John Burton Sour Grapes...Really!!!
- Thread starter Wedge
- Start date
- Status
RJB,
I'll let Wilson answer your question, but seriously. Let me tell you something, I bet John has started 500/1000 maybe more threads involving his cases that I haven't ever peeped on. You will be hard pressed to find a single instance of me talking about cases, where John has not made it a point to say something negative about me or the casemaker. That includes my For Sale section posts, which BTW are taboo to interupt / cause trouble in.
So for you to say I do this anytime John posts is a HUGE stretch. In fact I'll say that it has been MY threads wrecked or thrashed by John 95% of any confilct we have had.
I make it a POINT to stay out of Johns threads and can back it up by fact.
JV
Let's get a few things straight
1. None of my family is a member of AZ Billiards nor did they vote. So leave my family out of it John. I never mentioned yours.
2. No one became a member of AZ Billiards to vote for the case. That is simply not true. Not sure who mentioned it or on what post but it was mentioned.
3. I asked my friends on AZ to look at the poll and vote for the case if it was worthy. Guilty as charged. John, how do you know that none of the other case owners did not do the same...you don't. I am probably just fortunate enough to have a lot of friends on AZ
4. John, on one of your posts you said I called you a liar. Please show me where I did that.
5. I asked you early on to stop sending me PM's on this topic but you continue. So I will continue to copy every PM you send me on this thread. If you don't like it quit sending them. Here is your latest:
Thank you. - Today, 02:53 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't expect you to go public but I am glad you did. I appreciate every opportunity to promote this great craft and personally to promote our work.
Every time you or anyone else attacks me in public it only gives me a platform to tackle the subject head-on and expound with my view. And you know how I love to talk.
So I wish to extend a heartfelt thank you. Not only am I glad to be able to openly address my concerns about the campaigning you did but I also got to show off the work again. I appreciate it.
Best to you,
John
There are the facts.
Wedge
1. None of my family is a member of AZ Billiards nor did they vote. So leave my family out of it John. I never mentioned yours.
2. No one became a member of AZ Billiards to vote for the case. That is simply not true. Not sure who mentioned it or on what post but it was mentioned.
3. I asked my friends on AZ to look at the poll and vote for the case if it was worthy. Guilty as charged. John, how do you know that none of the other case owners did not do the same...you don't. I am probably just fortunate enough to have a lot of friends on AZ
4. John, on one of your posts you said I called you a liar. Please show me where I did that.
5. I asked you early on to stop sending me PM's on this topic but you continue. So I will continue to copy every PM you send me on this thread. If you don't like it quit sending them. Here is your latest:
Thank you. - Today, 02:53 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't expect you to go public but I am glad you did. I appreciate every opportunity to promote this great craft and personally to promote our work.
Every time you or anyone else attacks me in public it only gives me a platform to tackle the subject head-on and expound with my view. And you know how I love to talk.
So I wish to extend a heartfelt thank you. Not only am I glad to be able to openly address my concerns about the campaigning you did but I also got to show off the work again. I appreciate it.
Best to you,
John
There are the facts.
Wedge
??? Not hardly Dave. You should have simply enforced the rules you already have in place. Of course I engage people who say things about me. That is part of what a forum is about. The point I am making which you are missing is that in the past you have allowed people to flame me quite heavily with zero repercussion and only stepped in when the argument got well out of hand on both sides.
Recently you allowed two people, one of whom is Joe Van Buren, to essentially accuse me of being a pedophile. You banned a person for calling Jenny a certain word but it's ok with you if people call me a child molester? If that's not worth a ban then I fail to see what is.
No. I can deal just fine with anyone's opinion. What I can't deal with is defamation. I should not have to explain the difference to you.
You're probably right. But that does not change the fact that you play favorites and allow people to defame me and break the rules on namecalling and harassment. Sorry but that's what you have done and what you continue to do.
That is absolutely not true. I take my lumps and admit when I wrong. What I believe Dave is that you don't moderate fairly. The record shows it in my case and in the case of many others. I was wrong to meet people's personal attacks with similar vitriol. At times I felt I had no choice as appeals to you yielded no help. Now however I am much more at peace and choose to respond to attacks with civility. Even to your attacks.
I agree in premise. Ultimately it's my choice in how to respond to attacks. But it's your moderation that allows a climate where attacks are frequent and vitriolic. On other boards with more consistent moderation and low tolerance things are peaceful and the members don't attack each other. Once in a while there will be a flare-up which is quickly quelled but a moderator. Those boards also have many more moderators to stay on top of things. As I have said I don't envy you with the responsibility you have volunteered for. You have a lot of members and threads to keep up with. I am sorry that in the past I have argued pretty hard and made it tough for you at times.
I should not have been banned in the first place. You can have your opinion Dave but as long as you refuse to see your part in how the forum as a whole has played out you will always find scapegoats in the people like me who are willing to stand up and tell you their perspective.
I told Mike that if he wants me to leave all he has to do is ask. I have been nice to you and everyone else here. Even in the face of you allowing people to call me a child molester I have maintained my decorum. You are forcing the animosity Dave. I have a lot of people here who really like me and like what I contribute to the forum. But because you allowed a core group to stalk and harass me they are now permanent fixtures in my forum life. They will needle and jab at every opportunity just as Joe is clearly doing here. And they know that you will do nothing to stop them.
My daughter is into My Little Pony. In that series the Pegasus ponies are responsible for keeping the sky clear. You could erase the cloud by applying the rules to the antagonists but you refuse to do it.
Well, this is a loaded question because we can't very well compare cases can we?
But my opinion as stated above and repeated here is that with moderation that quells flame wars before they ever get started, and which shows little to no tolerance for mean personal attacks and defamation then there would be a vibrant community where lots of industry folks would like to be in order to engage their customers and fans. I personally think I bring a lot to the table as an industry veteran and world billiard traveler as well as decent pool player.
But in the past that has been tainted by my responses to personal attacks. I gave as good as I got and that was not productive at all. But if you care at all about AZB and growth then you want people like me who have a lot to offer the community. You should be protective of all the members but especially of the ones who are professionals, both players and industry insiders.
These are the people who can create useful content that readers want and need. People don't need flame wars and juvenile mudslinging. They need good conversation that is as factual as it can be. I am one of the people that has actual facts about a segment of the billiard industry. So that's why I am "worth it".
Does that grant me a license to be a jerk? Absolutely not. Should it provide me with a little extra protection against attacks, I think so. People like me are bigger targets and part of your job should be to encourage professionals to want to be here. In my opinion of course and looking at it from a business standpoint.
So there you go. You asked.
Just my opinion, but since John has been allowed back, he has been civil and followed the rules. Is he prolific in his posting, yes. But he hasn't broken any rules (that I am aware of), and seems to being held to a different standard, due to his past.
I would think at this point, he should only be held liable for actions made since his return. And shouldn't be subject to any more harassment than any other member.
Of course, if john were to revert to his old ways, I believe his past would then dictate a different level of enforcement, due to that history. He has told Mike that he would behave, and he has. What else can he do?
Um, "friends and family" is a simply a saying to indicate people close to you. I wasn't eve including your actual family in anything,
I never said anyone did.
You are correct, I don't know if anyone else did it. I just happened to ONLY hear about you doing it and apparently some of your "friends" didn't feel that you were doing the right thing.
I lumped you in with Joe. He has called me a liar several times. You didn't call me a liar you simply are mistaken as to my motivation. It's not sour grapes as you termed it, merely disappointment that there is a taint floating around because of your campaigning.
Please don't act like you have received a barrage of PMs. You have received TWO. Both of which you posted. I am sorry Wedge but I felt like saying thank you in private and not in public.
The least you could do for ruining the Case of the Year poll is not to act like a victim.
Well thank you for standing up to admit that you were campaigning. And I believe you when you say you asked them vote on your case if it was worthy. And I want to say VERY CLEARLY again that it IS worthy of the win.
I just wish that either I had never found out about your campaining or that you hadn't done it. There was absolutely no need to start this thread and bring this out but since you did I am glad you did because I can now REALLY put it behind me.
Joe,
John posts all the time and your correct that you dont post on everyone of his posts, but when it has happened in the past(no matter who started it) it has gotten ugly and imho your just as bad as him the way you insult him and his cases being made in China. You deserve to be talked to just as much as him by Mr. Wilson . There's alot of name calling and accusation's on your part. Im not the only one that feels this way and that's all I have to say!
Later,
Ray
To many points that are simply smoke John.
Like I said...you opt to engage anyone who you feel is a detractor.
They are entitled an opinion too. You feel they are not.
You don't make a good victim. You'd like me to feel you are the victim but I see otherwise. I feel like you are manipulative in your efforts.
You are effusively verbose. In this regard, quantity as not the same as quality.
You put a great deal of effort into your replies and arguments that could better be used to make friends instead of attempting to bury your perceived enemies with words.
I'm not trying to convince you. I am telling you. These are facts from my perspective.
If you NEVER reply to the people you feel are attacking you..not much of a fight, is it? John, you have already created this animosity. You own it.
You made bad blood between yourself and many people and now want safe harbor.
I cannot moderate it out of existence, nor will I try..just for you.
Like I said...you opt to engage anyone who you feel is a detractor.
They are entitled an opinion too. You feel they are not.
You don't make a good victim. You'd like me to feel you are the victim but I see otherwise. I feel like you are manipulative in your efforts.
You are effusively verbose. In this regard, quantity as not the same as quality.
You put a great deal of effort into your replies and arguments that could better be used to make friends instead of attempting to bury your perceived enemies with words.
I'm not trying to convince you. I am telling you. These are facts from my perspective.
If you NEVER reply to the people you feel are attacking you..not much of a fight, is it? John, you have already created this animosity. You own it.
You made bad blood between yourself and many people and now want safe harbor.
I cannot moderate it out of existence, nor will I try..just for you.
.............and BTW, Joe, you are on thin ice as well.
Not the first time I've had to speak to you either.
You both may think you're too valuable that I won't ban you just to keep the peace here....you'd both be dead wrong.
My days can be spent in other ways than dealing with petty BS.
Not the first time I've had to speak to you either.
You both may think you're too valuable that I won't ban you just to keep the peace here....you'd both be dead wrong.
My days can be spent in other ways than dealing with petty BS.
If I had WANTED any particular case to win then that case would have won. The voting was private so you would have had no way to know that 400 new accounts were registered to skew the vote. Karen used to be the administrator for a couple thousand university students. One message to them and AZB gains hundreds of new members.
Don't worry about it though my days of running popularity contests like this is over for this very reason. It was a stupid stupid stupid thing for me to do because I really loathe such beauty contests where the craftsmanship and construction and protection and overall build isn't considered.
And yes, I call campaigning unethical in this situation. I am not the only person who felt that way either. I just felt that the cases should have been left alone to let people judge them without any extra influence.
OR it should have been opened up to allow everyone to run around and solicit votes. Personally I prefer the former.
I didn't want any particular case to win. My intention was to show off the cases and I did. You can assume all the motivation you want.
And in fact a half-chinese case DID win. I think Long Chan should get some of the credit for providing the interior that holds up the outer skin. I think I will send the good folks at Long Chan a note and let them know that a Justis won Case of the Year on an AZB Poll. I am sure they would like to work that into their upcoming advertising and perhaps make a lower priced replica of the winning case as a limited series.
If so then maybe they will make enough to pay Jack what they owe him. Could work out for everyone after all.
That seems appropriate.
John,
I'll say this, if you stop lying I might cut you some slack. I wasn't even aware of your accusation of pedophilia until you mentioned it in another arguement. Quite frankly John, I find it the most sickening rumor imaginable. In fact I had to go look for your arguement with another AZer to see where it came from. However, I have heard this about your buddy. I just thought the two rumors somehow got thrown together and comingled. I woulnd't even publically slam you for it unless there was an arrest or pictures to prove it happened. But if its out there, its not because of me. If I mentioned it in an arguement with YOU after you said it, then its on you, because I had no idea about it until a recent thread explosion.
JV
Let Jack Justis out of this thread
Jack has not posted so John you should let his business dealings with Long Chan out of it. It is simply wrong to suggest that an overseas case manufacturer make a less expensive copy to pay Jack.
"I didn't want any particular case to win. My intention was to show off the cases and I did. You can assume all the motivation you want.
And in fact a half-chinese case DID win. I think Long Chan should get some of the credit for providing the interior that holds up the outer skin. I think I will send the good folks at Long Chan a note and let them know that a Justis won Case of the Year on an AZB Poll. I am sure they would like to work that into their upcoming advertising and perhaps make a lower priced replica of the winning case as a limited series.
If so then maybe they will make enough to pay Jack what they owe him. Could work out for everyone after all."
Wedge
Jack has not posted so John you should let his business dealings with Long Chan out of it. It is simply wrong to suggest that an overseas case manufacturer make a less expensive copy to pay Jack.
"I didn't want any particular case to win. My intention was to show off the cases and I did. You can assume all the motivation you want.
And in fact a half-chinese case DID win. I think Long Chan should get some of the credit for providing the interior that holds up the outer skin. I think I will send the good folks at Long Chan a note and let them know that a Justis won Case of the Year on an AZB Poll. I am sure they would like to work that into their upcoming advertising and perhaps make a lower priced replica of the winning case as a limited series.
If so then maybe they will make enough to pay Jack what they owe him. Could work out for everyone after all."
Wedge
I received a PM from Wedge. We have always got along pretty well.
Just the same, I wouldn't let an Internet AZ board acquaintance influence my decision to vote either way.
I looked at all the cases and it was a hard decision as to me, they were all worthy of being Case of the Year.
I did end up voting for his case and that was based on which case I would like to be seen with walking into a pool hall.
It was clearly my favorite case and my vote wasn't swayed by his PM.
I could have voted for any.
Just the same, I wouldn't let an Internet AZ board acquaintance influence my decision to vote either way.
I looked at all the cases and it was a hard decision as to me, they were all worthy of being Case of the Year.
I did end up voting for his case and that was based on which case I would like to be seen with walking into a pool hall.
It was clearly my favorite case and my vote wasn't swayed by his PM.
I could have voted for any.
You should have left me out of it. Just accepted your win and how you got it, taken the extremely mild rebuke I sent you and gone on your way.
Long Chan is being mentioned because it's relevant to the discussion. I was not SERIOUSLY proposing that Long Chan make another copy of a Justis case to pay Jack what they owe him and I would never contact them at all much less to talk about Justis or his cases.
Joe Van Buren is the one who brought "China" into the discussion. He used my association with Jiasen to denigrate and further lie about me while at the same time completely ignoring Jack's partnership with Long Chan.
Neither of you can have it both ways. You can't be allowed to continue to knock me and knock where and who I do business with while ignoring the elephant in the room. ;-)
I think the only solution to this fiasco is dropping Joe, John, and Jimbo (3 large white men, the triple J's) into a Hunger Games arena, and we can bet it out on the Action Room as to who emerges alive. Who will be the crafty trapper? Who will engage first? What alliances will be made???
I proposed this to Jimbo and his response was (I believe verbatim), "I will swiftly kill them both single-handedly." FWIW, my money's on Jimbo.
-roger (John, swivel away from the computer and finish my case!)
I proposed this to Jimbo and his response was (I believe verbatim), "I will swiftly kill them both single-handedly." FWIW, my money's on Jimbo.
-roger (John, swivel away from the computer and finish my case!)
Last edited:
- Status