Personal Attacks Ignored by Mods

[poormadpeter2]

It seems a bit odd that the two topics currently locked aren't directly related to the examples I posted here - although any stop to the Jarvis issue and the behaviour of fn2drive is appreciated.

[jessewade]

Fact is this board would be a much better place without XXXXXXXXXXXX

[poormadpeter2]

Fact is this board would be a much better place without XXXXXXXXXXXX

While the issue about accusations of trolling in my OP are related to one personal in particular, there are three here at the moment that are an issue. Maybe four.

[Rob]

Fact is this board would be a much better place without XXXXXXXXXXXX

You're not fooling me, mister! I know that's a secret code and it means "Rob."

I get blamed for everything around here!

[Hard Rocker]

And the Felton etc baiting continues...

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=101183

[midnightx]

poormadpeter2, the irony is that you call out others for behavior that you also take part in. You accuse others of bringing Felton Jarvis into threads simply as wind-ups, yet you brought him into a thread unprovoked just yesterday.

Now I want to check out the Albert King album. Thanks for this topic.

What a nasty little man Goldman was. “Can ya dig it?” I think he wanted to be hip but didn’t know how, so he became bitter and jealous.

Albert Goldman, Music Critic, was already 42 at the time he contributed his liner notes, and clearly a bitter man, envious of everyone and everything, and lashing out at popular culture he did not understand. You know, I'd be willing to wager he did not actually listen to the Albert King album before he wrote those notes. It would be so like him. There is nothing in them that indicates he did, not a single detail about the songs done, not even the stunning monologue Albert delivers to close out Side 2.

Uh-oh. Jarvis and Steve Allen are off the hook.

This week's villain is Albert Goldman with unsubstantiated accusations thrown at him now.

You cannot have it both ways. You like to promote the theory that others troll and derail topics, and that your hands are clean, but the bottom line is that you engage in the very behavior you denounce. And when you are called out, you assert that your integrity is being questioned.

And for the record, you cannot insist that the moderators limit Felton Jarvis discourse, the man produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elvis' output, and as such, he will remain a very relevant topic of discussion, whether or not you like the content of such dialogue.

-- Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:41 pm --

And the Felton etc baiting continues...

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=101183

Yes, and who was it that brought Jarvis into the thread in an apparent baiting fashion? Your pal poormadpeter2.

Is that an attack on one's integrity, or a valid observation?

[Hard Rocker]

Wind yer neck in lad. You're always at it and we all know that. People have been banned from here for less than some get away with.

[poormadpeter2]

poormadpeter2, the irony is that you call out others for behavior that you also take part in. You accuse others of bringing Felton Jarvis into threads simply as wind-ups, yet you brought him into a thread unprovoked just yesterday.

Now I want to check out the Albert King album. Thanks for this topic.

What a nasty little man Goldman was. “Can ya dig it?” I think he wanted to be hip but didn’t know how, so he became bitter and jealous.

Albert Goldman, Music Critic, was already 42 at the time he contributed his liner notes, and clearly a bitter man, envious of everyone and everything, and lashing out at popular culture he did not understand. You know, I'd be willing to wager he did not actually listen to the Albert King album before he wrote those notes. It would be so like him. There is nothing in them that indicates he did, not a single detail about the songs done, not even the stunning monologue Albert delivers to close out Side 2.

Uh-oh. Jarvis and Steve Allen are off the hook.

This week's villain is Albert Goldman with unsubstantiated accusations thrown at him now.

You cannot have it both ways. You like to promote the theory that others troll and derail topics, and that your hands are clean, but the bottom line is that you engage in the very behavior you denounce. And when you are called out, you assert that your integrity is being questioned.

And for the record, you cannot insist that the moderators limit Felton Jarvis discourse, the man produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elvis' output, and as such, he will remain a very relevant topic of discussion, whether or not you like the content of such dialogue.

-- Tue Apr 24, 2018 12:41 pm --

And the Felton etc baiting continues...

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=101183

Yes, and who was it that brought Jarvis into the thread in an apparent baiting fashion? Your pal poormadpeter2.

Is that an attack on one's integrity, or a valid observation?

You need to try harder than that, Midnight. I mentioned his name, I did not bring him into the conversation other than refer in a single sentence to what is going on within the board. There was no attempt to change the course of the conversation, no attempt to ridicule him, no attempt to discuss his work, no attempt to bait any members on the subject of Jarvis, no attempt to start a conversation on Jarvis within the thread. If there was, the conversation would now be about Jarvis on that thread, just as it becomes when you bring him into a conversation on an unrelated topic. And yet a whole page has elapsed on that thread without the topic changing to him, or him ever being mentioned again.

Sadly, you seem to be grasping at straws to muddy the waters between mentioning Jarvis (literally just his name) as a reference to the state of the board (as I did), and bringing his work into every conversation as you do, or his integrity into every conversation as fn2drive does. I know the difference, you know the difference, and so does everyone else.

[midnightx]

Just admit it, it wasn't some innocent, insinuated commentary about what was going on within the board, you fanned the flames. The Jarvis debate got heated just days before and shut down two Searcher threads. It was almost as if you wanted to reignite the spark, and placed him in a new thread. What did you think was going to happen? You knew what could potentially happen -- you denounced what was going on in The Searcher threads, yet in some twisted way, wanted it to continue. And frankly, I personally do not care one way or the other if Jarvis was mentioned -- I simply pointed out the hypocrisy because you make grandiose statements about others baiting and derailing threads, yet you unnecessarily brought Jarvis into the aforementioned thread, knowing full-well that it could result in changing the course of the conversation once again.

We both know I do not bring Jarvis' work "into every conversation" -- I have been a member of this forum since 2003, and the majority of my posts do not refer to Felton Jarvis. That said, as previously pointed out, the much embattled producer is going to continue to be a topic of conversation when fans discuss the quality of certain sessions or Elvis' history, because after all, Jarvis produced over 40% of Elvis' outpoint for over 10 years. You cannot start restricting content, especially when it involves a major topic, just because you do not like where it might go. If you and others cannot handle the Jarvis topic, then you can simply avoid engaging in the topic. There are plenty of topics and positions I disagree with, and frequently choose to ignore the threads completely. It is not that difficult.

[Hard Rocker]

[poormadpeter2]

Just admit it, it wasn't some innocent, insinuated commentary about what was going on within the board, you fanned the flames. The Jarvis debate got heated just days before and shut down two Searcher threads. It was almost as if you wanted to reignite the spark, and placed him in a new thread. What did you think was going to happen? You knew what could potentially happen -- you denounced what was going on in The Searcher threads, yet in some twisted way, wanted it to continue. And frankly, I personally do not care one way or the other if Jarvis was mentioned -- I simply pointed out the hypocrisy because you make grandiose statements about others baiting and derailing threads, yet you unnecessarily brought Jarvis into the aforementioned thread, knowing full-well that it could result in changing the course of the conversation once again.

We both know I do not bring Jarvis' work "into every conversation" -- I have been a member of this forum since 2003, and the majority of my posts do not refer to Felton Jarvis. That said, as previously pointed out, the much embattled producer is going to continue to be a topic of conversation when fans discuss the quality of certain sessions or Elvis' history, because after all, Jarvis produced over 40% of Elvis' outpoint for over 10 years. You cannot start restricting content, especially when it involves a major topic, just because you do not like where it might go. If you and others cannot handle the Jarvis topic, then you can simply avoid engaging in the topic. There are plenty of topics and positions I disagree with, and frequently choose to ignore the threads completely. It is not that difficult.

As I have shown in another thread, virtually all introductions of Jarvis into any thread on this board is by yourself, fn2drive or, less often, Doc. I have demonstrated that quite clearly.

I have no idea why those threads were locked. I'm not a moderator, and neither are you, and neither have I been in contact with them outside of this thread. But again, both were threads where Jarvis, who wasn't mentioned within The Searcher, got brought into the conversation by yourself, as a means of baiting those who champion his work.

And, again, there was no baiting in my comment in the blues thread. Just a simple observation that the board lurches from the demonisation of Jarvis, then to Allen, and then to Goldman, and then we do it all again. I have stated quite clearly that the mention of his name by myself was not a cue for him to be discussed, and neither was it perceived by anyone as such as his name was never again mentioned within the thread.

So you can come here and try to deflect from your own shenanigans if you wish, but everyone else on this board is well aware of what is going on here. And they are certainly well aware that virtually every thread that lurches into Jarvis war is due to the introduction of him into a thread where you or fn2drive have introduced him - only for you to then blame others for doing so.

But as you seem unclear, let me demonstrate something to you. This is your first mention of Jarvis on one of the Searcher threads:

One suspects that some FECC members are not going to like some of the narrative, especially from Part Two of the documentary. Felton Jarvis is not mentioned once. Chips Moman and his vitally important role facilitating and producing the America Sound sessions is highlighted as part of Elvis' return to focused and impassioned recording. There is a major emphasis on the '68 Comeback Special and its significance and role in changing Elvis' career. Tom Parker's mismanagement is discussed, his old-school management philosophy of limiting and narrowing the artist's options and creating sole reliance on the manager to the detriment of creativity is presented. The theory and historical-record rewrite created and perpetuated by a handful of FECC posters that the '68 Comeback Special was not particularly successful or noteworthy, that Elvis' "comeback" started in '65/'66, and that Felton Jarvis started the comeback was not presented in "The Searcher" in any shape or form.

And this is the comment that I wrote that you seem to think is baiting other members:

Uh-oh. Jarvis and Steve Allen are off the hook.

Now, I really do not believe that you can't tell the difference between a paragraph-long diatribe that is an attempt to restart the Jarvis war by accusing people here or rewriting history, misrepresenting the 68 TV show, and smugness over the lack of Jarvis in a documentary, and my own nine word observation which doesn't actually discuss Jarvis or his work at all. You are not stupid, but neither is the rest of the board, and your feigned innocence fools no-one.

-- Tue Apr 24, 2018 11:34 pm --

I should also add that hopefully we will get some more feedback on this particular thread when the moderator has returned to health. Oddly, he/she locked the Jarvis threads, but did not touch the TIger Man thread that the majority of my opening post discussed, and none of the offending posts appear to have been removed as yet, nor any warnings given. I am sure we will be updated soon.

[mike edwards66]

FELTON JARVIS........it was meant to be.

[midnightx]

But as you seem unclear, let me demonstrate something to you. This is your first mention of Jarvis on one of the Searcher threads:

One suspects that some FECC members are not going to like some of the narrative, especially from Part Two of the documentary. Felton Jarvis is not mentioned once. Chips Moman and his vitally important role facilitating and producing the America Sound sessions is highlighted as part of Elvis' return to focused and impassioned recording. There is a major emphasis on the '68 Comeback Special and its significance and role in changing Elvis' career. Tom Parker's mismanagement is discussed, his old-school management philosophy of limiting and narrowing the artist's options and creating sole reliance on the manager to the detriment of creativity is presented. The theory and historical-record rewrite created and perpetuated by a handful of FECC posters that the '68 Comeback Special was not particularly successful or noteworthy, that Elvis' "comeback" started in '65/'66, and that Felton Jarvis started the comeback was not presented in "The Searcher" in any shape or form.

I stand by what I posted. There was nothing controversial about it. There have been some very strong positions taken about Felton Jarvis, the mid-1960's period and the Comeback Special by a select group of members on this forum over the past year, and it was very much reasonable and relevant to mention those positions in relation to "The Searcher," a documentary intended to be a thorough career and life overview of Elvis Presley, particularly because "The Searcher" did not support those positions taken. On Page 12 of The Searcher thread you refer to, I stated the following to mister mike with regard to the relevance of my initial aforementioned post:

You are incorrect. I derailed nothing. Presuming you have been an active member of this forum for the past year, there are a handful of passionate Elvis enthusiasts who strongly think and believe that the historical record pertaining to the 1966/1967 period is incorrect; Felton Jarvis' role during that period, at American Sound, and subsequently during the 1970's is not properly defined and respected; and that the 1968 NBC/Singer Presents television special was not notably successful and influential at the time of its broadcast.

I noted in my first impressions of viewing the documentary that those heated and often-debated topics were not resolved in the favor of those FECC members. They are, however, relevant topics as it pertains to Elvis' life and career, which was the basis for "The Searcher," was it not? Clearly discussion of Elvis' mid-1960's commercial, non-soundtrack period is relevant to this topic, as is Felton Jarvis' role in Elvis' career and the significance of the 1968 NBC/Singer Presents special. The fact that you do not like "The Searcher's" conclusion and outcome of such topics does not make them "explosives" that caused a thread derailment. If there has been any derailment, it is by a few members reviving old erroneous rhetoric to support their attempted historical rewrites that were debunked by "The Searcher."

You, on the other hand, brought Felton Jarvis into the "blues" thread simply to wind-up the Jarvis rhetoric one more time after the Jarvis rhetoric had recently taken over multiple threads. Unlike my post in a thread about the life and career of Elvis, a career which contained 10 years of recording overseen by Jarvis, your post about Jarvis was in a thread that had no association to Jarvis. You brought him into the discussion as a wise-crack, clearly intended to wind-up people.

[Hard Rocker]

A search of MidnightX's posts containing the word "Jarvis" returns over 800 resuts. Emphatic and incessant.

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&terms=all&author=midnightx&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Let's not pretend you don't have an agenda here.

[poormadpeter2]

But as you seem unclear, let me demonstrate something to you. This is your first mention of Jarvis on one of the Searcher threads:

One suspects that some FECC members are not going to like some of the narrative, especially from Part Two of the documentary. Felton Jarvis is not mentioned once. Chips Moman and his vitally important role facilitating and producing the America Sound sessions is highlighted as part of Elvis' return to focused and impassioned recording. There is a major emphasis on the '68 Comeback Special and its significance and role in changing Elvis' career. Tom Parker's mismanagement is discussed, his old-school management philosophy of limiting and narrowing the artist's options and creating sole reliance on the manager to the detriment of creativity is presented. The theory and historical-record rewrite created and perpetuated by a handful of FECC posters that the '68 Comeback Special was not particularly successful or noteworthy, that Elvis' "comeback" started in '65/'66, and that Felton Jarvis started the comeback was not presented in "The Searcher" in any shape or form.

I stand by what I posted. There was nothing controversial about it. There have been some very strong positions taken about Felton Jarvis, the mid-1960's period and the Comeback Special by a select group of members on this forum over the past year, and it was very much reasonable and relevant to mention those positions in relation to "The Searcher," a documentary intended to be a thorough career and life overview of Elvis Presley, particularly because "The Searcher" did not support those positions taken. On Page 12 of The Searcher thread you refer to, I stated the following to mister mike with regard to the relevance of my initial aforementioned post:

You are incorrect. I derailed nothing. Presuming you have been an active member of this forum for the past year, there are a handful of passionate Elvis enthusiasts who strongly think and believe that the historical record pertaining to the 1966/1967 period is incorrect; Felton Jarvis' role during that period, at American Sound, and subsequently during the 1970's is not properly defined and respected; and that the 1968 NBC/Singer Presents television special was not notably successful and influential at the time of its broadcast.

I noted in my first impressions of viewing the documentary that those heated and often-debated topics were not resolved in the favor of those FECC members. They are, however, relevant topics as it pertains to Elvis' life and career, which was the basis for "The Searcher," was it not? Clearly discussion of Elvis' mid-1960's commercial, non-soundtrack period is relevant to this topic, as is Felton Jarvis' role in Elvis' career and the significance of the 1968 NBC/Singer Presents special. The fact that you do not like "The Searcher's" conclusion and outcome of such topics does not make them "explosives" that caused a thread derailment. If there has been any derailment, it is by a few members reviving old erroneous rhetoric to support their attempted historical rewrites that were debunked by "The Searcher."

You, on the other hand, brought Felton Jarvis into the "blues" thread simply to wind-up the Jarvis rhetoric one more time after the Jarvis rhetoric had recently taken over multiple threads. Unlike my post in a thread about the life and career of Elvis, a career which contained 10 years of recording overseen by Jarvis, your post about Jarvis was in a thread that had no association to Jarvis. You brought him into the discussion as a wise-crack, clearly intended to wind-up people.

Tell me, how many people were "wound up" enough by my nine-word comment to post about Jarvis again in that thread? The only people who commented on the post was you and fn2drive, and both of you were so incensed by the very word "Jarvis" that you couldn't see that the comment was actually about Goldman. And as if to prove my point, you appear to have/had no objection to me mentioning Steve Allen in the very same sentence, and in the very same context. Your reply said, quite clearly:

Look who it is injecting Felton Jarvis into this thread? FECC Mechanic wisely shut down The Searcher topics, and now we have your latest attempt at fanning the flames. The Jarvis discussion has ended, no reason for you to rev it up again.

And, again here, you accuse me of bringing Jarvis into the thread, but have no objection to Allen being mentioned. I am sorry you misunderstood the very clear point that I was making, but sometimes when you're obsessed with something you can't see the wood for the trees. Or perhaps you're just trying to deflect blame from yourself.

And I really fail to believe that you wrote your post without any idea that referring to a "handful of FECC posters" in a derogatory way would result in a heated argument.

-- Wed Apr 25, 2018 1:44 am --

A search of MidnightX's posts containing the word "Jarvis" returns over 800 resuts. Emphatic and incessant.

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&terms=all&author=midnightx&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Let's not pretend you don't have an agenda here.

That's interesting, because a search of my own (who is apparently bringing him up left, right and centre) going back over both "poormadpeters" is 356.

And over the last year, MidnightX has him at 208 and myself at 126. So, who's the obsessed one?

The key point out of all of this, however, is that I produced a long series of threads where derailments have happened because of negative talk of Jarvis by MidnightX and fn2drive. I did it back in November, going back over a three-week spell:

The Legendary Performer thread: MidnightX
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=Jarvis&t=99673&sf=msgonly

TROUBLE thread: fn2drive (except for the opening post where Juan names the producer, but he does that whoever the producer is in the first posts of these threads)
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=Jarvis&t=99608&sf=msgonly&ch=-1&start=25

The Morrissey thread: MidnightX
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&t=99610&sf=msgonly

The Snowbird thread: fn2drive
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=Jarvis&t=99554&sf=msgonly

Elvis in Concert thread: MidnightX
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=Jarvis&t=99573&sf=msgonly

The thread on the new FTDs: MidnightX
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=Jarvis&t=99543&sf=msgonly

The Shindig thread: MidnightX
https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=Jarvis&t=99467&sf=msgonly

And then I did it again last week:

Elvis The Searcher: Thoughts and Grades ----MidnightX

Elvis The Searcher; First Thoughts ----MidnightX

We can Make the Morning ----R&B (very briefly), then a tirade from fn2drive

20 Original Albums ----fn2drive

Clean Up Your Own Backyard ---- fn2drive

Elvis vs Beatles ----midnightx

Presley or Diamond ----DJC

MidnightX's defence is that I brought him into the conversation once in a nine-word comment. It's not the greatest defence.

[midnightx]

A search of MidnightX's posts containing the word "Jarvis" returns over 800 resuts. Emphatic and incessant.

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&terms=all&author=midnightx&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Let's not pretend you don't have an agenda here.

With over 22,000 posts under my name, 800 references to Jarvis is less than 5% of my total posts. Yeah, some "agenda."

-- Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:54 pm --

Sorry guys, this is an Elvis message board, there will be "negative" dialogue posted about a number of topics, including Jarvis. The "derailment" as you keep referring to, occurs by aggressive reactionary posting, not the mere mentioning of a name. This is not a cheerleading Elvis forum.

Furthermore, this is really not about Jarvis, even though a couple of members are trying to make it seem so. I simply pointed out an example of poormadpeter2 accusing others of certain behavior, yet conducting himself in the same manner that he denounces. This has happened numerous times over the years, the Jarvis episode just happened to be the latest.

[Scarre]

...
And for the record, you cannot insist that the moderators limit Felton Jarvis discourse, the man produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elvis' output, and as such, he will remain a very relevant topic of discussion, whether or not you like the content of such dialogue.

So now when the shoe fits, he "produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elivs´output".
Other times, he has produced almost nothing...it was always Elvis himself or someone else...but not FJ, not even worth to mention in the HBO doc.

You can´t have it both ways.

[poormadpeter2]

A search of MidnightX's posts containing the word "Jarvis" returns over 800 resuts. Emphatic and incessant.

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&terms=all&author=midnightx&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Let's not pretend you don't have an agenda here.

With over 22,000 posts under my name, 800 references to Jarvis is less than 5% of my total posts. Yeah, some "agenda."

-- Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:54 pm --

Sorry guys, this is an Elvis message board, there will be "negative" dialogue posted about a number of topics, including Jarvis. The "derailment" as you keep referring to, occurs by aggressive reactionary posting, not the mere mentioning of a name. This is not a cheerleading Elvis forum.

Furthermore, this is really not about Jarvis, even though a couple of members are trying to make it seem so. I simply pointed out an example of poormadpeter2 accusing others of certain behavior, yet conducting himself in the same manner that he denounces. This has happened numerous times over the years, the Jarvis episode just happened to be the latest.

I accused you of a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR, which I have proven twice on this board, showing a catalogue of posts from last November and from this April.

when you come back here showing s PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR from myself where I mention Jarvis first in a thread, then we can talk.

Until then you have one single incident which you have taken out of context.

But I will concede that the amount of posts you have dedicated to Jarvis over the years has been low - just 3.5% since 2003. Better than you thought.

So it becomes yet more obvious to everyone when,over the last year, 15% of your posts are dedicated to him? That's quite a shift. Fn2drive has a figure for the last year if over 20%.

And, despite you accusing me of bringing him into conversations and talking incessantly about Jarvis, my own figure for the last year is just 5%.

Oh, and before you ask, Juan Luis's figure for the last year is approx 13%. He talks about Jarvis less than you.

Best to do your maths before thinking it will clear your name.

[Rob]

I know for a fact that I've mentioned Felton's name a couple of times lately. Why don't I get a percentage?

I get left out of everything around here!

[EPA4368]

FECC Forum: What Happened? Might be a good topic to discuss what's been happening with a handful of members. We have a few that just like to argue over anything and everything.

[norrie]

This is getting like the worst ever episode of Judge Judy.

[poormadpeter2]

This is getting like the worst ever episode of Judge Judy.

Maybe. But there is something amiss here. The Moderator said on this thread:

"I haven't received any PM's, I haven't reseived any reports (or they have been dealt with by a administrator, which in that case, I wouldn't see any reports)."

That may be true - but SOMEONE is getting those reports, someone is deciding they weren't worth dealing with, and is closing them without taking any action. And here is my email inbox:

reports.JPG

The most recent of those closed reports was received in my email box at 5.20am on Friday 20th April - around six hours before the Moderator said he hadn't received any reports.

Now, if the moderator was the only one moderating last week (and was ill), and he didn't deal with these reports, who did? And why were they basically ignored?

Each of those reports dealt with the accusations in the opening post, each of them were an issue with the same person, and each of them (it appears) was ignored and closed by someone higher up the chain than a moderator. And if that is indeed the case, it might explain why none of this was caught and dealt with earlier, and why much of the "fairer" system rhetoric from moderators sounds like empty rhetoric.

As far as I'm aware, we have heard nothing from the mods about this topic since Friday when it was stated that he planned to deal with it that day or the next (Saturday). It's now Wednesday, and we haven't had a comment to say there is a hold up (which would be fine) - but two threads unrelated to the "personal attacks" were locked.

It's hardly surprising, all things considered, that things get out of hand here.

[Hard Rocker]

A search of MidnightX's posts containing the word "Jarvis" returns over 800 resuts. Emphatic and incessant.

https://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/search.php?keywords=jarvis&terms=all&author=midnightx&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search

Let's not pretend you don't have an agenda here.

With over 22,000 posts under my name, 800 references to Jarvis is less than 5% of my total posts. Yeah, some "agenda."

Nah, it's well over the top and you know it so don't deny it. Over 800 reference from you about Jarvis tells the tale. Beyond ridiculous.

[Juan Luis]

...
And for the record, you cannot insist that the moderators limit Felton Jarvis discourse, the man produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elvis' output, and as such, he will remain a very relevant topic of discussion, whether or not you like the content of such dialogue.

So now when the shoe fits, he "produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elivs´output".
Other times, he has produced almost nothing...it was always Elvis himself or someone else...but not FJ, not even worth to mention in the HBO doc.

You can´t have it both ways.

I am glad you noticed that too.

[midnightx]

...
And for the record, you cannot insist that the moderators limit Felton Jarvis discourse, the man produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elvis' output, and as such, he will remain a very relevant topic of discussion, whether or not you like the content of such dialogue.

So now when the shoe fits, he "produced 10+ years of work and over 40% of Elivs´output".
Other times, he has produced almost nothing...it was always Elvis himself or someone else...but not FJ, not even worth to mention in the HBO doc.

You can´t have it both ways.

I do not have it both ways. I never said Jarvis "has produced almost nothing." Jarvis produced a lot of work, but that does not mean most of it was artistically and commercially relevant. The fact that he was omitted entirely from "The Searcher" affirms that. Nice try in attempting to create something out of nothing.

Again, this does not need to turn into another Jarvis love-fest by his staunch supporters. poormadpeter2 has a history of accusing members of engaging in certain behavior, and then he turns around and does the same thing. I simply pointed out his latest infraction, which happened to concern Jarvis.

This is a perfect example of how Jarvis sends people off the rails. I simply pointed out poormadpeter2's hypocrisy when he mentioned Jarvis as a wind-up in the blues thread, and now the mere mention of Jarvis in this thread causes a few Jarvis enthusiasts to rev up the Jarvis rhetoric again by turning this into a debate over Jarvis' worth and value as a producer, and to attack others who do not share their position. Can any of you guys let it go? You have made your position on Jarvis very clear. Do you need to derail this thread as well?