Till Noever: Shameless Hypocrite and Coward

As noted below, Till Noever--in a display of cowardice and hypocrisy--deleted my comments from his blog. The conduct was hypocritical because, in his blog, he criticizes me for not granting Paul Rhoads the right of reply on the Jack Vance Message Board. The conduct was cowardly because he has not engaged directly with my accusations. If Till wants to delete my comments, that's fine. But I want everyone to know that he's a hypocrite.

I have taken this issue up with Till directly. Here's the exchange that we have had so far. First, I wrote the following:

So let's get this straight:

1. In your blog, you criticized me for banning Paul Rhoads. You offered two reasons: (a) censorship is wrong; (b) an accused person should be given the right of reply in the forum in which he or she is accused.

2. I responded with comments to your blog entry.

3. You responded by deleting my comments.

Don't you see that your deleting my comments was precisely the same sort of conduct that you said was wrong on my part? Are there two sets of rules: one for you, one for me? You get to censor me; you get to accuse me and deprive me of the right of reply. By contrast, I do not get to censor Paul Rhoads; Paul has a right of reply, no matter how he acts?

Till, you should be ashamed of yourself. Go back to your blog and admit your error.

Till responded:

No. I also deleted Paul's comments. And I really don't want to hear from you
anymore, because you bore me.

Well, I wasn't talking about Paul's comments. I was talking about Till's comments.

And I bore Till? Really? I don't think so. I think that Till just can't admit his own hypocrisy.

I responded:

You didn't delete your comments, though.

And you're a liar. You don't want to hear from me because I have exposed your hypocrisy.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Till responded as follows to my note that he hadn't deleted his comments:

And you're welcome to reply to them in your own blog as you please, how you please, if you please and when you please. The world's your oyster.

So I have responded to Till as follows:

And Paul Rhoads was free to reply to my accusations on his own BBS, how he pleased, if he pleased, and when he pleased. The world was his oyster.

Yet you criticized me for banning Rhoads from posting on my BBS. And now you have taken precisely the same approach to me that I took to Rhoads.

If you criticize me, you need to criticize yourself.

I don't imagine that Till is going to admit that he's a hypocrite. It's fruitless to think that he will admit his error. But I'm not going to let his hypocrisy go unchallenged.