Threepercenter.org has no relationship to me and the Sipsey Street Three Percenters. The site was established well after I had made it a prominent term. Their use of the term does not imply any affiliation or endorsement on my part.
The Three Percent is an idea and a movement, NOT a "DOT Org." But the Internet is a big, free space so he can say what he wishes. What I wish is that he put a disclaimer on HIS site indicating the same things.
Mike
III
17 comments:
No need to approve this post for comment, but I intend it as an FYI since a correction is needed.
Threepercent.org goes to something different and unrelated. It should read "Threepercenter.org", but it's possible you spelled it wrong on purpose to avoid establishing a link. If that's the case, my apologies. Just wanted to make sure this wasn't an oversight.
Had a brief email exchange with the very defensive Brad Clifford. First, he claimed he had no idea there was any such thing as a threeper movement when he started the site. Next, he claimed that Sipsey Street Irregulars didn't have any definition of a "threeper". Then he tried to correct that statement, and said he meant that he got the definition from another site. Which would seem to indicate that he did know of the movement.
If he'd just said something like, "Yeah, I thought the threeper idea was so good, I wanted to show my support", I'd have thought, "Cool. Fellow traveller." And maybe he really is. But his evasions and inconsistencies incline me to mistrust him.
Mike -
Click the "About" link in the top right corner of the threepercenter.org page.
I found the following:
"Please visit The Sipsey Street Irregulars, the blog of the founder of the term and meaning of three percenters (Therepercenter.org is not affiliated)."
James
III
it's on the about page, but they ought to post it more prominently.
other than that, hey, no problem. just another spartacus.
Carl Bussjaeger misrepresents any email exchange. I'll send you copies if you want. But I'm sick and tired of psychotics running around misrepresenting the facts.
Quote:
March 4, 2010 4:23 PM Anonymous said...
Carl Bussjaeger misrepresents any email exchange. I'll send you copies if you want. But I'm sick and tired of psychotics running around misrepresenting the facts.
March 4, 2010 6:39 PM
Hey Brad Clifford, Send copies of any misrepresented email exchange(s)from/to Carl Bussjaeger as referenced above, to Mike or just post them in a reply to this topic Sir.
Chris
III
To anon @ 6:39 - If what you say is true, why not post the e-mail exchange on your site? Frankly, I trust MBV and CB, but I'll ALWAYS consider any and all available evidence on anything. You've made a pretty bold claim, and I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing there was some evidence available to consider.
The REAL point here however is that of non-affiliation. You could solve that quandary with a prominently-displayed statement - which seems to be all MBV is seeking.
Why not?
$0.02...
Mike, you can put this in comments or as a separate post, which you think appropriate. I'm beaking this down in separate posts due to the character limit. Thanks.
1) My initial email to Clifford:
---
Mr. Clifford,
Interesting site you have there. Odd though, that a search of "vanderboegh" doesn't turn up a single hit. I think for real Threeper info I'll stick with http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com .
Carl Bussjaeger
http://www.bussjaeger.org
---
2) His reply. Note the "not known that Mike created an organization or even coined the phrase" and "the definition of three percenter wasn't even found on his site".
---
Hello Carl Bussjaeger,
1: This site was created under the assumption that "Three Percenter" was
a term used to describe individuals with a common belief set. It was not
known that Mike created an organization or even coined the phrase at the
time. In fact, the definition of three percenter wasn't even found on
his site. To bad though, as it would have saved me allot of trouble.
2: Mike may want to call us shills or what have you.. and even claim
that we are here to make money. Well, We did make money. We may bring in
almost $3 a month which is to be applied towards hosting costs.
Obviously, it does not cover those costs. This site wasn't created to
bring in money, nor glory -- Only a place to network like minded
individuals and have a place to discuss things.
3: Mike has never made any effort to contact us here. Efforts where made
to contact him though. If he so-requested, this site would have been
taken down. I would have even handed it over to him if he wasn't so
concerned about keeping himself on some sort of pedestal.
As far as "real" three percenter -- If its an organization, I suppose
that would be a fair assessment. If its just a coined term or phrase..
it would be very ambiguous and aught to promote the creation of sites
with the purpose much like threepercenter.org.
Did you manage to read the about section? Here is a snippet:
"A note: Threepercenter.org does not directly represent Three Percenters
everywhere, we do however share in the Three Percenter spirit and
ideology (and identify ourselves as Three Percenters). We cherish and
work to defend our 2nd Amendment rights along with all our rights and
liberties.
Please visit The Sipsey Street Irregulars, the blog of the founder of
the term and meaning of three percenters (Therepercenter.org is not
affiliated)."
I hope this helps clarify things a bit.
-- Brad Clifford
---
3) My response:
---
Mr Clifford,
>1: This site was created under the assumption that "Three Percenter" was
>a term used to describe individuals with a common belief set. It was not
>known that Mike created an organization or even coined the phrase at the
>time.
Given the timing -- I saw when you registered the domain -- that seems unlikely.
> In fact, the definition of three percenter wasn't even found on
>his site. To bad though, as it would have saved me allot of trouble.
Then you are illiterate. the definition is featured prominently on his site, and has been for quite some time.
>2: Mike may want to call us shills or what have you.. and even claim
>that we are here to make money. Well, We did make money. We may bring in
>almost $3 a month which is to be applied towards hosting costs.
Speaking for myself, I suspect that Mr. Vanderboegh was more concered about the "shill" part than making money. Note his lack of disapproval of those selling threeper and Nyberg patches and flags.
>3: Mike has never made any effort to contact us here. Efforts where made
>to contact him though. If he so-requested, this site would have been
>taken down. I would have even handed it over to him if he wasn't so
>concerned about keeping himself on some sort of pedestal.
Hmm. I wasn't even aware of the existence of your site, pre-MJ coverage. And I know that Mr. Vanderboegh has been knowledgeable of other "3%" groups (he apparently wants to know of what the SPLC will try to link him to; a wise decision). And I've never had any difficulty email him, and getting answers. Actually, I have other meat-space friends who similarly report being able to converse with Mr. Vandeboegh.
Maybe you're doing it wrong.
As for pedestals... That alone indicates "shill" or clueless plant.
>As far as "real" three percenter -- If its an organization, I suppose
>that would be a fair assessment. If its just a coined term or phrase..
>it would be very ambiguous and aught to promote the creation of sites
>with the purpose much like threepercenter.org.
Not an organization, but a movement, an idea. One which is not entirely consistent with posts I've seen on your site. One which you appear to be trying to hijack. Personally, I'm self-employed right now. But I wonder for whom you work.
>Did you manage to read the about section? Here is a snippet:
Yes, and I notice that it was edited again "Wednesday, March 03, 2010 9:56:47 PM". Just a little after my email.
>I hope this helps clarify things a bit.
Immensely.
Carl Bussjaeger
---
4) Clifford's second response. This where he admits finding the threeper definition: "I actually meant to say that the definition wasn't originally found on his site."
---
I don't care if you don't believe me, its not my problem. Insulting me
changes nothing.
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 22:05 -0500, Carl Bussjaeger wrote:
> Mr Clifford,
>
> >1: This site was created under the assumption that "Three Percenter" was
> >a term used to describe individuals with a common belief set. It was not
> >known that Mike created an organization or even coined the phrase at the
> >time.
>
> Given the timing -- I saw when you registered the domain -- that seems unlikely.
>
Seems unlikely? It also seems unlikely that you would take it upon
yourself to insult people that you know nothing about.
>
> > In fact, the definition of three percenter wasn't even found on
> >his site. To bad though, as it would have saved me allot of trouble.
>
> Then you are illiterate. the definition is featured prominently on his site, and has been for quite some time.
>
Yes, it is. I miss typed that. I actually meant to say that the
definition wasn't originally found on his site.
>
> >2: Mike may want to call us shills or what have you.. and even claim
> >that we are here to make money. Well, We did make money. We may bring in
> >almost $3 a month which is to be applied towards hosting costs.
>
> Speaking for myself, I suspect that Mr. Vanderboegh was more concered about the "shill" part than making money. Note his lack of disapproval of those selling threeper and Nyberg patches and flags.
>
We didn't sell anything .. just so you know. Actually, emails I had
received inquiring about such things.. I sent them a link to the seller
he advertises on his site.
Just another note btw: I already posted a note to his blog at an earlier
date explaining the situation. However, your guys' attitude is akin to
harassing someone for creating a site after a phrase like "In God We
Trust". There was never any ill-will intended.
>
> >3: Mike has never made any effort to contact us here. Efforts where made
> >to contact him though. If he so-requested, this site would have been
> >taken down. I would have even handed it over to him if he wasn't so
> >concerned about keeping himself on some sort of pedestal.
>
and part 2 of his second response:
---
> Hmm. I wasn't even aware of the existence of your site, pre-MJ coverage. And I know that Mr. Vanderboegh has been knowledgeable of other "3%" groups (he apparently wants to know of what the SPLC will try to link him to; a wise decision). And I've never had any difficulty email him, and getting answers. Actually, I have other meat-space friends who similarly report being able to converse with Mr. Vandeboegh.
>
> Maybe you're doing it wrong.
>
Maybe, maybe he has some sort of code word to get a response from him.
Maybe he rides a pink elephant too. I don't know.
> As for pedestals... That alone indicates "shill" or clueless plant.
>
Really? I must be a clueless plant. That MUST be it!
> >As far as "real" three percenter -- If its an organization, I suppose
> >that would be a fair assessment. If its just a coined term or phrase..
> >it would be very ambiguous and aught to promote the creation of sites
> >with the purpose much like threepercenter.org.
>
> Not an organization, but a movement, an idea. One which is not entirely consistent with posts I've seen on your site. One which you appear to be trying to hijack. Personally, I'm self-employed right now. But I wonder for whom you work.
>
I'm honestly not trying to hijack anything. I'm not employed by some
phantom government agency. I was only trying to connect people with
each-other. People are allowed to post on a verity of subjects. I try
not to interfere with others opinions on the site to much.
If I was trying to hijack it, I'd do it much differently I'm sure.
>
> >Did you manage to read the about section? Here is a snippet:
>
> Yes, and I notice that it was edited again "Wednesday, March 03, 2010 9:56:47 PM". Just a little after my email.
>
It was only edited to fix layout issues with the site. The text for
several pages were way over to the left hand side. That had been
corrected today (or March 3rd).
Actually, the forums were all out of whack too. Of course, you would
have known this if you looked at the site at an earlier date.
>
> >I hope this helps clarify things a bit.
>
> Immensely.
>
> Carl Bussjaeger
>
Well thats good.
-- Brad Clifford
---
OK, there are the emails. Decide for yourself. One thing I do have to correct: I stated that until the Mother Jones piece, I was unaware of his site. In fact, I failed to connect this site with the one we discussed last year. I attribute that to an interval of months, and changes to the site layout. Then I realized these were one and the same.
Carl posted the email so need for anyone else to. Thanks Carl.
The "About" section includes two other comments in the far right column.
The first is another disclaimer about Sipsey Street claiming no affiliation or endorsement.
The other comment states the .org URL will expire on 05/23/10 with traffic to be redirected after that time.
Sounds to me like they are going to abandon the threepercenter URL altogether, but it's likely someone else will pick it up later.
Anonymous, you are quite welcome. I'll admit that I can sometimes be an opinionated and judgemental SOB; that's why I'm willing to share the exchange with everyone -- if consensus says I'm wrong, I should apologize.
for the sake of the information you put out on the internet. i hope you make the effort to buy or own the domain names in thier various forms: ie .net, .com .tv or .org if (they) act first. they can shut you out. and turh your web site into anything but what it is; good luck!
Post a Comment