FEBRUARY 18, 2012 12:25AM

Brain Damage

Rate: 10 Flag

Yesterday, I spent some time reading up on a couple of posts here that garnered a lot of attention.  I mean A LOT of attention.

I started with the “Red Alert” post by Kim Gamble, which totally flabbergasted me.  So I went and read a few posts by Diary Of A Hopeful Starving Student, to see if I could get a baseline for what was going on.  I guess I’m either too sane, or y’all are too damn crazy because I couldn’t for the life of me figure out what the hell the problem was.

It SEEMS like DOAHSS apparently had professed her undying love for another OSer, neilpaul, and Mr. Gamble for some inexplicable reason decided to call bullshit.

Now, MAYBE there was a lot of behind-the-scenes back-and-forths going on that I wasn’t privy to – and if there were, please note that I DO NOT WANT TO BE PRIVY TO THEM.  But based on what I saw, I don’t get why Kim was so taken aback to the point that he held a lynching party.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for fun and games.  But that seemed like a whole bunch of you got together and tried to run off someone you didn’t like.

There are PLENTY of nutcases here.  I should know, there were a few around when I was a kid.  We called them “the children of Mr. and Mrs. Nucking Futs”.  And we avoided them, because there is nothing noble about a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

So, I’m left here tonight wondering why the hell that strange fruit was hung out on the OS tree a few days ago.  If it was because someone was acting loony, all I can say is – shit, that’s a regular occurrence here.  If it was because someone was perceived to be “stalking” someone else, all I can say is – shit, you harass management about that.  But if it was just a case of tossing an M-80 into a crowd to watch the dancing, then I don’t know what the hell to say.

I’m guessing there’s a full moon out. 




Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
"there is nothing noble about a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent"

Yep. But if it weren't for the dust-ups, how would we practice our writing skillz?
Very true. And I totally mis-read this dust-up. Took me nearly a week to figure out what the hell was going on, and by that time I'd already posted this.

I'm just surprised that here we are, nearly a month later, and the damn thing is still going on. I think this is the longest dust-up I've witnessed here.

Maybe there should be a cake or something...
This whole thing would be going on in an alternate universe if V 1. Hadn't told us about her love and then deleted the post, and 2. If she would let it drop. All of the players had moved on. Of course, they could ignore her. Ostracism works.
This has come around again thanks to Kim Gamble 's blog. I was fairly new on the site when that whole Red Alert thing went on. Had no idea who neil paul was, or Diary, either. I could not begin to fathom why Kim Gamble wanted to put that out there. I do remember it going on forever.
Hmmmm... so I see. maybe you could provide some clarification for them, then.

"If it was because someone was perceived to be “stalking” someone else, all I can say is – shit, you harass management about that."

When I mentioned "stalking", I was referring to DOAHSS allegedly stalking neilpaul.

Nothing more, nothing less. As stated, I totally mis-read the situation since I missed the initial dust-up between DOAHSS and neilpaul.

This post is what happens when you come into the conversation in the middle, don't have a fucking clue what's going on, and so make some bald-faced assumptions that turn out to be completely wrong.

Which is why I left it up.
One of the things that cracks me up here is the Gamble element. And the Gamble element that cracks me up is a special one.

When the Boston Marathon bombing occurred, Gamble wrote that Americans where over reacting. I posted something after seeing it on the news right after it happened. I was kind of just live blogging it, so to speak. Later I read Gamble's sor of complaint that Americans were paying attention to that while so many more people were dying somewhere overseas. You get the idea.

Ok, the weird Gamble angle was when this recent thing started, where Gamble posted about "being accused publicly", Israel had been bombing Syria for two or three days. I wasn't going to point it out, but if you say one situation is more serious overseas, and the one connected to you is evidence of over reacting or being self involved....wouldn't this be one? Israel bombing Syria was huge. I didn't see it covered. Gamble was fine talking about being accused whole Syria burned.

Ok, add to that, Gamble creates a "RED ALERT" about getting involved in someone else's affair? Presumably no one was getting bombed that week...(or those several weeks)

Don't say "stalk" or "harass" with regard to Gamble. Interesting that it was observed in February of 2012, and now. Gotta change those words out, but this activity repeats with an amazing similarity. RED ALERT! DRIVE HIM FROM THE INTERNET!
Bill Beck - when I referenced "stalking", I was NOT referring to Kim Gamble. Rather, I was referring to Diary of a Hopeful Starving Student since it was alleged she was stalking neilpaul at one point.

I have not witnessed Kim stalking anyone myself - but then, I don't spend a lot of time here since most of the writing is not my cuppa, if ya know what I mean.

This post was written because Kim created a post where a bunch of OS members seemingly ganged up on Diary for what seemed to me no apparent reason.

Took a long time for the reason to BECOME apparent. Again, see the comment I left after onislandtime commented.

Thanks for stopping by, folks.
I get it. I also get that your use of it was not questioned. You said several other things. You said, "lynching", "strange fruit", and harassment. I get called on each one of those things.

The fact remains, there was a public lynching, as it were. Kind of the point.
Like you said in your post, I don't care what went on in the event. I did not care what went on in the recent event. I did not go seeking it. PM's came to me, and Gamble seeks me out to fight repeatedly. This came at me from both directions. In answer to this, Gamble acts like I invented it, and no post was ever removed because of his involvement. There were at least two, and I had no idea of this post. This was 15 months ago. The notion that I invented this, or sought to "publicly accuse" him is absurd on many levels.
It was top ten nutcase stuff that led to that post. I think neil paul had flounced already. The him and diary 'thing' was sooo beyond strange. I was oblivious, then Phyllis pointed the way to the ongoing trainwreck; of course I became fascinated. Top shelf - best of OS - or worst. Na, best. Lots of comments were being deleted somewhere, forgot where, so Gamble made a haven for non-deletion. Good times. Fuck
Look, folks, I skimmed Kim's recent post, and all I can say is that once again I have no idea what's going on and I'd like to keep it that way this time.

Bill, you said:
"I get it. I also get that your use of it was not questioned. You said several other things. You said, "lynching", "strange fruit", and harassment. I get called on each one of those things."

Not sure what you mean by "your use of it was not questioned".

If you mean my referencing Kim's "Red Alert" post, well I HAD to reference it since this particular post here was ABOUT what transpired on THAT POST. Not sure why it would be questioned.

I thought my use of those particular words was pretty obvious to anyone who had read the "Red Alert" post as I had - with no real context to what had previously transpired, that's how it appeared to me, as a lynching albeit a verbal one.

I will readily admit to creating this post in February 2012, and in fact posting it here for public consumption. I can even declare publicly that you didn't make it up, Bill, if that helps any.

But whatever the two of you are skirmishing about, I'm afraid I can't help either one of you on that. I've no idea what has been going on. Frankly, I've been trying to catch re-runs of Gilligan's Island on television to distract me from reality.
Here is my testimony, Quatto. My testimony.

Kim Gamble harasses. Kim Gamble has harassed me for YEARS. So many pieces of this exist in so many places that it is ridiculous, but it exists. I find myself sayng the same thing over and over. He's a pushy jackass who likes to start fights with ME. That's all I knew.

I observed him say shitty things about Onislandtime, but not really anyone else. I dont do the OS clique thing. I go from paying little attention to OS to none. Much of the soap opera stuff is way beyond me, and I dont really care about it.

Now, with regard to this recent issue, gamble has had a bug up his ass to fight with me for a week or two. He tried on Kosher's blog. He said a few things a few places. Generally they are off subject. On Kosher's he made some error and called me an idiot. Kosher called it a cheap shot...to me. That kind of sums him up...to me.

Recently Fernsy made some post, which was a post about Frank Apisa's view...of some other posts. Keeping this as simple as possible, Fernsy placed my name in her blog, as some of these people are want to do, and said that my attitude about the world really is "dont worry, be happy." I said...That's not my view....etc.

Enter Gamble. In the convoluted shit that was that perfect storm of dishinesty and twisted words, Gamble made a post saying that he was "publicly accused." Now, Gamble has played to the crowd for years. He starts a fight, then claims that he was "accused"...or whatever. In the process of this, he implied that I had made this "stalking", "lynching", "harassing", and so on.

Again, your post was presented to me today. I had never seen it before. When I first read it, I thought it was from 3 months ago. When I looked again, I relized it was from 15 months ago. This activity is being repeated against numerous people, and over a long period of time. I did not invent it. I have no desire to invent it. And I did not even know of these various accounts, and many of the elements are nearly identical.

There is one very important element. Gamble insists in every case that this be done PUBLICLY. Every other person I have heard from is terrified. I find it annoying, but I am not terrified. I am probably far too stupid to be terrified. My point of commenting here is that Gamble's lies to discredit them, me, and the story does not ever add up. He disembles. He addresses some, ignores others. He gets character witnesses who were never involved. He attemtps to frieghten by insiting that records of things be kept.

This has been done so often to me that there is nothing to protect. He can say whatever the hell he wants. I did not lie about him. I did not lie about this history. I did not ever seek contact with him. I always avoid him until he starts one of his "lynchings." And I am not remotely afraid of him. He refuses to come to an understanding publicly or privately. His wish, which he copted out to today, is to "drive me from the internet." As luck would have it, his "Red Alert" post was the same sort of thing...just another person. He repeats his behavior. That is M.O. I am not lying about this. This is happening to more than just me.

One woman was criticized because she wrote a post about killing small animals. It does not matter what she did. That does not justify attacking her. The fingerprint of an admission is in his justifications. He scoffs at her for saying she attacked small animals. I love animals. I remember when the post was written. I avoided it because I did not want to read the disturbing content. How anyone else deals with it is their own business, but attacking, or "DRIVING FROM THE INTERNET" is not exceptable. Now, others may lay down in fear. I can repsect their choice. But he called me a liar and basically admitted to half of it. At first he acted like none of it EVER happened. Now he has explanations for this and that.

He can leave me out of his BS, and it wont ever see me going back and forth again, but as sure as I am here typing, he will come back at me again. He does not stop. I wont surrender my free space in a public place.
Quatto, I don't know who you are. There is a lot of intrigue in OS. But this title is hugely ironic. I know, just like "stalking" it is not your intent. But the irony is multi layered. There are parallels, and then parallels, and then parallels. "Brain Damage." Couldn't be better.
Bill, I would urge you to remember something from your police training - just because you don't like someone, have a problem with someone, does not necessarily make them guilty of all the bad things people say about them.

I'm not saying this to defend Kim Gamble; if Kim wants or feels a need to defend himself, he's a big boy. But as far as events that did not involve you go, evidence is crucial and it needs to be more than hearsay evidence to have weight.

I'm sure if I go back through all the posts and comments that I can find a disagreement somewhere between me and Kim (and for that matter, me and a lot of people - I'm an opinionated ass), but when I arrive at a faulty conclusion (as I did with this post) I usually own up to it. I won't delete it because hell - I said it, it's been out there on record.

But I can at least say I fucked up.

Do some serious digging on other events beyond what any single participant may say. I think, if you talk to the right observers and follow the trail, you'll find "I have looked over Jordan and I have seen... Things are not what they seem".

That's a snippet of a Pink Floyd song (called "Sheep" but that is not really pertinent to this comment or this post - I just think those two lines are fitting).

As for the title of this post, it was actually inspired once again by a Pink Floyd song of the same name.

Nothing covert about it, no hidden meaning. As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is only a cigar.
Quatto, I completely agree with your advice regarding liking someone and guilt.

Now, play close attention to what is happening, or what has happened. First of all, the conmflict is initiated by Gamble, not me. Second, Gamble is the one who seeks to "drive" people from the internet. Not me. (Does that not seem like dislike and penalty to you?) I have never sought to drive him from the internet. At every stop I have tried to make space between myself and Gamble. Gamble seeks to close the space. I have never made a post about Gamble. Gamble posts about me. Gamble first claimed that this never happened and that I was lying, when I responded to him. Once it was presented, he said he recalled it. Gamble insists that it be public, not me. On one previous episode, Gamble posed some question. I said, this is not a trial. I am not subject to any judgement. He responded that of course it was not a trial and derided the statement. THEN, moments later he said, "you lose. You're a loser." I said, "I thought this was not a trial."

This stuff exists in bits and pieces in various places. I am not conducting these "RED ALERT" warnings and the "lynching," your word. If you could persuade Gamble that dislike does not equal guilt, this would not happen. He is the one who said driving someone from the internet would be a good day. How can you not see that?
Bill - forgive me if this is a bit incoherent, but I just got up.

I understand what you are saying. Sincerely, I do.

I cannot validate or invalidate your gripes with Gamble (nor his with you) for the simple reason that I do not want to be in a position to validate or invalidate them.

I am merely explaining what this post I made last year was about, why it came about and why it is still up.

I would suggest that you carefully consider things whispered to you in PMs, for they are not always an accurate representation of the truth. People will distort situations to gain attention, to gain sympathy, to gain cameraderie. You know this already, But I'm reminding you, just because someone is the enemy of my enemy, it does not make them my friend. You know?

If anyone thinks they can run anyone else off the internet, well that's a pretty tall ambition.

Believe me, Bill, the LAST thing I'm gonna do is to try and persuade anyone else about anything. I've tried that before in internet forums and found that you can't reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into (someone else's words, I forget who but in this case the shoe fits me so I'll wear it).

I'm not here for brownie points, as you probably already noticed I don't have any "favorites" - I'm not here for social interaction, that's what I go out for. So I am not interested in the constant taking of sides that transpires here on an almost weekly basis.

I occasionally observe things here. When they spark a reaction in me, whether it be laughter or irritability, I post about them.

If people agree with me, great. If they don't agree, still great. If they want to make fun of me for what I post, even better.

If it were only things "whispered in PM's," I'd ignore it. Wanna know how I know? Because I alread did.

If it were things done directly to me, I'd ignore it. Wanna know how I know? Because I already did.

Aside from those to "whispers", and that done directly to me on numerous occasions, over a LONG persiod of time....please get this now...aside from those, I have witnessed it. See what I mean.

So, this involves numerous events of a variety of forms. Direct, person to person evidence. Observed evidence. Corroborated testimony. Additional corroborated testimony. Partial admission by the subject. A long passage of time which precludes any judgement of hasty action. Etc.

"Whispers"? Hardly. Throw out the whispers. He said publicly he seeks to throw ME from the internet. Publicly.

I am not seeking to make you believe anything. What you believe is yours. Please understand that. The events are objective. Don't characterize what happened as "whispers" in private, or whatever. They were public assaults. I did not know you, nor did I persuade you to call this "Brain Damage." Doesn't look like a whisper to me. Now, you are fully entitled to recant, but whether you recant or not, one thing always remains. This pattern can't be expunged. I was accused of inventing something that did not happen. Interpreted correcdtly or not, the pattern was repeated. That is M.O. How you feel about it then, versus now is not relevant. It was OBSERVED before I knew about it. I did not CREATE it. That is the point.
"If it were only things "whispered in PM's," I'd ignore it. Wanna know how I know? Because I alread did. "

Bill, you mentioned on Kim's post that someone sent you a PM, and you indicated (maybe it was there, maybe here but right now I do not have time to check) that you became aware of this post in that manner. That is what I was alluding to when I said "whispers in a PM", as I am pretty sure you weren't JUST sent a link to this blog post.

"So, this involves numerous events of a variety of forms. Direct, person to person evidence. Observed evidence. Corroborated testimony. Additional corroborated testimony. Partial admission by the subject. A long passage of time which precludes any judgement of hasty action. Etc."

OK - you've witnessed Gamble's egregious behavior. I am not suggesting Kim is a saint, nor am I agreeing he is a sinner. *I* have no opinion on either count, since I do NOT know him and have not witnessed the behavior you have.

" I did not know you, nor did I persuade you to call this "Brain Damage." Doesn't look like a whisper to me. Now, you are fully entitled to recant, but whether you recant or not, one thing always remains. This pattern can't be expunged. "

Once again, you are straying into incomprehensible territory, Bill. Maybe I'm thick and I just don't get it, but NO ONE persuaded me to call this post "Brain Damage" - as I said, I chose it because of the Pink Floyd song of the same name. Check out the lyrics in context to the post content, and maybe it will make sense.

I have nothing to recant, Bill. I simply created this post because I walked into a situation in the middle, and I made assumptions. Assumptions that, upon consideration of additional evidence and conversations with others, I determined to be incorrect.

Call it a recant if you like, I call it fucking up and admitting so after the fact.

Not really sure what purpose is being served here, over a year later. The major parties that were the topic of this post are all still on OS as far as I know, save one. There has not been any continued animus between the parties that I have witnessed. I have not paid any attention to this post.

Until today.
About to head out, but want to make one more clarification:

It has been alleged that I am OES.

I am not. Nor have I ever been. At least, I don't THINK I am or have been.

I don't even know what OES is.

Look, people - you can believe whatever the hell you want to believe. I am an anonymous mutant that is an opinionated ass - I've said that more than once.

I use this avatar and this moniker to separate my work from my play. Nothing more, nothing less.

Have a nice night. Got to go earn that minimum wage.
I think you are Jerry DuNuccio.
Took a quick look at Jerry's stuff. I'm impressed. This place needs more people who write like he does.

But sadly, Kim, I am not he. He is not me. YOU are not me, though we are all together.

I guess I am the walrus. Koo-koo-ka-choo.
It was a gentle rib, about Jerry.
I agree, he took class with him, when he left.
Thanks for clarifying that - I can be obtuse at times. :-)

Not having read any of Jerry's stuff (didn't even know of his existence here), I wasn't sure.
Jerry DuNuccio is another who seems to have lost patience and left, or was fallen by the recent cull.
Search for Jerry returned no results.

There was an adult.
John Cleese said he'd only met one adult in his life. I think ( I hope ) I've met more than one, right here.

Anyone who knows who Cleese was referring to, without using google : free tea-cake !
Jerry DeNuccio ... sorry ... just saw this and fell back into detective mode. Try again and see. No recent words ... but some of his own from a while ago appear.
An adult ... so thoughtful ... like someone else we know ...
not sure about John Cleese ... though ... once I might have known ...
part of a tea-cake ... surely ... toasted ... butter dripping ...
It'd purely be a guess, but I'd say Margaret Thatcher. Though I can't for the life of me imagine Cleese considering her an adult.

Am I warm at least?
Once upon a time ... John Cleese wrote a book with Robin Skinner ... why am I thinking ... something might be there ... somewhere here I may still have it ... not a book about ways to walk ... well ...
not exactly ...
No, not Thatcher ~ not even warm ...

( hi a1 ! ~ set aside a cake for Phyllis ! )

Clue : not political. Not European.
there are dustups all the time on this site, as you know. people take sides, and bitch for weeks.

what makes diary special is one thing: she posts people's personal information that is not hers to share. which infuriates people who are all here, sharing what we choose of our lives.

she hurts not just the abused, but their families.

no other dustup has ever involved that element.

its no more complicated than that.
kim, i am in impatient girl. googled it. couldnt find it. PLEASE tell us, before i go crazy? i got ENOUGH stress right now, man!
dj, no.

You need to be patient. I'm sure you've heard of the person ~ you remind me to go back to your last ; I needed to read the Keith one first.
You're making me think ... not Connie B?
Not Connie B, though she was the most adult person in Fawlty Towers by far.
Alyce. Took a minute to Google. Cake?
No phyllis.
Also, even after I said no google, what did you do ? You googled !
One last guess then, Kim Gamble, and off to find something to eat I go:

his father.

And if I get it right, does that mean I'm off the hook for making tea cake?
Break out the flour, gather two eggs and a cup of milk, or pick up the phone.
Not his dad, no.
The answer is here, last comment ( it surprised me too ; I'd never heard of him) :

( can't believe what a blogwhore I am ... )
That's some painting, fella. And some tale.

And I never would have guessed that in a million years. So I guess it's tea cake for everyone, courtesy of the mutant who can't cook.

I hope you all have a bottle of the pink stuff handy.
May I simply say ... that last night ... here ...
I went away ... and ... looked through so many books ...
mine ... here ...
sigh ... friends all ... these books ...
bought many of them at Kemp Book Store ...
just up the hill from Brighton beach ...
when I was taking my counselling course ...
when I found and read ... John Cleese's book with Robin Skynner ...
found it ... finally ... and skimmed ... til I had skimmed it all ...
and nothing ... nothing ... when I had been so sure ...
and then I come here and ...
a name I'd not have known ...
but ... will follow a suggestion offered here ...
or not far away ...
had thought through the longest night ...
of who it might have been ...
and of who ... whom ... it might still be ...
May I just add here ... because where else ...
Markey ... Ed Markey ...
won ...
one of my friends worked for him ... a hundred years ago ...
but now ... Kerry's seat ...
Markey ... Ed Markey ...
won ...
now go ... and read Helvetica's piece ...
and know why it matters that ...
Markey ... won ...
Also this, anna1liese ... time for tea ... http://youtu.be/3PHOE_7ZK3o

Hope for you to enjoying.
Do you know ... exactly where I am ... and need to be ...
how much of ... all of this ... calls ... to me ...
I will be with this ...
and then ...
come back to you ...
who knew ...
who knew ...