I reverse my conviction of you as "disingenuous" and ask that you forgive my failure to discern beyond the way you were representing yourself.  You had quite persuaded me, and I had allowed it, that your adversary contention arose on sufficient analysis to know what you now see, and thus that you knowingly falsified your analysis.  This is erroneous and false.  You exonerate yourself completely here of all of which I had accused you.    I am always more than willing, and indeed eager, to void erroneous adverse judgment of anyone on any probative evidence of error, however slight.  I despise false conviction, it is the most corrosive of human errors, utterly fatal to comity among humanity and the fountain of discord and bloodshed.    And this is the Way of human nature for all condemnation of others for any departure however slight, that all animosity and suspicion and pain attaching to false conviction of any degree be expunged and erased and no more recalled or maintained save as error from which we were saved by His Mercy.    Case closed, error convicted of error.

   The remainder of our difference is procedural.

   [Striken]Your representation of these tools is disingenuous.[Striken]

   You can call them any way you want, my argument is not with that.  I never disputed your characterization of the tools.

   Nor I your characterization of the tools.  What I refute is that they are reserved to professional or restricted application or that either characterization is exclusively predominant over the other or intended.

   My point was, and remains, that it was unethical to disclose your findings, not to use any particular tool to make the findings.

   This is a distinguishable issue.  I maintain, and will show, that my open, evidenced, public disclosure to all Liberty Forum readers was not merely ethical but in this instance, and in this context, obligatory if not intrinsically compulsory.

   Show me the injury coming from the multiple Daisies, and explain why you couldn't discuss your allegation with the forum owner.

   This is the crux of the issue, the injury.  First, the peripheral issue of management and procedure.

   I have personally asserted the presence and activity of agenda-driven floor parties to John Deere beginning with my first approach to him.  My impression is that he has dismissed this as tinfoil.

   If so, this would prove him a complete political neophyte, since floor parties are standard instrumentalities for advancing agendas in the realm of all public deliberation of public affairs and political direction.  In Congress, "on the floor" of Congress, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are floor parties, neither comprises the entire body by itself, and there are scores of other floor parties as well ~ some of them are called caucuses.  The Speaker "gives the floor" to the Congressman at the podium, and questions and comments come "from the floor" by means of floor parties.  During election seasons every party gathering also hosts covert floor parties from their opponent parties, it is a given and an accepted and sometimes vital element of the political process.

   They operate all the time:  some, for example, are called telephone polling banks, on "the floor" of the population at large, seeking to influence the public's discussions; and they are ubiquitous features of all political environments.  Their activities and machinations are transparently obvious to anyone with sufficient experience in the political arena, which isn't really much experience at all, it's a matter of quality of the experience, and transmission of political methodology and science and effectivity, not secrecy or lodgecraft.

   Whatever the case, my repeated entreaties to John Deere on these matters remain unanswered.  There is every reason to believe that an evidenced instance of a covert agenda-driven adversarial floor party would be ignored, and in this event it has been, by Mr. Deere, who is reported to have dismissed it out of hand as unworthy of disruption even if proven.

   However, before publishing to the Forum, I presented my case privately to a moderator, hoping that someone else could persuade John Deere of the problematic aspects and effect the necessary changes in the mechanical policies implemented as moderation.  I did not even need to present any argument, the facts as evidenced were immediately acknowledged as compelling and persuasive and probative of non-trivial concern as an impact against the purposes and principles of Liberty Forum and a deception of Liberty Forum readers.

   Whether the case was presented to John Deere is beyond my knowledge.  I received no indication whatever of any impending action on, or even discussion of, my evidence.  After what I considered an appropriate interval of waiting for a follow-up, an opportunity presented itself ~

a Thread of sheer speculation on hype, innuendo and known disinformation, presented as fact and analysis and utterly devoid of either, of which I have direct personal knowledge because I've lived with the people being falsely accused, during the twenty years involved in the false accusations

   Predictably, all hell broke loose.  Also predictably, it had not occurred to me that this would happen.  My evidence was compelling and persuasive, additional evidence I have still not disclosed was absolutely conclusive.  I did not disclose what my logs revealed about other Liberty Forum virtual identities of the hidden actors who were masquerading as Daisy11.  Instead, my disclosures notified those actors, openly in public, that denial was utterly vain (there has been no denial), and I expected that Daisy11 would get her Liberty Forum membership back from the collective hasbara party and that would be the end of it.

   Instead, dear Oink decided to play, and Nuke decided to Buzzcut.  And then the fun began, tormenting poor old John Deere, busy with more important brilliance, about "privacy" and "tinfoil fantasy."  And of course ~ expunge and denigrate the evidence presented to Liberty Forum readers.

   Now you may elect to fault me on any aspect you wish, but it is not the case that I did not seek a proper course in this.  I did not just decide, on my own, to appoint myself as a citizen Prosecutor and proceed according to Napoleonic law as practiced in Louisiana, Evidence first and then an Indictment resting conclusively on it, unlike adversarial justice, which levels an accusation and then goes looking for something to convince a jury who don't know what evidence looks like.  The upshot here is that I did not just casually find a way to stir up a commotion, I just happened to casually find hard evidence of deliberate deception of Liberty Forum readers and took it as near to the top as I was able.

   And yes ~ my discovery of "the evidence" was pure serendipity, I hadn't been poring over archives and logs looking for spooks, it was completely off-handed and a minor element of casual private conversation.  Just on a whim, completely out of the blue, I took a peek and it jumped out at me in less than five minutes.  The rest of the one hour or so was following the leads and verifying the facts with hard, public record evidence and phone calls to ISP operators.

   Plan Daisy was sloppy in terms of concealment, the nearest thing to professionalism was one proxy most probably used by only one individual, most probably used for personal, not organizational, reasons.  But I didn't use embassy contacts in the muslim world to verify that, I can't waste assets to go bribe ISP operators in foreign countries for something this trivial and amateurish and besides, I don't speak [language deleted in conformity with LF "Privacy" Policy] and I already had everything I needed.  It was altogether too easy.

   This clearly was nothing approaching a "professional" operation, a "paid boiler room," a "Mossad mission" or anything of the kind.  I doubt whether any of the actors has ever even met a katsa, or even bears any resemblance to the sayyanim, I think it was a spontaneous amateur hasbara experiment ~ a prank, really ~ that took off for them.  As "sinister" as that.

   It was still highly effective as a covert floor party, even with its limited impact.  And it was still a subversive manipulation of Liberty Forum readers and our public discussion of political affairs.  Which all also makes it a textbook case, below.  Any bunch of college students could do it from their dormitory rooms.  My pubescent school children could do it without getting caught.

   That's why floor parties exist:  they work.

   They don't even need any tinfoil.

   And now the injury.  To Liberty Forum readers and to Liberty Forum purposes and to Liberty Forum principles.  There's plenty.  And it's still continuing while Plan Daisy has vanished to the dressing room to design a new costume, "Phoenixed" until it's ready to fly again.

   We are supposed to be ~ people suppose we are ~ transmitting effective tools of political engagement here.  This is the purpose of any gathering of like-oriented individuals with goals whether mundane or noble.  We are not here to fool and cozen each other into blind adoption of uncertain agendas.  That is completely contrathetical to the entire concept of a marketplace of ideas, to the preservation and protection of liberty, and to the advancement of the commonweal.

   Instead we are beset with agendas to deceive, and a situation of corruption of public affairs and curtailment of liberty manifest to all who care to look around them.  And amidst this sea of mendacity, floor parties are fielded to advance an agenda of depriving Liberty Forum readers of the very capacities they come here to seek, for realization of effective political tools and methodologies for recovering what has been stolen from then ~ their political liberties and the helm of their own directions.

   Plan Daisy is a textbook case of a covert floor party.  It is of a relatively new design for floor parties, peculiarly adapted to the Web environment and Web discussion forums and dependent on features unique to the Web for its effectivity.  It includes the necessary rudimentary elements for functionality, is easily analyzed to show where additional effectivity could be added by other missing elements ~ for example of command and control, which appears to have been minimal in the Plan ~ and displays the desirability of effective concealment when the use of the design calls for covert operation, such as in the creation of a megapersonality like "Daisy11" or the Meshuryan team at Microsoft Networks' discussion forums, past masters on every detail of Palestine going back eleventy-thousand years and everything else under the sun, they're crackerjack and running a score of virtual personalities that are hard to recognize as their hasbara collective.

The differences remain in the "injury" area.  I will probably argue that the most a hasbara group can accomplish is to present us with a super-erudite rebuttal-on-the-ready Professor Daisy, while in fact it's a collective effort and thus not spectacular.  But no one alleged Daisy to be so formidable content-wise.  So, no injury.  Both LSJohn and Randal made a similar point."    LOL!  You're writing the article for me!  I'm adding these comments at the top after seeing how I responded to your PM.  I'm adding this PM (in part) and posting it, it's finished.  (I think. I'll check it again and see.)    I love how this works:  I haven't a clue and then someone asks a question or raises a point, with sincerity (that's absolutely critical but it doesn't have to reside, necessarily, in the questioner or the advocate, it can be in the gallery), and out of the blue the proper response starts falling from my fingertips onto the keyboard and thence to the screen where I find out what it's about.  It's been like that for me for thirty years now ~ and today it's a flood, I can't get away from my desk.    Let me know if you'd mind if I included part of THESE top comments in a sidebar box in the article.  I'll put it at the link I sent you presently insha'ALLAH.    So ... I watched and read this ...

   These floor parties, these "Professor Daisy" operations, are everywhere on the Web.  Usually you don't see them until some discussion starts about Palestine or AIPAC, Israel's American lobby, known to all American politicians simply as "The Lobby" because they all know they dare not oppose it in anything on pain of exile from the halls of power at the very least.  You cannot make a comment on the Web that impacts or even touches on Israeli interests without it being at least seen by an Israeli loyalist.  They're extremely efficient and very good at this hasbara ~ looking after the interests of the group, which everyone should do, actually.

   The "nazis" say "Everywhere you look is a joo."  It's true ~ although seldom blatantly obvious and not remotely objectionable ~ so people go for the imputations and sometimes the nazis can find some place where the imputations are half-true, but more often not.  And so it goes, whenever the target party involved ~ whoever it is, our example here is the textbook Plan Daisy that happens to implicate the very best of these guardians of their own ~ loses sight of first principles and becomes overly cynical beyond merely "self-interested."

   But better would be if the response turned into "Look closer ~ everywhere you look there's also a Catholic and a Baptist and a muslim and an atheist, they're all working together and look what they're doing for everybody.  That's how it works, people helping each other by working together productively."  It's not a zero-sum game, wealth grows when we grow it, it's in short supply only where it's not being created by the incredibly productive critter known as homo sapiens sapiens, who grows stuff.

   Floor parties are a tool, a political instrumentality that serves function and accomplishes good ~ like these common hasbara groups sitting on EVERY public forum usually silently but there, just in case something comes up that's "good for the Jews" ~ or otherwise.  Everyone interested ~ truly interested ~ in common liberty should be not only contributing to that "eternal vigilance" which is its price, but able also to contribute with the proper tools.  It's instinctive but it isn't intuitive, learning what and how is what we call "socialization" ~ this stuff is learned and passed on from generation to generation.

   But that isn't the way it is.  "Those tools are for my use, not yours.  You use them for the wrong purposes.  You're taking something away from somebody."  Those were YOUR contentions here, my Catholic advocate friend ~ do you recognize them?  And we were only talking about legitimate networking use of legitimate networking tools to illuminate a legitimate networking method that was being abused ~ albeit with minimal "damage."

   Writ large, the people of every age and every nation have been deprived of the tools they need to preserve their liberty by building liberty anew in each generation, against the parties who've realized their agendas and become institutionalized and entrenched and formidable ~ whereupon those forerunners have fielded the instrumentalities to preclude disruption of their positioning, a naturally-occurring process.  Progress of any kind involves overcoming inertia, gaining momentum, and movement against at least frictional resistance, we become obstacles to those who follow us when we succeed enough to be able to sit down.  And it's almost inevitable that we sit down "in the way" of those who follow, because they're headed in the same direction we were ~ if they are as "right" as we were.

   Neglecting to pass on these tools is to deprive our progeny of liberty.  To conceal them or abuse them so as to delegitimize them is far worse, it's theft.  That's the "injury" here with Plan Daisy.  It accrues to all Liberty Forum readers and worse ~ to our successors and children, as the tool remains unavailable for legitimate use.

   But this is the inevitable tendency in all societies, as parties reach their goals and come under "attack" as others seek to share in the fruits of their accomplishments, whether as a matter of right or as a matter of simple ambition.  There is a measure of legitimacy to not giving a pistol to a toddler.

   But not here at Liberty Forum.

   Is liberty in such short supply that some have to protect what they have by preventing others from getting any?

   Here is a tool, a political instrumentality you can build at home with readily-available materials, a covert agenda floor party used for shaping public discussion of common agenda and political direction.  It works.

   See how it works.  See how to set it up.  See how to use it.  Do it.  It's been done countless times, it's being done everywhere, the only people who don't like it are those who don't know how to do it or don't know it's being done and find out after they've been tricked into furthering an agenda that they oppose.

   To dismiss the contention as "tin foil" and deny it, to malign the illumination and proof of it, to argue "spirit of privacy" when it's no privacy intrusion at all but exposure of explicitly public conduct ~ all these are injury to our children's children's children.  It's merely hiding the tools, stealing them.

   Like with Plan Daisy ~ eleven people pretending to be one abusive, raucous, profane troll at Liberty Forum for a few months, looking like some superJew troublemaker.

   Hmmm ... what have I actually exposed here?  Who benefits?

   Is it everybody?