[Coco] Fresh new retro computing article!

Brian Blake random.rodder at gmail.com
Tue May 28 18:21:58 EDT 2019

I'm not digging thru all of these to find one message...

Stevie, if you're going to quote me, at least get it right. I didn't need
to read any father than the first sentence...

I've never said 'I've never watched CoCoTalk'. What i said was,  I don't
watch CoCoTalk. There's a huge difference as I have signed in on numerous
occasions and watched for a while.

The reasons i don't watch it can be summed up like this:

1. If I want to watch toilet humor, I'll watch Beavis and Butthead.

2. If I want to hear talk about the female body, I'll watch shows that
actually display it.

3. At no time do I want to watch middle aged men crack bad jokes about
bodily functions, discuss women's beasts and what they feel like, with a
little retro computing interspersed.

Thanks, John, for the link:


In summary for those without Facebook:

1. Fest 2018 - Mark M. demoed a new RAM upgrade
2. Sometime in 2018, Richard L. Released a new RAM upgrade
3. Both were 2MB upgrades
4. Shortly prior to Fest 2019, Mark M. released a chart comparing the two
5. In Joey Buckets response a guy with a one day old membership to the
group disputed Marks info - ther person's name was Brock Harrison
6. Boisy asked him a legit question of how he knew so much about the
product, while being so new to the group
7. He didn't answer the question, just stated Richard L. asked him to join
and comment
8. I asked why Richard didn't respond, and stated that after all the
support and good word of mouth about his product, I didn't understand why
he needed a spokesman
9. Richard responded he never heard of Brock, never asked anyone to answer
anything, and didn't need a spokesman

At that point, I set Brock's membership to MUTE,  and sent him a PM asking
him to explain himself, why he claimed what he did. This east dive with
some discussions with the other Admins.

I got no response until after the Fest when, ironically, both Brock and
Stevie surfaced within an hour of each other.

Brock stated he was disappointed in the actions that were taken - he did
not explain why he did what he did. After some short admin discussion,
Brock was banned.

1. Brock lied about who he was - saying Richard asked him to answer
questions suggested at least a working relationship. Richard's response
calls this into question.

2. Brock lied about his purpose for being in the group - again, see number

While the information he gave appeared to be accurate, lying about who he
is and his pretense for being a member belies that. Further, he never
answered the question of why he took the actions he did - nor did he ever
answer the question Boisy posed.

If only the story ended there...

Like I said earlier, Stevie and Brock both showed up within a short time of
each other. Stevie accused the other group admins of censorship because
Brock was muted, then banned. He threw a tantrum, is the best description,
and constantly claimed Brock did nothing wrong. When several of us
disagreed, Stevie left the admin group in a huff.

After a short time, he used another of his accounts that also had admin
privileges to rejoin the conversation - still claiming Brock did nothing
wrong, not caring about the fact that the only truth Brock had told to that
point was about Richard's RAM upgrade.

If Brock wanted social media anonymity, I get it. Say so, answer some
questions so we know whats going on. We got nothing like that, and that
still wouldn't answer the questions why he lied about Richard asking him to
join and comment.

So basically, we're left with several possibilities:

1. Richard lied and did ask others to respond to the post for him -
personally, I have no reason to believe this.

2. Brock lied about everything regarding Richard, but, had really good
knowledge of the product (it was pointed out by Bruce, I think, much of
this info was available on Discord).
This, I'm more inclined to believe.

3. Stevie knows who Brock is. I find it difficult to believe any reasonable
person would take up the mantle of someone who was proven to be a liar,
without actually knowing them in some fashion.

Banning Brock was not censorship in any way. Nobody has an inherent right
to be a member of a group, or message list, for that matter.

When I say that Stevie and people like him have made CoCo group less fun
and enjoyable, that's what I mean. Knowingly and openly defending a liar
leaves a less than desirable taste.

Coming in a week after the fact and criticizing decisions made without his
input because he was 'getting ready for the fest', criticizing other admins
for having a differing opinion, stating a person did no wrong when the
person clearly lied; that's what I meant when I said he thinks his opinions
are more important than others.

It was suggested to him he could undo the ban if he wished. At this point,
I left the admin group and CoCo group - and I didn't have multiple
accounts. I left because I knew if he unbanned Brock, I'd just ban him
again - and this would start a never ending circle until either Stevie or
myself, or both of us got kicked out. The reality is, none of that is even
close to being worth it.

Take my comments for what they're worth to you, read the link John sent if
you can. I tried to summarize as accurately as I remember. Ask some of the
other admins on the group their opinion. Make your own mind up.


More information about the Coco mailing list