Exposed!

[James Heaps-Nelson]

What will it take for this to end?

More than 2/3s of this forum's activity has to do with Victor.

I talk to Victor outside of this forum, and consider him a friend. I may disagree with him on some issues, but hey, his beliefs and values are his alone, and I cannot judge him for them.

Please people.

Shut the hell up about this.

Mitchell,

I give this a couple more days to run and then it will be over. Since you are talking to Victor outside this forum, tell him to give the internet a break for a while. Also, he probably needs to give Objectivism a break for a long while and come back when he's ready, but not before then. Right now he just needs to find out who he is and what's important to him.

Jim

[Ciro]

To lie, and to fool people, is the easiest thing a man can do, and that is why there are few real men in this world.

Ciro D'Agostino

[James Heaps-Nelson]

To lie, and to fool people, is the easiest thing a man can do, and that is why there are few real men in this world.

Ciro D'Agostino

Good to see you again, Ciro. I'm only sorry it's on such a sad occasion.

Jim

[bmacwilliam]

Angie, I haven't seen anyone attacking you or blaming you for Victor's behavior. On the contrary, there have been expressions of sympathy toward you because Victor tried to give you, as well as all of us, a false picture of himself. This whole episode has to be terribly painful for you.

I want to tell you that I admire you for facing and acknowledging Victor's wrongdong as you have done in your post..

Barbara

Yes, even I haven't attacked or blamed you, so I'm not sure why you feel that way. And FWIW, I echo Barbara's statement about admiration.

Also Barbara wrote:

"Steve, one cannot have it both ways. One cannot fill page after page on a publlc forum wirh discussions of one's most intimate relationship, yet expect that the readers of those pages will not comment on what has been presented to them, just as they comment on anything else posted on a forum to which they belong. And surely it is relevant that the comments are expressions of sympathy for Angie, who has done no wrong but is Victor's victim."

Exactly! And Steve, if you have met her and care anything about either one of them, I don't see how it's inappropriate to express your worry or concern especially if it's well founded. In fact I'd argue you'd be somewhat obligated if you had suspicions or confirmation that one person was of questionable character unbeknownst to the other. C'mon, after all, everyone knows that there's three big warning signs when dating a man, if discovered, a woman should run the other way...

- Axe murderer

- Plagiarist

- Living with parents after 21

Bob

[Chris Grieb]

Ciro; I am going to get some people to visit your place during Summer Seminar. Good to see you back.

[Brant Gaede]

I wasn't going to post further in this thread, as my earlier remarks speak for themselves, no matter what MSK or others may read into them. The following, though, is too utterly appalling to let pass without comment.

[...] I'm sorry for Angie; no one was more sucked in than Angie. Love has its own reasons, but reality comes a cropper. Angie, run away, don't walk. Today's pain hurts. Tomorrow's destroys. [...]

What if Angie doesn't exist? What if she is only an invention of VP?

How DARE you, sir? What is between them has nothing to do with the animadverting and personal slurs that are being put across here. Or even Victor's plagiarism. Their love, and its continuance, is their business.

Do you think — or does anyone else — that because Angie and Victor made public note in this forum of their affection, their emotions, and finally their meeting, you have an unlimited right and license to comment on and judge the standards and behavior of that relationship? If so, well, you have no such right and no such license. To presume that you are in any position to offer such advice is to go where you do not belong.

When someone shares a value, or the knowledge of it, with others, this doesn't mean that any of those others have a moral right to make prescriptions or proclamations to those doing the sharing. More simply: They did not ask for your advice, Brant.

As for "doesn't exist," a truly nasty comment not couched in anything suggesting that you were facetious:

I'm one of the few here who actually has met Angie in person, as most of you know. I'm going to waste some money right now to demonstrate this: I have 15 exposures left on a camera (non-digital) wherein a picture resides of my having met Angie. I'm going to get that film prematurely developed, and that picture scanned and posted, in order to prove — with one of the highest possible Objectivist ironies — that Angie's existence exists.

Is that "necessary" on my part? No, of course not. But it's a gesture, in the face of a nauseating personal attack. This isn't just a superfluous twisting of the knife on someone whose absentia has already long been made plain. This is an attack on his highest personal values, wherein nobody has business treading.

And that ought to be seen, by everyone around here, as being unacceptable. We'll see.

Of course I apologize to Angie for the aforementioned post. I shouldn't have made it. I was wrong to do so.

--Brant

Edited June 29, 2007 by Brant Gaede

[CNA]

Angie, I haven't seen anyone attacking you or blaming you for Victor's behavior. On the contrary, there have been expressions of sympathy toward you because Victor tried to give you, as well as all of us, a false picture of himself. This whole episode has to be terribly painful for you.

I want to tell you that I admire you for facing and acknowledging Victor's wrongdong as you have done in your post..

Barbara

Yes, even I haven't attacked or blamed you, so I'm not sure why you feel that way. And FWIW, I echo Barbara's statement about admiration.

Also Barbara wrote:

"Steve, one cannot have it both ways. One cannot fill page after page on a publlc forum wirh discussions of one's most intimate relationship, yet expect that the readers of those pages will not comment on what has been presented to them, just as they comment on anything else posted on a forum to which they belong. And surely it is relevant that the comments are expressions of sympathy for Angie, who has done no wrong but is Victor's victim."

Exactly! And Steve, if you have met her and care anything about either one of them, I don't see how it's inappropriate to express your worry or concern especially if it's well founded. In fact I'd argue you'd be somewhat obligated if you had suspicions or confirmation that one person was of questionable character unbeknownst to the other. C'mon, after all, everyone knows that there's three big warning signs when dating a man, if discovered, a woman should run the other way...

- Axe murderer

- Plagiarist

- Living with parents after 21

Bob

Thank you, Bob. I've gotten some BS offline for this, mostly here in the last few days. I'm not aware of all the posts in this thread and if it was also included in here which it seems it is not. So given that, my first post wasn't addressed to anyone in particular but covered some of my thoughts regarding it. That's why I posted it, wanted to make sure it was out in public view for everyone to see and they know who they are.

Angie

[CNA]

I wasn't going to post further in this thread, as my earlier remarks speak for themselves, no matter what MSK or others may read into them. The following, though, is too utterly appalling to let pass without comment.

[...] I'm sorry for Angie; no one was more sucked in than Angie. Love has its own reasons, but reality comes a cropper. Angie, run away, don't walk. Today's pain hurts. Tomorrow's destroys. [...]

What if Angie doesn't exist? What if she is only an invention of VP?

How DARE you, sir? What is between them has nothing to do with the animadverting and personal slurs that are being put across here. Or even Victor's plagiarism. Their love, and its continuance, is their business.

Do you think — or does anyone else — that because Angie and Victor made public note in this forum of their affection, their emotions, and finally their meeting, you have an unlimited right and license to comment on and judge the standards and behavior of that relationship? If so, well, you have no such right and no such license. To presume that you are in any position to offer such advice is to go where you do not belong.

When someone shares a value, or the knowledge of it, with others, this doesn't mean that any of those others have a moral right to make prescriptions or proclamations to those doing the sharing. More simply: They did not ask for your advice, Brant.

As for "doesn't exist," a truly nasty comment not couched in anything suggesting that you were facetious:

I'm one of the few here who actually has met Angie in person, as most of you know. I'm going to waste some money right now to demonstrate this: I have 15 exposures left on a camera (non-digital) wherein a picture resides of my having met Angie. I'm going to get that film prematurely developed, and that picture scanned and posted, in order to prove — with one of the highest possible Objectivist ironies — that Angie's existence exists.

Is that "necessary" on my part? No, of course not. But it's a gesture, in the face of a nauseating personal attack. This isn't just a superfluous twisting of the knife on someone whose absentia has already long been made plain. This is an attack on his highest personal values, wherein nobody has business treading.

And that ought to be seen, by everyone around here, as being unacceptable. We'll see.

Of course I apologize to Angie for the aforementioned post. I shouldn't have made it. I was wrong to do so.

--Brant

Apology accepted, thank you, Brant

Angie

[Judith]

For awhile, I was actually wondering if it was possible that Victor has a near-photographic memory and was pulling this stuff up out of his mind without intending to copy.

But there's his statement in the "Madame Bovary" thread that "I don’t deny lifting text out of sheer laziness".

I just don't see any possible motivation for the copying. How much work does it take to chase down all the things that one wants to say and copy them, rather than simply writing them out for one's self?

And what pleasure is there in using someone else's words when one has the wonderful opportunity to use one's own?

I'm curious. Did you read any of the Art threads (I mean the threads about the visual arts)? I recall your saying a couple times that there are a lot of forums on the site at which you never look, and I wonder if those threads were amongst them. He needed to resort to the copying to give any appearance of providing argumentation. When answering on his own, he got mixed up over even such details as having cast discredit on Frank Lloyd Wright's window panes, and then denying he'd done so. The "wonderful opportunity" of using his own words would have produced complete incoherence.

Astute point, Ellen! I rarely looked at the visual arts threads and accordingly didn't see those discussions.

It still strikes me that it it takes an awful lot of effort to find words by other people that say exactly what one wants to say at the moment, rather than whipping off one's own contribution from scratch. If one can understand the quotes and apply them appropriately, how hard can it be to speak for one's self? It's like the robber who's too lazy to get a job and who then spends every waking moment planning robberies -- it's harder than an honest job would have been.

Judith

[Jonathan]

For awhile, I was actually wondering if it was possible that Victor has a near-photographic memory and was pulling this stuff up out of his mind without intending to copy.

But there's his statement in the "Madame Bovary" thread that "I don’t deny lifting text out of sheer laziness".

I just don't see any possible motivation for the copying. How much work does it take to chase down all the things that one wants to say and copy them, rather than simply writing them out for one's self?

And what pleasure is there in using someone else's words when one has the wonderful opportunity to use one's own?

I'm curious. Did you read any of the Art threads (I mean the threads about the visual arts)? I recall your saying a couple times that there are a lot of forums on the site at which you never look, and I wonder if those threads were amongst them. He needed to resort to the copying to give any appearance of providing argumentation. When answering on his own, he got mixed up over even such details as having cast discredit on Frank Lloyd Wright's window panes, and then denying he'd done so. The "wonderful opportunity" of using his own words would have produced complete incoherence.

Astute point, Ellen! I rarely looked at the visual arts threads and accordingly didn't see those discussions.

It still strikes me that it it takes an awful lot of effort to find words by other people that say exactly what one wants to say at the moment, rather than whipping off one's own contribution from scratch. If one can understand the quotes and apply them appropriately, how hard can it be to speak for one's self? It's like the robber who's too lazy to get a job and who then spends every waking moment planning robberies -- it's harder than an honest job would have been.

Judith

A lot of what Victor "had to say at the moment" about art didn't necessarily address the specifics of what others were discussing, but were just general rants against abstract art (which is one of the reasons that some of us reached a point where we were not reading most of his posts).

It's not all that hard to find essays that are either for or against abstract art in general, but I would imagine that it's very hard to find ones which answer the specific questions that some of us were asking of Victor. For example, I asked him several times to explain hows forms like music, architecture and dance could be considered intelligible by the same standards which he was using to reject abstract art as a legitimate art form, and, more importantly, when he announced that he had decided that architecture is not an art form, I asked why he was not calling people who disagreed with him charlatans (as he was calling people who disagreed with him that abstract art was not art). He'd ignore my specific questions, and then, later, he'd post yet another general rant against abstract art, calling people names again, impugning their motives for believing what they believed, yet still not addressing why he wasn't applying the same standards to those who believed that architecture was art.

So, to answer your question ("If one can understand the quotes and apply them appropriately, how hard can it be to speak for one's self?"), I would say that he was not applying quotes appropriately, but just repeating the same general assertions in a slightly different way (with others' words) because he was not capable of speaking for himself on the specific issues.

So, I think you're being too generous in assuming that Victor was just borrowing from others what he might have otherwise said on his own, especially when you consider that he wasn't just presenting others' beliefs as his own, but their experiences as well. I mean, you don't believe that he just happened to have the same experiences confronting modernist and postmodernist "con-artists" that someone at RuthlessReviews.com claimed to have had when confronting people who had read The Fountainhead, do you? You don't believe that he just happened to teach the same specific disciplines -- anatomy, perspective, proportion and foreshortening, to name a few -- that Igor Babailov (whose words Victor borrowed) taught, do you? Victor is good at what he does with his caricature work -- his use of lighting, form and color are very expressive -- but I've seen nothing to indicate that he understands classical anatomy, perspective, proportion and foreshortening, let alone at a level that would allow him to teach it. I'd be willing to bet that Victor has never been in situations that were even remotely similar to those which he was trying to pass off as his own experiences.

So, again, I don't buy the idea that he was borrowing descriptions that happened to coincide with what he would have said otherwise. I don't think he was being like a robber who stupidly works much harder at planning robberies than what would be required to do an honest job -- I don't think that he was working hard to find others' words that actually fit the conversations or accurately reflected his beliefs or experiences, because the content that he stole often did not fit the conversations or accurately represent his experiences.

J

[Brant Gaede]

Of course I apologize to Angie for the aforementioned post. I shouldn't have made it. I was wrong to do so.

--Brant

Apology accepted, thank you, Brant

Angie

Angie, I think you are a fine young woman with a very highly developed thinking and writing style and I wish you a long, happy and productive life.

--Brant

PS: Love the photos. Especially the one of your son, Chris. I'd die and go to heaven to have such a beautiful son.

Edited June 30, 2007 by Brant Gaede

[CNA]

Of course I apologize to Angie for the aforementioned post. I shouldn't have made it. I was wrong to do so.

--Brant

Apology accepted, thank you, Brant

Angie

Angie, I think you are a fine young woman with a very highly developed thinking and writing style and I wish you a long, happy and productive life.

--Brant

PS: Love the photos. Especially the one of your son, Chris. I'd die and go to heaven to have such a beautiful son.

Thank you very much, Brant, and will have a happy long productive life !! Also thank you for visiting my Flickr page. Chris is an absolute doll and joy to be around. He is very vivacious and his joy of life is amazing to witness. He's a beacon of light, always exuding happiness, especially when he is adventurous and discovering new things. His eyes light up. He is my baby !! I recently took off some of the restrictions on my photos of him and my niece Kala so there are a few more shots that are now visible to the public. But thank you very much, Brant, for the sincerity and concern for my well-being. It's very sweet of you.

Angie

[Chris Grieb]

Angie; I'm glad you have chosen to stay with us. I never doubted your existence and never will.

Edited July 1, 2007 by Chris Grieb

[CNA]

Angie; I'm glad you have chosen to stay with us. I never doubted your existence and never will.

Thank you, Chris. I'm not sure what you mean by "chosen to stay with us." If you mean that by staying around on OL or any O'ist online communities, I won't be around. I've pretty much have lost all interest in online O'ist sites. I've seen so much in the year I've been on OL and watching other sites as well, etc. Just too much game playing, too much social meta crap, too much tribalism as some would say, too much hate, too much cynicism, too much gossip for me, too many rationalizations, too much of a lot. I sometimes think I am back in high school as it was with grouping, the cheerleaders on one side, the intellectuals on another side, the jocks on another side; we're better than you because we belong to this group, etc. Just a lot of immaturity going around on many sites, it's unfortunate. I pretty much dropped off quite a few months ago but will be more so now. I very much would like to find some place where there is real life experiences, people talking about their stories, their conclusions, what they've learned on their own rather than adopting what they've read in a book. For me, this is where it is at, the truly independent mind, their firsthand experiences, their own conclusions, their own understanding of what they went through.

I'm not saying that this is the case with all of OL because this isn't so but it is running rampant in the O'ist community and many different sites. I have met a rare few here that are like this and extremely independent so I am grateful for that. I've got a life to live, a new hobby I enjoy tremendously, getting a lot done since I no longer frequent O'ist sites. It's been a breath of fresh air and have been extremely productive more so now because of it. Although not active on OL, etc., I still enjoy intellectual convos through emails with the few I talk with so it's all good. I'm sure I'll lurk around on rare occasions but I am sure it will be a long while before I become active again on OL.

Angie

Edited July 2, 2007 by CNA

[Ciro]

Angie wrote:I've seen so much in the year I've been on OL and watching other sites as well, etc. Just too much game playing, too much social meta crap, too much tribalism as some would say, too much hate, too much cynicism, too much gossip for me, too many rationalizations, too much of a lot.

Dear Angie,

who are you talking about? lhahahahahahhahah

best to you my friend!

[Reidy]

A few years back the measure of being Somebody in Objectivist circles was to have been cited in Jeff Walker's book. Now it is to have been plagiarized by Victor.

[Barbara Branden]

A few years back the measure of being Somebody in Objectivist circles was to have been cited in Jeff Walker's book. Now it is to have been plagiarized by Victor.

Damn! I haven't made it yet. I've managed the first, but not the second... as far as I know.

Barbara

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Pross is using the Meetup site to make a public confession, see here. I am mentioned a lot. Despite the flattering statements, I wish I could feel good about this. But I can't feel good about something I do not believe in. He presented part of a private email I wrote to him, but he added his own words to it. In principle, I am against publishing private correspondence without permission from the author, and I did not give my permission for that. Still, in this case, I would have no objection except the principle if it were my own words. Here is what he presented (with his words in bold):

You are the only person I have ever met who is addicted to attention-getting or posting or plagiary. The bitch about this is that you have real talent and a good mind. You don't need this suicidal behavior to get the attention you crave or to achieve good things in life. Something is really mixed up way down on your premise level causing this self-destructive behavior and you have shown to be helpless before it.

What I actually wrote was:

You are the only person I have ever met who is addicted to plagiary. The bitch about this is that you have real talent and a good mind. You don't need this suicidal behavior to get the attention you crave or to achieve good things in life. Something is really mixed up way down on your premise level causing this self-destructive behavior and you have shown to be helpless before it.

Starting in this manner, I do not believe the problem is being addressed at all. Instead, I believe he is angling for an attention fix and singing the "taking responsibility" line because he has no other. One thing is clear. He has not yet developed any real respect for the words of others.

Why not leave the words the way I wrote them? I sent this passage to a couple of people before his post went up. Surely he must have realized that. Frankly, it is irritating to look at a public presentation of some text with my name attached to it and see words that I did not write to endorse ideas I do not hold. (Also, he knows how to spell my name correctly.)

I contend that the only manner to get well is to stop faking reality. Not even faking a little reality. I especially do not appreciate his faking my reality.

LATER NOTE: The passage has been corrected.

Michael

[Jonathan]

I don't expect that Victor will change overnight, and I can understand your having doubts, MSK, especially since he's posted a private message of yours without permission and altered the content (now corrected), but I have to say that I'm glad to see him at least trying to take some steps in the right direction. Time will tell if he's sincere about taking responsibility. If he follows through on diligently compiling and presenting a list of his plagiarized posts, it will go a long way, at least in my book.

One other comment:

Victor has mentioned Steve Reed's use of "schadenfreude." As someone who has ridiculed Victor's poor behavior, I wanted to say that I don't think that people here were taking pleasure in Victor's misfortunes, but were expressing disapproval of his misdeeds. I don't think it's at all accurate to say that Victor has been the victim of a lynching, as Steve said before pretending to unsay it in the same post. No one was piling on or kicking Victor when he was down, since they were not given the impression that he was down.

If Victor is now suffering misfortunes, I'm not deriving pleasure from discovering it. My hope is that he will sincerely make amends, and then go on to live a happy life.

J

[BAMF]

If he follows through on diligently compiling and presenting a list of his plagiarized posts, it will go a long way, at least in my book.

He is working on it. Dude's got a lotta posts.

[Matus1976]

Victor Wrote, over at meetup

"I am taking full responsibility for my actions regarding the matter of plagiarism at Objectivist Living...

I was addicted to posting"

Hey, we have all at times been guilty of posting more often than is probably in accordance with our own golden means, but Victor was not merely posting often, he was posting a particular way, a way which included theft of ideas and fraud. But how, exactly, does one 'take responsiblity' by admitting they are 'addicted' ? Those evading personal responsibility always say "I can't help it, I'm an addict!"

Victor chose willingly and consciously, every single moment, to copy some one elses work, change a word or two in each sentance, and then pretend it was his own work. I have a hard time reconciling such behavior with the concepts connected to 'addiction' Dropping the addiction idea, Victor would have elaborated on the reasons why he thinks he was compelled to comitting this fraud, which is different than being 'addicted' He does so here:

"I used plagiarism in such a way to smack OL in the face---and I wanted to be discovered---so as to be tossed off the site. "

But I'm not buying it, didnt he plagairise on many other sites as well? There is something deeper at root here, clearly Victor has a good mind has is capable of presenting and arguing ideas on his own. But the word and idea of 'addiction' seems out of place in this context, Victor chose to steal other people's ideas, what, because he was angry that other people werent as happy for him as he was?? Then he proceeded to attack those who challenged him ferociously, and now by pulling out the 'addiction' card wants a clean slate?

Edited July 3, 2007 by Matus1976

[Ellen Stuttle]

On Meetup. com, Victor has cited me as a bad example of prying into his relationship with Angie. He correctly quoted what he quoted, but didn't provide the start of the quote or indicate the context.

The statement about his spending a lot of time in communication with Angie wasn't speculation, as he describes, but instead came from accepting his own numerous reports to that effect as accurate.

Of more importance: Victor is giving as a reason for his massive plagiary here his anger at the reception when he posted about having become attracted to Angie.

Possibly this might be plausible as a reason for his having turned to wholesale plagiary, but I doubt that the plagiary here started only after his "Love in Bloom" item.

I paid little attention to Victor's early material posted on OL. In looking back though, I wonder about these articles, all posted within a few days of his joining OL (he joined June 23, '06):

Satire as a Moral Message, posted Jun 24 2006, 04:37 PM;

The Age of SO WHAT?, posted Jun 24 2006, 09:03 PM;

LENNY BRUCE: A First Amendment Hero!, posted Jun 26 2006, 01:52 AM.

Ironically, at the start I was of the opinion that the outcry on SOLO over his having picked up material from an O'ist site and forgotten (in haste, he said) to use quote marks was just another tempest in an O'ist teapot. See this post by me.

In the same thread, Victor writes An Open letter to Diana... explaining his behavior on SOLO.

The parallels to his current explanations might be of interest.

Ellen

___

Edited July 3, 2007 by Ellen Stuttle

[BAMF]

But how, exactly, does one 'take responsiblity' by admitting they are 'addicted' ?

The first step to taking action is admitting you have something you need to take action to deal with. Victor is helping to find his plagiarisms. He's found some. They will be posted soon and he will continue to look for them. That is action. He has also apologized to some of those he has hurt.

[Jonathan]

On Meetup. com, Victor has cited me as a bad example of prying into his relationship with Angie.

I hadn't seen the genuine contrition posts until just now. Unfortunately (or maybe I should say fortunately), with a busy holiday schedule, I have no time to comment, other than to make a brief request: Victor, now that you've made some apologies and comments about wanting to redeem yourself, it might be a good time to think about taking some time away from dealing with this issue publicly. Ask yourself if it is understandable that people would continue to be angry with you and wary of anything that you might have to say. There are a lot of people who are going to need a lot of time before they begin to even think about trusting you again. Some of them never will. Any little lie or fuck up that you make is going to be noticed and criticized, and rightfully so. I think you have to focus solely on you and what is your fault, and you have to stop attacking people who you think are attacking you. No one owes you generosity, and being critical of anyone right now other than yourself is just not cool.

You're in a shitty position, but being aggressive, or pushing for a quick resolution, isn't going to help.

J

[Barbara Branden]

I'm sorry to see that Victor is posturing as much as he ever did -- but this time with a different posture. Now he is the abject penitent, admitting his misdeeds, determined to change -- while blaming his misdeeds on Michael, and terribly eager to impress upon his readers how heroic he is for admitting to what he's been caught doing. He is as much in denial as he was when he countered Dan Edge's exposure of his plagiarism by calling Dan a murderer.

If he would stop blaming other people for what he did and come off the "see how heroic I am" nonsense, I might be inclined to suspect him of sincerity. And are we really supposed to admire him for offering to tell Michael, after heaps of bodies have been discovered, where he buried the rest of the bodies?

Barbara