I agree 100% William. People searching for help can rely on 'RWD' guiding them in a truthful manner!    'RWD is a Democratic Forum'

[BillyB]

Billy,

 Have you been to Jim's site to read what he has written about RWD? If not, you should. And remember that his site is His Writing and Opinions where RWD is a commnity site with multiple members doing the writing. Big difference IMO.

Ken

Ken, Yes I did read what Jim is said about RWD. But you and everyone else here needs to realize Dan is negotiating with Jim for a reason when he could simply ignore him or continue an ongoing war. If Jim was such a bad person, I don't think Dan would have anything to do with Jim. Jim has also been the subject of attacks I don't think was necessary. Jack has attacked the integrity of Jim's whole site on the forums and his beef with Jim is differences over how Jim runs his site and a few ladies he believed were not scammers. Also there was an anti-Jim's list site created to smear Jim. Attacks have been going both ways. Whether or not what is said about JIm's site and RWD is true or false, once the first shot is fired, the war either ends with a truce or till one or all participants are destroyed.

[KenC]

RWD is a community with many diverse opinions.  You may not like some of them, but it is what it is.  A collection of thoughts and opinions on the subject of RW.  Jim has a problem with some of the opinions regarding his site.  So what?  Jim then counter attacks the opinions he doesn't like by calling RWD a scam site.  Another, "so what?"  How can an open forum be a scam site?  It isn't like Dan began a campaign here against Jim's list.  The threads were a free flow of opinions and observations from the membership here and Jim just happened to come up short in many areas.  No one likes negative information floating on the Net about their sites.  Jim doesn't like it and neither do we appreciate his opinion of RWD.

To remove any threads because of Jim's blatant blackmail tactics would do more harm to the integrity of this forum than anything I can think.  The fact of the matter is, by posting Jim's "demands" does nothing but further destroy any integrity that Jim's List may or may not have ever had.  Give just a little credit to the intelligence of the reader and anyone can see through Jim's simplistic attempt to sully RWD's image in retaliation for criticisms posted here.  In the big picture of things, RWD is a growing force with a great reputation, and Jim's list is questionable.  Ignore him, he isn't worth the effort to even dabate with.
KenC

[acrzybear]

Dan
 As you said this board is free expression and free will, so I would tell him to kiss my arse and go pound sand!!

But I'm noty nearly as diplomatic as you are, but I attended Jb's school of diplomacy.

[KenC]

Ken, Yes I did read what Jim is said about RWD. But you and everyone else here needs to realize Dan is negotiating with Jim for a reason when he could simply ignore him or continue an ongoing war. If Jim was such a bad person, I don't think Dan would have anything to do with Jim. Jim has also been the subject of attacks I don't think was necessary. Jack has attacked the integrity of Jim's whole site on the forums and his beef with Jim is differences over how Jim runs his site and a few ladies he believed were not scammers. Also there was an anti-Jim's list site created to smear Jim. Attacks have been going both ways. Whether or not what is said about JIm's site and RWD is true or false, once the first shot is fired, the war either ends with a truce or till one or all participants are destroyed.

Like it or not, Jack is a member of the RWD community and his opinion should be heard here as any other member's.  To start editing and controling what can or cannot be said here is a path I certainly hope will never be taken.
KenC

[wiz]

Who the fuck is Jim and his lists and who does care about his sites, without members expressing openly their views and opinions?

RWD is an international community with a common interest and purpose and all other members before me have articulated better so.... tell him to shove it up his  backside.

If he has problems with the views and opinions expressed over here by our members then he can sign in and debate the subject with the person(s) responsible who made the comments he does not like. As you can see most of members respect the freedom of expression you have allowed us so I think you will loose our respect if you give an inch!

The RWD has huge number of excellent posters and Jim will not dare to debate any subject because he will be easily humiliated and that is why is blackmailing you!

Tell him to stuff it!

[Stirlitz]

My opinion is that one should never capitulate to blackmail.

I second that.

On Jim's sites, he writes everything himself. If there is anything found there, one can safely-assume it is Jim himself who contributed it.

Yep.

[jinx13]

 I agree with everything BillyB said...other than that 

[IAmZon]

No to removal.

Every good community has a defense and an offence.

With very limited time and less money, I can imagine certain things that could be constructed as a counter offer to Good ole' Jim. If it were just an individual, it would deserve no mention ... NO MENTION AT ALL.

But Jim is positioned, on the internet,  as something other than an individual.  As such, he constructed a site posing as a VERY legitimate information provider, but contradicts the very core edict upon which his site is founded.

Therefore it harms.

I, myself found Jim (infact I exchanged emails with him)  before I found RWD.  Even after finding RWD, it takes an investment of time to see its vitality and fresh dialogue.

[Bruno]

No removal

Start a removal, same with agrement of Dan and members are a dangerous move... it will create a precedent who can be used by other...

If RWD remove the topic about Jim, all the bad agencies cited in several topic will use the same method... complain about RWD and propose the delete of complain in exchange of RWD...

Accepting a removal is the best way to mute members in the future... What we be the use of a forum if we cannot anymore post complain about some service, guiide, agency, scam-list...

Dan, please, keep the pandora box closed...

[Shadow]

I agree that nothing should be removed that is not against the TOU.
If anyone has an opinion that someone else does not like, they can either try to settle the differences or decide to disagree. And even if the contribution would be written by the owner, the TOU of the forum are deciding and valid for all contributions.

[jinx13]

 Ok, I will say this 

I actually voted to remove the topics, just because it's mostly crap here anyway, nothing of value in them, and I thought maybe it would be good to just finally end this stupid war between Jimslist and RWD (via Jack).

 I do think it sets a bad precedent though, I wouldn't want other lists, agencies guides, or whatever threatening RWD to remove threads, it's a tough call, but I still think if they are both in agreement to end the fighting, and both agree to remove the garbage (that pollutes both of their sites) than why not let them be men and settle their differences. Is it a threat or a agreement for peace? Guess it depends on how you look at it, and we don't know the language or tone in Jim's letters to Dan.

 BillyB's posts were on the money in my opinion.

[KenC]

I guess some people just do not have any principals and would allow an "outsider" to come here and try to censor what we can or cannot say by blackmailing RWD with bad press.  It doesn't matter if you agree or not with what was written here regarding Jim's list, it matters that you have the right to say it.

Jim can come here and debate his side anytime but choose to take a chicken shit way to strike back.  To cow tow to his methods would make RWD no better than him, which aint much.
KenC