I probably shouldn't respond to this, seeing as Annie says below that she has killfiled me. However, in the hope that now she's no longer reading my posts, this debate can become more relaxed and healthy, I shall reply:

--- Ashton7@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 3/2/01 4:07:50 AM Eastern

Standard Time, nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk writes:

<< To accuse Dr Jenkins of not respecting his informants' wishes is very much an accusation of being ethically suspect, and one which could seriously damage his professional credibility.>>

I have now pointed out at least twice, maybe more, that I never accused Henry of anything. I made no moral judgment whatsoever. If you chose to interpret my words that way, you are mistaken.

Again, to quote exactly, Archive #43924:

<This is, in fact, the crux of the problem many fans had with Camille Bacon-Smith and Henry Jenkins' books about fandom. Many fans were highly offended that they had been part of some sort of "study." Personally, I have never had a problem with either book or either author... but, then, both authors had spoken directly to both Leah and myself and I remember even signing a release with one of them. So, we *did* know what they were up to. Apparently, there were a good number of fans who didn't know and didn't take kindly to be the basis of someone's academic lab experiment>

I am not going to offer an intepretation. I am just going to let that post stand, as evidence.

I have also repeatedly pointed out that you and anyone else who interpreted my words that way are mistaken. The only quotes you have produced from me have proven my point. At this juncture, you are now calling me a liar and are refusing to accept that fact that you obviously misunderstood.

I'm slightly confused, on two points.

1) Could anybody else, reading the quote from me at the beginning of this e-mail, tell me where I called Annie a liar? I have read that paragraph, and the posts leading up to it, over three times and

2) If both Iain (in Archive #44168) and myself have misunderstood the above statement, then perhaps the statement should have been more clearly worded.

I demand an apology.

I'll apologise to you when you apologise to me for your earlier post accusing me of lax professional ethics, insensitivity etc, in archive post #43924 (in response, btw, to a discussion I was having with *Carol.* Not yourself). Which you haven't done.

Well, I didn't "twist" your words. I quoted them directly. There were no emoticons that I remember indicating you were joking and, furthermore, you were quite obviously trying to imply that it was I who regarded Henry as a "horrible demon bloke." Once again, I must ask that you stop putting words in my mouth

Something else I have to raise. What I said (quoted in Archive #44165) was:

<< BTW, Una, you've met him-- is Jenkins really this horrible demon bloke who came in and didn't tell anyone bar a few what he was really doing? >

Now if I had wanted to put words in your mouth, I would say:

"Una, is it true what Annie says about Jenkins being a horrible demon bloke?"

Which I didn't do.

Furthermore, since more people than just Annie spoke out against Jenkins earlier, I did not feel I particularly singled yourself out in that post.

and, in fact, you owe me an apology for that one, too.

As I've just made clear, no I don't.

You can have the last word. I won't know if it's an apology or more of the same nonsense, anyway. You're on my delete list.

Why demand an apology and then killfile the person from whom you want an apology? Somebody else please point out the logic in this to me?

Thank you, Annie, for allowing me the last word.

Fiona

The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net

____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie