Wolf, you say: "When you posted to Agora about my actions as Hub Leader you knew there was no truth to that statement."

Really? I doubt anyone has forgotten your Hub Leader actions of the past, banning anyone with an opposing view or, specifically, anyone who questioned your actions in your attempt to perform as Hub leader. As I have stated before "Everyone KNOWS".

You went off on the issue of "Off Topic" posts by Mark4321. Tom NEVER MENTIONED OT POSTS! That was your own little tangent, and WAS NOT THE ISSUE. Perhaps you "went there" because the only Mark post that Tom acted on was one that was, indeed, OT. YOU, on the other hand, let the redundant negative posts by Mark, where numerous violations were reported by 5 different forum users, slide with an "Ignore Violation". THIS was the issue. And what was a predominate theme in those redundant posts? The ramifications if TPL failed to respond to Barco's motion for SJ. Tom's issue had to do with your complete failure to act responsibly as a Hub Leader in dealing with Mark's violating posts. This is what he specifically referred to in his "Censorship" post that got this thread rolling, violating posts by Mark. So perhaps this is why Tom didn't respond to your demand for him to produce evidence of mishandling OT posts - because IT WAS NOT THE ISSUE!

Perhaps it is mere coincidence that the subject of Mark's redundant posts was PRECISELY the topic of the PACER you failed to timely post. While you provide an excuse for having missed it, I and others have gone to PACER and looked. To effectively review what has happened on a particular case, you look to case history. It's all there, including the subject of the motion (or whatever). How could you have possibly missed it?

Then, you posted the PACER in question, on Feb 24. That PACER was deliberately altered by YOU to remove any indication of the specific date of its release, which was Feb 4. The really silly aspect of this is that if you would have just added a "2" thereby altering the date to Feb 24, and not leave it "Feb (blank)". That probably would have worked, none the wiser. Heck, if you're going to go to the trouble to alter the thing, alter it to remove suspicions, not create them! LOL

Put it all together. Mark's posts about ramifications if TPL failed to respond to Barco's motion, and the fact that the response PACER, issued on Feb 4, was not shared until the afternoon before the issue was to be addressed in court. If the PACER had been timely posted, the Mark posts along these lines - the "base" posts and the redundant ones - would have been moot. But apparently this was not what YOU wanted. YOU, for whatever reason, wanted that FUD to exist.

Interestingly, upon closer examination, it has been determined that this was NOT the first time a significant PACER was withheld and posted well after the fact. Other PACERs were likewise withheld, up to two months, and the specific dates were removed on those "late posted" PACERs as well. The above was not the first time you've pulled this.

Now, you can argue the "I paid for it" BS all you want. The fact of the matter is that YOU established yourself as "PACER Czar". People depended on YOU to perform. You didn't. And, in fact, deliberately altered the PACERs to hide your actions/failures. Integrity?

Likewise, people depended on YOU to properly perform as Hub Leader. You don't. Everyone KNOWS you don't. And everyone KNOWS you go out of your way to protect negative, pointless (if the truth were known), redundant, violating posts. YOU placed yourself in the position of controlling posts and who can post to the apparent favor of some and to the disadvantage of others. Hardly a "level playing field". Integrity?

The basics of the above are factual. I've already provided example of redundant Mark posts. The PACERs are there, as posted by you available in your Agora post history as compared to the actual PACERs available to anyone via PACER (BTW, up to $10 worth of PACERs, or 125 pages, can be viewed FREE of charge per qtr).

You say that "When you [Tommeeek in the "Censorship!!" post that got 34 thumbs] posted to Agora about my actions as Hub Leader you knew there was no truth to that statement".

But what did Tom say?

"Somebody on this board, probably a hub leader and not me, is going to great lengths to defend Mark4321, and manipulate our board."

Now tell us how THAT is not a true statement. Also explain how you surmised that Tom was talking about YOU. YOU were not mentioned in that post. But it was easy for you (and EVERYONE) to determine which Hub Leader he was suspecting.

You expect an apology from Tom? How about YOU making an apology to everyone here for your actions, past and recent? You've been caught doing EXACTLY as Tom depicted, and much more.

Some will undoubtedly jump to your defense. Watch closely. Based on the facts of the above, do they have a leg to stand on? Who all was complicit?

BTW, with all your sensitivity to monitoring OT posts, why is the post I'm replying to, and all those in association, considered by YOU to be On Topic?

FWIW,

SGE