John Pelan - The Autobiography (Reviewed)

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:40:28 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge"
wrote:


Obviously I've walked in on some psycho-drama between you two, so I'll
just back away slowly and let you two settle this on your own.

Problem is, C.S., it NEVER settles.

John, you know I have great respect for you and your accomplishments.
You know I'm on your side in this. Having said that, let me add this:
SHADDAP. The more you squeeze this pimple, the more he'll spew. You
do yourself no favors by rising to his bait, quite aside from the
ignominy of engaging in a battle of wits with a half-armed man.

John Pelan wrote:
On 18 Dec 2004 09:41:22 -0800, wrote:

On the 8th February 2004 Pelan said the following in this very
newsgroup:

"Be quiet, you damn troll. You'll be heartened to know that the sys
admins at CNW and I shared quite a few chuckles over your ten-page
letter of complaint you posted to my ISP. Really, who do you think
they're going to listen to, a stockholder in their holding company
who
has been on board with them for years or an unemployed nutter from
the
UK with a host of sockpuppet identities?"

Earlier on 2nd February he had said this:

"Indeed! This is quite shocking and will no doubt result in CNW
asking
me if I'd like to purchase another block of stock..."


Thus, whilst liasing with CNW / ISOMEDIA over John Pelan's abusive
behaviour, I asked them to clarify this issue, since it seemed like
Pelan was trying to prevent anyone from complaining about his
abusive
behaviour by suggesting that complaints would be pointless, given
his
importance to the company. In response, their legal counsel replied
as
follows:

"John Pelan is not a shareholder of our company and is only a
customer.
We have called and emailed Mr. Pelan to be more judicious in his
comments on use groups and to cease from claiming ownership of our
company."

Thus Pelan was brazenly caught out in a lie.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that CNW are brushing you off.
Pelan no longer one of their customers, and before he left he was
wildly threatening them with litigation, furious that they had
exposed
his claims as a lie. Besides, the matter involves Pelan, CNW /
ISOMEDIA
and myself, so I can well imagine CNW's wondering quite what your
own
interest in the matter was.

I have these emails stored safely away on my old PC in case I ever
need
to produce them as evidence (in the extremely unlikely event that
Pelan
is stupid enough to try and bluster his way out of the situation).
But
the freely available archive records prove that Pelan did make these
claims. Furthermore, despite being asked pointedly to repeat his
claims, Pelan clammed-up and refused to do so for the few months he
stayed with CNW after having been outed.

So why did he fall silent? Because CNW had warned him that one more
breach of ISP protocol would result in account termination, and at
that
point in time his business website was hosted by them. Thus to
repeat
his lie would result in having his website pulled, which is why for
several months he persistently ducked out of commenting on the
issue.

Again, proof of all this is in the archives. I can't imagine how you
can have failed to find this information. It's there, it's freely
available, and it's very conclusive.

CB

**** off, you tedious little ******.

It's precisely this sort of vile language that undermines your
integrity.


Any search of Usenet will show
that I haven't exactly "fallen silent" at any time in the last year.


Alas not. But you failed to repeat your fraudulent claim when pointedly
challenged, knowing that CNW / ISOMEDIA would litigate against you for
telling lies which involved them.



I *do* opt to ignore your pathetic rantings from time to time, but
that's hardly a matter of "falling silent".


Well, one week you claim that you will forever ignore me, the next you
break that promise, and resort to malicious persobal abuse.


Now why don't you regale the group with tales of what a success you
are as a bookseller (stock just job-lotted on eBay),

Five years "exemplary" service with ABE? Much longer than you managed.

And as for Ebay, I simply disposed of circa 10% of my collection. They
sold instantly, and the buyer is overjoyed with his bargain. I may be
listing individual books - signed Visiaks and M R James's along with
nice William Hope Hodgson 1sts - I havene't decided, but if I do, I'll
be sure to let you know, given that you've taken such a (jealous and
embittered) interest in the matter.


a writer (never
sold anything),

I once offered some experimental stories to Ray Russell, which he
wisely rejected (I'm very glad they never appeared in print). Then I
stood back and re-evaluated the situation, and started writing afresh.
The only person I offered any of them too was David Longhorn at S
Tales, where they all subsequently appeared.

So no, I've not sold anything - yet. But that's because I don't need
the money and I haven't bothered submitting my work to anyone else.
When the twins start school, I'll be able to dedicate proper time to
the matter, and hopefully then my writing career can start proper.
Though I do actually have one 'iron-in-the-fire' as we speak, and am
waiting on response from a production company.

Quite where you get your "Every US and UK publisher immediately dumps
your submissions in the bin" nonsense from amazes me. I've not
submitted anything to anyone except for the three mentioned above.
Either you are lying (again) or feverishly expressing an ungracious
hope.


an editor (doesn't know the difference between desert
and dessert),

I've had a very well respected writer and editor, someone infinitely
more famous and successful than you, express a completely different
opinion.


and a publisher (couldn't sell 300 copies of a
collection by a popular and respected author)

Until Reggie and I linked up, he was known only as a playwright and
biographer, so any 'respect and popularity' he has since acquired as an
author must logically be as a result of the book the Haunted River
published....

I'm not going to discuss the sales issue with you. What other people in
this group don't know is that you have been making sneaky enquiries
about the book through third parties, trying to stir up trouble.
Besides, the book has sold very well, and is close to selling out. In
contrast, many Midnight House and Ashtree books remain in stock several
years after publication, so the words 'greenhouse', 'stones' and
'throwing' spring to mind.

Finally, it's a bit rich for someone who a) nobbled an awards jury, and
b) posted hundreds of messages detailing non-existent faults with the
book, to now query the sales issue. Arguably, the ridiculous criticisms
that you and C Roden heaped upon the book before, during and after
publication dented initial sales.

For example, you authoritatively condemned the book as a flimsy
perfect-bound montrosity, yet one year later, we all realised that you
had got it wrong, and had not known about notch-binding (which my book
is). So your nasty envious little lies may well have put potential
customers off, which therefore makes your current comments about
overall sales appear malicious and hypocritical.



.... The words that come
to mind are "dismal failure".

How can it be a dismal failure when it has been a critical sucess? It
also garnered an IHG nomination.

Come on, admit it. You are still incandescent with rage and envy that
with my first hardback venture, we achieved such great success.

And we did it without haing to pull nepotistic strings of cronyism.....



Perhaps you'll meet with more acclaim in
other walks of life... Oh, that's right... You were sacked from your
last job for gross incompetence and remain on the dole to this day
having no marketable skills whatsoever...


(Sighs).

No, I took them to a Tribunal and agreed to settle out-of-court.

And I'm not 'on the dole'. If you can get your thuggish, chauvinist
wrestler mentality around the concept, I am a fulltime primary
child-carer for three children, two of whom have special needs. You may
have prehistoric, red-necked views about such matters, but I personally
am perfectly happy to put my career on hold to care for my children,
rather than farm them off to a remote nursery.

You are always trying to suggest that we are poverty-stricken no-hopers
etc etc. Please stop embarrassing yourself. We have a very nice house,
no debts, a very small mortgage, and a large collection of valuable &
rare books. We don't need a large income because we have so much
equity.

There, surely even you can understand that, eh? If not, please ask a
grown-up to translate it for you into Urkolease.

CB

Bud Webster wrote:
"C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:

Obviously I've walked in on some psycho-drama between you two, so I'll
just back away slowly and let you two settle this on your own.

Problem is, C.S., it NEVER settles.

Maybe they should meet face-to-face. Seeing each other as a real human
being and not just some text on the screen should help put the debate
into perspective.

Or maybe they'll kill each other. Either way, it's problem solved as far
as the flamewars go.

C.S.Strowbridge

Hoppy, what of your vow to leave this NG on 12/12/04?
wrote in message
oups.com...
[Having decided to leave the venom-filled pit called rec.collecting.books,


--
Bob Finnan
http://bobfinnan.com
wrote in message
ups.com...

John Pelan wrote:
On 18 Dec 2004 09:41:22 -0800, wrote:

On the 8th February 2004 Pelan said the following in this very
newsgroup:

"Be quiet, you damn troll. You'll be heartened to know that the sys
admins at CNW and I shared quite a few chuckles over your ten-page
letter of complaint you posted to my ISP. Really, who do you think
they're going to listen to, a stockholder in their holding company
who
has been on board with them for years or an unemployed nutter from
the
UK with a host of sockpuppet identities?"

Earlier on 2nd February he had said this:

"Indeed! This is quite shocking and will no doubt result in CNW
asking
me if I'd like to purchase another block of stock..."


Thus, whilst liasing with CNW / ISOMEDIA over John Pelan's abusive
behaviour, I asked them to clarify this issue, since it seemed like
Pelan was trying to prevent anyone from complaining about his
abusive
behaviour by suggesting that complaints would be pointless, given
his
importance to the company. In response, their legal counsel replied
as
follows:

"John Pelan is not a shareholder of our company and is only a
customer.
We have called and emailed Mr. Pelan to be more judicious in his
comments on use groups and to cease from claiming ownership of our
company."

Thus Pelan was brazenly caught out in a lie.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that CNW are brushing you off.
Pelan no longer one of their customers, and before he left he was
wildly threatening them with litigation, furious that they had
exposed
his claims as a lie. Besides, the matter involves Pelan, CNW /
ISOMEDIA
and myself, so I can well imagine CNW's wondering quite what your
own
interest in the matter was.

I have these emails stored safely away on my old PC in case I ever
need
to produce them as evidence (in the extremely unlikely event that
Pelan
is stupid enough to try and bluster his way out of the situation).
But
the freely available archive records prove that Pelan did make these
claims. Furthermore, despite being asked pointedly to repeat his
claims, Pelan clammed-up and refused to do so for the few months he
stayed with CNW after having been outed.

So why did he fall silent? Because CNW had warned him that one more
breach of ISP protocol would result in account termination, and at
that
point in time his business website was hosted by them. Thus to
repeat
his lie would result in having his website pulled, which is why for
several months he persistently ducked out of commenting on the
issue.

Again, proof of all this is in the archives. I can't imagine how you
can have failed to find this information. It's there, it's freely
available, and it's very conclusive.

CB

**** off, you tedious little ******.

It's precisely this sort of vile language that undermines your
integrity.


Any search of Usenet will show
that I haven't exactly "fallen silent" at any time in the last year.


Alas not. But you failed to repeat your fraudulent claim when pointedly
challenged, knowing that CNW / ISOMEDIA would litigate against you for
telling lies which involved them.



I *do* opt to ignore your pathetic rantings from time to time, but
that's hardly a matter of "falling silent".


Well, one week you claim that you will forever ignore me, the next you
break that promise, and resort to malicious persobal abuse.


Now why don't you regale the group with tales of what a success you
are as a bookseller (stock just job-lotted on eBay),

Five years "exemplary" service with ABE? Much longer than you managed.

And as for Ebay, I simply disposed of circa 10% of my collection. They
sold instantly, and the buyer is overjoyed with his bargain. I may be
listing individual books - signed Visiaks and M R James's along with
nice William Hope Hodgson 1sts - I havene't decided, but if I do, I'll
be sure to let you know, given that you've taken such a (jealous and
embittered) interest in the matter.


a writer (never
sold anything),

I once offered some experimental stories to Ray Russell, which he
wisely rejected (I'm very glad they never appeared in print). Then I
stood back and re-evaluated the situation, and started writing afresh.
The only person I offered any of them too was David Longhorn at S
Tales, where they all subsequently appeared.

So no, I've not sold anything - yet. But that's because I don't need
the money and I haven't bothered submitting my work to anyone else.
When the twins start school, I'll be able to dedicate proper time to
the matter, and hopefully then my writing career can start proper.
Though I do actually have one 'iron-in-the-fire' as we speak, and am
waiting on response from a production company.

Quite where you get your "Every US and UK publisher immediately dumps
your submissions in the bin" nonsense from amazes me. I've not
submitted anything to anyone except for the three mentioned above.
Either you are lying (again) or feverishly expressing an ungracious
hope.


an editor (doesn't know the difference between desert
and dessert),

I've had a very well respected writer and editor, someone infinitely
more famous and successful than you, express a completely different
opinion.


and a publisher (couldn't sell 300 copies of a
collection by a popular and respected author)

Until Reggie and I linked up, he was known only as a playwright and
biographer, so any 'respect and popularity' he has since acquired as an
author must logically be as a result of the book the Haunted River
published....

I'm not going to discuss the sales issue with you. What other people in
this group don't know is that you have been making sneaky enquiries
about the book through third parties, trying to stir up trouble.
Besides, the book has sold very well, and is close to selling out. In
contrast, many Midnight House and Ashtree books remain in stock several
years after publication, so the words 'greenhouse', 'stones' and
'throwing' spring to mind.

Finally, it's a bit rich for someone who a) nobbled an awards jury, and
b) posted hundreds of messages detailing non-existent faults with the
book, to now query the sales issue. Arguably, the ridiculous criticisms
that you and C Roden heaped upon the book before, during and after
publication dented initial sales.

For example, you authoritatively condemned the book as a flimsy
perfect-bound montrosity, yet one year later, we all realised that you
had got it wrong, and had not known about notch-binding (which my book
is). So your nasty envious little lies may well have put potential
customers off, which therefore makes your current comments about
overall sales appear malicious and hypocritical.



... The words that come
to mind are "dismal failure".

How can it be a dismal failure when it has been a critical sucess? It
also garnered an IHG nomination.

Come on, admit it. You are still incandescent with rage and envy that
with my first hardback venture, we achieved such great success.

And we did it without haing to pull nepotistic strings of cronyism.....



Perhaps you'll meet with more acclaim in
other walks of life... Oh, that's right... You were sacked from your
last job for gross incompetence and remain on the dole to this day
having no marketable skills whatsoever...


(Sighs).

No, I took them to a Tribunal and agreed to settle out-of-court.

And I'm not 'on the dole'. If you can get your thuggish, chauvinist
wrestler mentality around the concept, I am a fulltime primary
child-carer for three children, two of whom have special needs. You may
have prehistoric, red-necked views about such matters, but I personally
am perfectly happy to put my career on hold to care for my children,
rather than farm them off to a remote nursery.

You are always trying to suggest that we are poverty-stricken no-hopers
etc etc. Please stop embarrassing yourself. We have a very nice house,
no debts, a very small mortgage, and a large collection of valuable &
rare books. We don't need a large income because we have so much
equity.

There, surely even you can understand that, eh? If not, please ask a
grown-up to translate it for you into Urkolease.

CB

I'm happy to be corrected, but I think that the only time that the
Harader creature and I have 'locked horns' has been in the last week.

So you're quite welcome to chip in with pertinent observations about
ignoring posts. You certainly aren't trespassing upon any long-running
feud that I'm aware of.

In the meantime I look forward to Harader trying to prove that you are
my sock puppet.

CB

"On the 8th February 2004 Pelan said the following in this very
newsgroup:"

"Earlier on 2nd February he had said this:"

So you keep claiming, but the fact is I cannot find these posts.

"Thus, whilst liasing with CNW / ISOMEDIA over John Pelan's abusive
behaviour, I asked them to clarify this issue . . . . In response,
their legal
counsel replied as follows:"

And their legal counsel told me he never said any such thing to you.

"It doesn't surprise me in the least that CNW are brushing you off."

They are not; they are denying that what you claim is true.

"Pelan no longer one of their customers, and before he left he was
wildly threatening them with litigation, furious that they had exposed
his claims as a lie."

Huh, like any good fish story, this just keeps getting bigger and
bigger.

"Besides, the matter involves Pelan, CNW / ISOMEDIA
and myself, so I can well imagine CNW's wondering quite what your own
interest in the matter was."

Just trying to ascertain what is the truth in this manner. And since
they flatly deny they said what you claimed they said, the truth is
obviously not on your side.

"I have these emails stored safely away on my old PC in case I ever
need
to produce them as evidence . . . ."

Except that CNW denies these emails even exist, or at least do not say
what you claim they say. So your credibility in this case is zero.

"But the freely available archive records prove that Pelan did make
these
claims."

Except you refuse to provide links to them, so again your credibility
is zero.

"Furthermore, despite being asked pointedly to repeat his
claims, Pelan clammed-up and refused to do so for the few months he
stayed with CNW after having been outed."

Since there is no evidence he ever made the claims, why should he
repeat what he never said?

"So why did he fall silent? Because CNW had warned him that one more
breach of ISP protocol would result in account termination . . . ."

Except CNW denies they ever issued such a warning.

"Again, proof of all this is in the archives."

Then provide links to the posts.

"I can't imagine how you can have failed to find this information."
Because they do not exist?

Kevin L. O'Brien

wrote:

In the meantime I look forward to Harader trying to prove that you are
my sock puppet.

If they don't believe I'm a real person, they can look me up on Google.

C.S.Strowbridge

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:50:32 GMT, Bud Webster
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:40:28 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge"
wrote:


Obviously I've walked in on some psycho-drama between you two, so I'll
just back away slowly and let you two settle this on your own.

Problem is, C.S., it NEVER settles.

John, you know I have great respect for you and your accomplishments.
You know I'm on your side in this. Having said that, let me add this:
SHADDAP. The more you squeeze this pimple, the more he'll spew. You
do yourself no favors by rising to his bait, quite aside from the
ignominy of engaging in a battle of wits with a half-armed man.


Bud, I consider you a friend, and I have the utmost respects for your
accomplishments. However, as an editor I must must take you task for
your analogy; Barker is not at all analogus to a pimple. With a
pimple, once it has busrt (or been squeezed) that's the end of the
matter); Barker is far more akin to a syphillitic chancre. Recurring,
unpleasant, and continually spewing pus. To make the analogy even more
apt, one need merely look at Google and view the progressive mental
deteriation of Barker to conclude that he suffers from a progressive
mental illness which may or may not be a symptom of syphillis.

As far as matching wits, it's really not my fault if Hoppy persists in
bringing a nail-clipper to a gunfight,

Cheers,

John

The fact that you can't find these posts in Google's
alt.books.ghost-fiction's archives doesn't surprise me in the elast.
After all, you couldn't spot a blatant Pixies reference in another
post.

Really, it is pointless exchanging words with you. You are incredibly
stupid or incompetent. A five year old child could search Google's
archives and find those two Pelan posts in less than five seconds. Your
inability to complete the task in two months is beyond laughable.
CB

PS. That small chubby thing on your face is your nose.

Sock puppet allegations of child abuse, quack diagnosis of syphillis
and mental illness, ugly references to male rape, faeces and pus - what
illuminating insights you give us into the workings of the John Pelan
mind.

CB