Hi. This is the monster referred to above by the anonymous writer. I must say the picture of me doesn’t look a bit like me?! Anyway, I thought I might respond a bit to this fellow’s comments about me. First, a few questions:

1. Why is his name not posted or available?
2. How come he never communicated with me personally about his concerns, especially after he left the company?

I would start by apologizing to this fellow for any real offense I caused him if I was having a bad day, for I do have them…even monster’s do! I am far from perfect and I fail.

Who ever this person is, they never knew me except by phone conversations in the context of software support. Believe it or not, large companies (and their representatives) do make false representations about their products and service, and I do get annoyed at that from time to time. I did point that out from time to time, and even if I did so in a normal tone of voice, to those who don’t want to hear it, it will generally be heard as a raging monster. Perhaps, deep down, they know they are doing something wrong by denying truth?

Apparently the anonymous person above claims to know something about Jesus’ teachings as he ‘corrects me’ (not much constructive here), I guess, in light of them. Which teachings of Jesus does this fellow follow…only the one’s he can use to slander me I guess! : )

Contrary to most people’s understanding of ‘Jesus’ teachings, he did offend most people. In fact, He offended people so much that the majority sought to – and did – kill him.

Unlike Jesus, however, I am sure sometimes the way I say something is less than perfect. However, I have noticed that many times, no matter how gently I say something, if it is truth that does not want to be heard, then people will start scouring for my imperfections in order to assassinate my character….hum…

Let’s review the facts again. This fellow does not provide his name. He never communicated anything to me regarding his opinions about me, other than this public attack. He probably has less than perfect days…how would he feel if someone did this to him? I guess he chooses not to listen to Jesus’ teaching about turning the other cheek and returning kindness for what he considers evil.

Please do visit my web site, and note that I don’t have any articles on that site attacking any person. Doesn’t this seem ‘out of character’ for the monster described above?

Most importantly, please do listen to Jesus, not me, for I only seek to repeat his Words, at times, no doubt, imperfectly.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”
(Joh 14:6)

Mr. Spiess, you raise an excellent point about turning the other cheek. I agree that turning the other cheek would have been the Christian thing to do. I do admit that this post was written in a fit of pique, and such moods can often lead one to say or write things that could have been posed more constructively.

However:

1. It isn’t hard to dig my name out of this site or the Internet. I’m not hiding. Pseudonyms are de rigeur for bloggers, and I am simply one of the herd, in that respect. Closer inspection of the content of this very page would, in fact, tell you who I am.
2. While I was in the employ of the company that provided our mutual connection, it was not my place to let you know how you were perceived; that role was played by others, higher up in the organization. I imagine they sugar-coated it for you. If so, I regret that you had to find out this way. After I’d left, it wasn’t worth the effort.

You are quite right in that I only knew you in one specific context, but please be hereby advised that your tone was seldom “gentle”. Indeed, it would have often been aptly described as alternating between “imperious” and “snide”. Certainly, as you say, nobody is perfect, and we all have bad days. Simple pattern analysis of the treatment you frequently dealt to me and my colleagues, however, indicated that you were just a jerk, because the overwhelming majority of contact with you was extremely unpleasant. You were not nice. The lack of any venomous personal attacks on your websites can not, unfortunately, be accepted as prima facie evidence of a lack of bile—not, at least, by those who were unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end of your attitude.

I will certainly not debate theology and/or the teachings of Jesus with you, since my understanding of Scripture and His Word is poor, at best. I do find it interesting, however, that you seem to imply that, like Jesus, you are being unfairly attacked for daring to gently explain the truth. Do you really seek to paint yourself as a martyr, against whom the whole world is set?

I must stand by my original words, hurtful and incivil though they might have been, for they draw an honest picture of the feelings and experience of not just me, but many people. Since they were posted for all to see, and have been seen, to erase them and pretend they were never published would be a lie.

Having said all this, though, I accept the apology you seem to gingerly offer, if you will accept mine in return. My erstwhile self-righteous wrath has abated with time, and I wish you no ill.

Well unfortunately I am not able to comment on the specifics here. I am deeply aware of all the situations. Two things I am sure of though the originator of this post made it 3 years ago and could really care less about the object of the post. I also am sure there is enough documentation to support the claims made in this post. Simply put the person who called in and the person who hosts jesusfamilies are almost two different people.

I am thoroughly intrigued. In addition, from what I was able to glean, I was happily off to find all internet related information and my browser crashed. I’ll take it as a sign to leave it alone. One thing I will say though is that the world in general should always remember that who we really are is the way we act when we think no one is watching.

For those with eyes to see….

1. Still no name on the page which slanders me.
2. My email is all over my web site, and anonymous never contacted me before posting the above slander.

I know many people who do not characterize me as anonymous does.

“Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way. ” (Luke 6:26)

Perhaps anonymous was particularly offended by something in is acting in a revengeful manner? Perhaps he really doesn’t like even a little bit of truth regarding something about himself which he doesn’t want to see?

Anonymous calls me, “major asshole”, “jackass”, “jerk”, and a dozen or so other such labels. Seems to me if anonymous was secure in what he believes, and he is so much better than me, he could at least refrain from such an attack…

His “honest picture” includes an unwillingness to plainly provide his name, no effort to contact me personally, and includes vulgar and mean-spirited labels? He wishes me “no ill”, but will leave this strong personal attack on the internet for everyone to see???

I suggest there is something else going on here, and I hope the reader has eyes to see.

By the way…to slander essentially means to say false things about someone with the intent to harm them. Every point anonymous makes about what he thinks my web site says, is either misrepresented out of context, or is plainly false. Why doesn’t anonymous post a quote from my web site – in context – to prove that is says, for example, that “the bible is basically worthless”.

Please remove this slanderous letter, anonymous.

Mr. Spiess: do you see the copyright information in the dark brown bar at the bottom of this page? It contains my name, and has appeared on this blog since its inception. I am not anonymous.My name is plainly available. Your failure to find this easily-obtainable information is no fault of mine.

I see you continue to harp upon the fact that I did not contact you personally. If you are accusing me of passive-agressive chickenshit, I am guilty as charged. As stated previously, however, I was forbidden to voice my displeasure to you directly while employed by the company which you had dealings with, and, afterward, gave this post (and you) little thought. I simply didn’t consider contacting you, because I had moved on.

As I stated before, I will not argue theology with you. Others with much better understandings of Scripture have done that, and I am not interested in following them. The picture I paint of your religious beliefs is in very, perhaps overly, broad strokes. Any reader of this post can follow the link I provide and judge for themselves whether or not they agree with my analysis. My opinion is my opinion. Please, readers, do visit Mr. Spiess’ site and read his writings for yourself. Do not take my word for it.

I find it interesting that you provide this gem:

“I know many people who do not characterize me as anonymous does.

‘Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.’ (Luke 6:26)”

What’s interesting about it is that:

• Your logic is flawed: Many people do not characterize you I did in 2005. Great! Unfortunately, that argument doesn’t hold a whole lot of weight. For instance, many people would not describe me as being able to speak German. Does that mean that I’m not capable of it? Nein.
• Your quotation from Luke doesn’t support the premise of your preceding sentence very well. Think about it.

I am also intrigued by this dark fantasy:

“I suggest there is something else going on here, and I hope the reader has eyes to see.”

Something else besides a three-year-old fit of pique? No. I was mad at you. Furious, even, when you brought one of my colleagues to the very brink of tears with your bullying manner after a history of rude behavior to both me and my colleagues. For the sake of argument, however, what sinister, ulterior motive do you suggest I am pursuing? Am I, perhaps, the paid agent of my former employer, which seeks to assassinate your character over how you treated a bunch of technical support agents? A follower of Satan attempting to dissuade people from salvation? A government operative? All three? More? Something else? If you’ve something to suggest, spit it out, instead of casting baseless aspersions.

I will not remove this post. I do not believe I am better than you, though I do say that I believe I was, and am, much nicer to technical staff and vendors than you were three years ago.

Let me sum this all up (again) for you and anyone else who might be reading this post and the attendant comment thread:

• You were snide, condescending, and rude to me and a number of my colleagues. Spin this however you like, or deny it altogether, but I stand by this assessment.
• My real name has been in plain sight for four years. I am not hiding.
• I have no interest in contacting you personally. I said my piece in 2005 and was done with it then.
• I am sorry that you are upset by this post, but I will not retroactively censor it.
• Take my analysis of your religious convictions with a grain of salt.

It was not my intent to inflict harm, only to vent spleen, and decry what I perceived as hypocrisy. The Internet is full of opinions; some are insightful, others silly, still others not worth the ones and zeroes they’re made of. Make of mine what you will.

To the people reading this ‘post’.

To the average person who might land on this page by, say, a search engine link (as opposed to the people that use and are familiar with this site)…how many would be able to understand that the brown frame bar at the bottom of the page containing a copyright label including a name, is the name of the person who wrote the post? Why not just place your name plainly in the post? Most people using written form of communication, especially specific communication about an individual, would sign their name to it unless they, for some reason, do not want their name associated with the communication.

Mr. Sievers refuses to post a quote from my site to validate his claims, which would be an easy thing to do. My above statement is true – his statement’s about what my site says are either completely false, or distorted and out of context.

Mr. Sievers wrote the above without any concern to contact me to understand me better, or to try and get to know me and thus try and gently correct me. This practice show’s no compassion, something he accuses me of and worse. Anyone can post anonymous diatribes against anybody, and perhaps this is a big part of the ugliness of the world. The reader should note that I don’t have any nasty attack writings on my web site (or anywhere else for that matter) regarding any individual person.

People can and do change, but Mr. Siever’s does not grant me that benefit of the doubt, but would rather keep this personal attack against me and my character on the world wide web for all to see.

Mr. Siever’s says, “I wish you no ill”, and “it was not my intent to inflict harm” even while he calls me, “major asshole”, “jackass”, “shitheel”, “Mr. Asshat”, “complete fuckstick”, “uptight prick”, “complete bastard”. And those are just the labels. He spends the rest of the his words in the original post attacking my character in a way that every one who was a target of that would consider it harmful to them. He even includes a mocking photo regarding my faith. His final verdict is essentially, that I was “not nice”.

Mr. Siever’s didn’t like the way I communicated to him in the context of computer software support, but Mr. Siever’s has no problem expanding his “opinions” to include attacking my faith.

Mr. Siever’s how “nice” is your original post about me? You talk of, and directly accuse me of “hypocrisy”. Perhaps your malice has blinded you to your own hypocrisy?

Please do keep this post up and available for everyone to read, as I am now sure it will be used for my benefit.

Blessings to you, Mr. Sievers.

Ah, another response. If only it contained new, substantive argument, instead of a recycling of points that have already been rebutted.

I must admit, though, I find your incessant whining about not being contacted personally a bit baffling. While it is true that I did not do so, I would have thought that the whole mess, and your obnoxious behavior, would have been “gently corrected” when my former employer took the extraordinary step of contacting your supervisor, and forbade you to contact technical support staff, because of your chronic hostility. Or had you conveniently forgotten that?

I’m afraid that you also get no extra points for your weak attempts at table-turning and reverse psychology. Do you honestly not perceive the stark contrast between the tolerance and love that you write about on your site, and your terrible treatment of my colleagues? Of course not; that would require some level of honest instrospection that you seem to lack. Your countercharge of hypocrisy falls flat, since I do not even profess to be a Christian, much less maintain a website devoted to Christ’s teachings, which is why I brought your faith into question.

I have no further interest in continuing to tread the same ground with you, over and over again. Either one or both of us are assholes. I will leave it up to readers to decide. We’re done here.

Oh, I almost forgot. Merry Christmas!