Reply #212: I got what I wanted, but...

[Devils Advocate NZ]

Re: suing for libel - fair enough. I can understand that. I was just trying to force an answer in regards to her accusations, an answer that I had not seen.

Have you been paying attention? She denied making the allegations and demanded we prove she did. We did just that. Now you are trying to re-establish the same smear, that people here filed 'qui tam' suits. As it has been almost a year now and no suit has come to light (except Bev's) the baselessness of the allegation is self-proving. Also, none of the principles accused have really "gone quiet" in the past year.

Now wait a second - Eloriel posted on these threads that she had nothing to do with BBV, and even denied that she had done much of anything in the past except post on DU about it.

It was someone else that bought up her involvement, to which she replied that she basically forgot about that. That was suspicious to me as that was exactly the kind of thing a Qui Tam lawsuit was supposed to cause.

You posted a denial from her that she had filed such a suit, and that is enough for me. However, like I said, there was this small doubt based on some of Eloriel's posts on these threads, so I felt I had to get a straight answer, rather than diversions such as reframing the debate as to whether Bev had accused people or not. I just wanted to hear the principles say they had not filed a suit.

Please, explain to me what is ambigous about her words.

There is nothing ambiguos about her words, what was ambiguos was your and Eloriel's responses. I had not seen a DENIAL that you or Eloriel had filed such a suit. That is what I asked for, and that is what I finally got above.

Like I said to althecat, I am happy now to 100% support you, and it is a shame that Bev wanted to risk the "cause" by playing games with other activists.

I assume her accusations were a means of forcing other activists to back off, therefore keeping the Qui Tam option for herself and March.