From: le Richard <lerichard at free.fr>
>>>>>I think this item is a false, what's your opinion?
http://cgi.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=81756&item=6516545484&
rd=1
Yes, that's a tracing. Even if my drawings aren't much better, many of the
lines on that are not as I would ever make them. The wrinkles on $crooge's
coat, the line on the cane near the handle, the tail on the "Rosa", drawing
the cane without a straight-edge, the way the coat parts overlap near the
belt, and the way the dedication is written so small in the upper corner...
and probably many more aspects if I could see it larger... none of these are
as I ever draw them. Also, if the text is saying that I drew that recently
in Angouleme, that is untrue -- I did many drawings for fans there, but only
head drawings, never full body.
I'll try to contact the seller to try to keep someone from being cheated.
(I police eBay for this sort of thing constantly and I always try to protect
Duckfans.)
Author
Topic: 200503
(98 messages)
Don Rosa
DCML Digest Issue 3
Message 31 -
2005-03-11 at 14:58:00
Don Rosa
Phrench Phorgery
Message 32 -
2005-03-11 at 17:56:54
Okay, I wrote to the seller and top bidders of that auction on eBay-France
for the piece of counterfeit Rosa art.
I am looking just now at a photo feature in the newest issue of PICSOU #398
that shows me at the Picsou exhibit tent at the Angouleme Festival drawing a
mural-sized $crooge while the "President" of the 2005 Festival, cartoonist
Zep, draws a "Zep $crooge" along with me. Obviously what someone passing
through the exhibit has done is taken a photo of that huge $crooge drawing,
enlarged the small photo on a copier (or printed it out by computer,
whatever) and tried to trace it.
for the piece of counterfeit Rosa art.
I am looking just now at a photo feature in the newest issue of PICSOU #398
that shows me at the Picsou exhibit tent at the Angouleme Festival drawing a
mural-sized $crooge while the "President" of the 2005 Festival, cartoonist
Zep, draws a "Zep $crooge" along with me. Obviously what someone passing
through the exhibit has done is taken a photo of that huge $crooge drawing,
enlarged the small photo on a copier (or printed it out by computer,
whatever) and tried to trace it.
Le Richard
Phrench phorgery
Message 33 -
2005-03-11 at 21:00:06
Don,
I've also been in contact with the top-seller of the item. He proposed to
help. I hope you succeed.
Photographs of you doing the drawing Picsou along with Zep are available here
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20060.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20061.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20062.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20063.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20064.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20065.jpg
Of course, it's easy to explain why are you were so smart that you found a false
when it has been confirmed, but I'll do it anyway. The thing that made me thing
the item was wrong is the fact that the drawing dedicace was small in a corner,
while you usually put it in BIG in the MIDDLE TOP or MIDDLE BOTTOM of the
drawing. Also the line drawings are quite not very well done, and when you copy
a drawing you're always worst than the original.
I hope you can counfound the seller. He also sold many rare items of Maus and
various other famous cartoonists (I'm not a specialist of those artists but
these originals seem doubtful now).
I think it often happens on EBAY, as it is so easy to make false (and in
normal "traditional" auctions as well with paintaings that sold for much
more). The fact is, that professionals (like ebay, or other sellers) are
usually not very eager to track the thiefs. They don't have any interest in
doing so. They just want items to be sold. And the worst thing that can
happen for the seller is that he should take his item out. Not a bery big risk,
heh?
[In traditional auctions they have experts who guarantish the origin of a
painting, but for some artists, this is usually when IT IS a false].
If you noticed, I think it's not possible to publicly add a note saying the
item is a false on the ebay page (it is with other auction sites like
Aucland).
Clearly they don't want people to say why an item could be wrong on the page
and alert the bidders. So all I can do is saying so in non-commercial mailing
lists like DCML...
--
I'm not reading mails sent to lerichard at free.fr anymore. To contact me use
f-wi at induREMOVE.also.THIScks (remove the hyphen and add ".org").
I've also been in contact with the top-seller of the item. He proposed to
help. I hope you succeed.
Photographs of you doing the drawing Picsou along with Zep are available here
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20060.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20061.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20062.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20063.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20064.jpg
http://paperone.free.fr/imagesangouleme/DONROSAANGOULEME%20065.jpg
Of course, it's easy to explain why are you were so smart that you found a false
when it has been confirmed, but I'll do it anyway. The thing that made me thing
the item was wrong is the fact that the drawing dedicace was small in a corner,
while you usually put it in BIG in the MIDDLE TOP or MIDDLE BOTTOM of the
drawing. Also the line drawings are quite not very well done, and when you copy
a drawing you're always worst than the original.
I hope you can counfound the seller. He also sold many rare items of Maus and
various other famous cartoonists (I'm not a specialist of those artists but
these originals seem doubtful now).
I think it often happens on EBAY, as it is so easy to make false (and in
normal "traditional" auctions as well with paintaings that sold for much
more). The fact is, that professionals (like ebay, or other sellers) are
usually not very eager to track the thiefs. They don't have any interest in
doing so. They just want items to be sold. And the worst thing that can
happen for the seller is that he should take his item out. Not a bery big risk,
heh?
[In traditional auctions they have experts who guarantish the origin of a
painting, but for some artists, this is usually when IT IS a false].
If you noticed, I think it's not possible to publicly add a note saying the
item is a false on the ebay page (it is with other auction sites like
Aucland).
Clearly they don't want people to say why an item could be wrong on the page
and alert the bidders. So all I can do is saying so in non-commercial mailing
lists like DCML...
--
I'm not reading mails sent to lerichard at free.fr anymore. To contact me use
f-wi at induREMOVE.also.THIScks (remove the hyphen and add ".org").
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Correspondence between Bomer and Don Rosa
Message 34 -
2005-03-11 at 21:34:06
KAI SAARTO, 11-03-2005:
> Other people's private messages should be no concern of yours. I don't
> give a damn if someone says something about me in their PRIVATE emails.
> Why should you?
It's very VERY scary when a Disney artist complains about one of his
readers, in private emails to other readers.
> You just want attention here, and behave like a child.
Speak for yourself, Kai.
> Besides, now that you miraciously got your hands to the original message
> by the said Ingebor, why on earth wouldn't you get the replies to it as
> well??
The person only sent me that Bomer-email. He told me about Rosa's replies,
and that they contain my name. He read some excerpts to me. He is afraid
that Don Rosa will commit suicide if they would get into my hands. He said
he wants to protect Rosa for himself.
In those emails, Rosa (reportedly) told that the Dutch editors are stingy,
and that people from The Netherlands are the worst people in the world, or
something like that.
The correspondence is directed at me. So, may I please know what Rosa
exactly is writing about me, in emails directed to me?
--- Dani?l
> Other people's private messages should be no concern of yours. I don't
> give a damn if someone says something about me in their PRIVATE emails.
> Why should you?
It's very VERY scary when a Disney artist complains about one of his
readers, in private emails to other readers.
> You just want attention here, and behave like a child.
Speak for yourself, Kai.
> Besides, now that you miraciously got your hands to the original message
> by the said Ingebor, why on earth wouldn't you get the replies to it as
> well??
The person only sent me that Bomer-email. He told me about Rosa's replies,
and that they contain my name. He read some excerpts to me. He is afraid
that Don Rosa will commit suicide if they would get into my hands. He said
he wants to protect Rosa for himself.
In those emails, Rosa (reportedly) told that the Dutch editors are stingy,
and that people from The Netherlands are the worst people in the world, or
something like that.
The correspondence is directed at me. So, may I please know what Rosa
exactly is writing about me, in emails directed to me?
--- Dani?l
Thomas Pryds Lauritsen
Inducks websites down
Message 35 -
2005-03-11 at 23:18:25
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
As you might have noticed, the Inducks websites (including the search
engine "COA") has been down for a day or two. This is caused by a
misunderstanding between us, the Inducks team, and the Internet Service
Provider where the Inducks server is physically located.
The problem affects all Inducks related websites including:
http://inducks.org/ - Main Inducks website
http://coa.inducks.org/ - COA search engine
http://bolderbast.inducks.org/ - Bolderbast background info website
Unfortunately, the problem will most likely not be fixed until next week
some time. In the meantime you can actually access the Inducks websites
anyway, but that requires a slight technical skill from your side (but
not too much) and it requires that you can access and edit system files
on your computer. I will explain this below.
Making it work on your local machine is a matter of adding two lines of
text to a system file (the "HOSTS" file) on your computer. Where this
file is located depends on your operating system:
- - Windows 95/98/ME: C:\windows\hosts
- - Windows NT/2000/XP Pro: C:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
- - Windows XP Home: C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
- - Linux: /etc/hosts (usually)
- - Mac: In System Folder:Preferences or in the System Folder itself
should be a file named "Hosts".
If you don't have such a file, make sure that hidden files are shown in
your operating system, and if still not, you can create the file. Note:
The file should *not* have an extension, so the file name should *not*
be "hosts.txt" or similar. Just "hosts", nothing else. Make sure your
operating system doesn't hide these file extensions for you (Windows has
a habit of doing this).
Edit (or create) the file using a plain text editor (not Word or
similar) such as Notepad in Windows. Add the following two lines to the
file:
62.61.159.55 inducks.org coa.inducks.org
62.107.104.7 irc.inducks.org
If you need to use any other Inducks websites (such as
bolderbast.inducks.org or de.inducks.org) you can add them to the first
line separated by spaces. After the file is saved, the Inducks websites
you have specified there should work again. Remember to remove the lines
again, when the Inducks works normally again. I will announce that here
when it happens.
Notice, even though you have done this, you still cannot send mail to
people with inducks.org-adresses.
We, the Inducks team, are very sorry for any inconvenience this may
cause, but believe me, we're working hard on solving the problem.
On behalf of the Inducks team,
Thomas Pryds Lauritsen (system maintainer)
Hash: SHA1
As you might have noticed, the Inducks websites (including the search
engine "COA") has been down for a day or two. This is caused by a
misunderstanding between us, the Inducks team, and the Internet Service
Provider where the Inducks server is physically located.
The problem affects all Inducks related websites including:
http://inducks.org/ - Main Inducks website
http://coa.inducks.org/ - COA search engine
http://bolderbast.inducks.org/ - Bolderbast background info website
Unfortunately, the problem will most likely not be fixed until next week
some time. In the meantime you can actually access the Inducks websites
anyway, but that requires a slight technical skill from your side (but
not too much) and it requires that you can access and edit system files
on your computer. I will explain this below.
Making it work on your local machine is a matter of adding two lines of
text to a system file (the "HOSTS" file) on your computer. Where this
file is located depends on your operating system:
- - Windows 95/98/ME: C:\windows\hosts
- - Windows NT/2000/XP Pro: C:\winnt\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
- - Windows XP Home: C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
- - Linux: /etc/hosts (usually)
- - Mac: In System Folder:Preferences or in the System Folder itself
should be a file named "Hosts".
If you don't have such a file, make sure that hidden files are shown in
your operating system, and if still not, you can create the file. Note:
The file should *not* have an extension, so the file name should *not*
be "hosts.txt" or similar. Just "hosts", nothing else. Make sure your
operating system doesn't hide these file extensions for you (Windows has
a habit of doing this).
Edit (or create) the file using a plain text editor (not Word or
similar) such as Notepad in Windows. Add the following two lines to the
file:
62.61.159.55 inducks.org coa.inducks.org
62.107.104.7 irc.inducks.org
If you need to use any other Inducks websites (such as
bolderbast.inducks.org or de.inducks.org) you can add them to the first
line separated by spaces. After the file is saved, the Inducks websites
you have specified there should work again. Remember to remove the lines
again, when the Inducks works normally again. I will announce that here
when it happens.
Notice, even though you have done this, you still cannot send mail to
people with inducks.org-adresses.
We, the Inducks team, are very sorry for any inconvenience this may
cause, but believe me, we're working hard on solving the problem.
On behalf of the Inducks team,
Thomas Pryds Lauritsen (system maintainer)
SRoweCanoe
Why this list needs a moderator
Message 36 -
2005-03-12 at 00:51:06
why this list needs a moderator
and why people no longer post here is pretty obvious.... and sad....
Is there nothing that can be done?
how many people remain on this list now?
Is this the case of the last person on the list turn off the lights?
sr
and why people no longer post here is pretty obvious.... and sad....
Is there nothing that can be done?
how many people remain on this list now?
Is this the case of the last person on the list turn off the lights?
sr
Francesco Spreafico
Why this list needs a moderator
Message 37 -
2005-03-12 at 12:42:32
SRoweCanoe at aol.com wrote:
> why this list needs a moderator
> and why people no longer post here is pretty obvious.... and sad....
>
> Is there nothing that can be done?
> how many people remain on this list now?
> Is this the case of the last person on the list turn off the lights?
Please, let's not make a big deal out of this. I too find it mostly
absurd the use that's been made of this list lately, but well, if we all
just managed in ignoring it I think there'd be no harm done. I wouldn't
want any moderator at all and most certainly there is no need to shut
down the list... seriously, you gotta be kidding!
And btw, what's this got to do with why people is not posting here? They
probably don't have time right now... that's why *I* am not posting
much. If I had time, I'd post. I can't see any connections with the
previous mails... personally I don't give a damn about them.
Best,
Francesco
> why this list needs a moderator
> and why people no longer post here is pretty obvious.... and sad....
>
> Is there nothing that can be done?
> how many people remain on this list now?
> Is this the case of the last person on the list turn off the lights?
Please, let's not make a big deal out of this. I too find it mostly
absurd the use that's been made of this list lately, but well, if we all
just managed in ignoring it I think there'd be no harm done. I wouldn't
want any moderator at all and most certainly there is no need to shut
down the list... seriously, you gotta be kidding!
And btw, what's this got to do with why people is not posting here? They
probably don't have time right now... that's why *I* am not posting
much. If I had time, I'd post. I can't see any connections with the
previous mails... personally I don't give a damn about them.
Best,
Francesco
Olivier
Why this list needs a moderator / Time
Message 38 -
2005-03-12 at 13:19:19
Francesco:
>>> And btw, what's this got to do with why people is not posting here? They
>>> probably don't have time right now... that's why *I* am not posting
>>> much. If I had time, I'd post. I can't see any connections with the
>>> previous mails... personally I don't give a damn about them.
Same here, no not much time to even skim over the messages.
I'd love to reply to Jean-Marc's long messages, but all I can do is keep
them in my mail for later-- note: please skip lines between your paragraphs
(and maybe have more "subparagraphs"), Jean-Marc, to make it easier to read
(in e-mails as well as on the DCML's archives site).
If Harry, Rob, S?ren, whoever hasn't appeared lately on the list reads
this:
I hope you're all fine and wish you well, hoping to read from you soon.
Olivier
>>> And btw, what's this got to do with why people is not posting here? They
>>> probably don't have time right now... that's why *I* am not posting
>>> much. If I had time, I'd post. I can't see any connections with the
>>> previous mails... personally I don't give a damn about them.
Same here, no not much time to even skim over the messages.
I'd love to reply to Jean-Marc's long messages, but all I can do is keep
them in my mail for later-- note: please skip lines between your paragraphs
(and maybe have more "subparagraphs"), Jean-Marc, to make it easier to read
(in e-mails as well as on the DCML's archives site).
If Harry, Rob, S?ren, whoever hasn't appeared lately on the list reads
this:
I hope you're all fine and wish you well, hoping to read from you soon.
Olivier
Rodney-selfhelpbikeco
DCML Digest, Vol 25, Issue 4
Message 39 -
2005-03-12 at 17:10:03
>He told me about Rosa's replies,
>and that they contain my name. He read some excerpts to me. He is >afraid
>that Don Rosa will commit suicide if they would get into my hands. He >said
>he wants to protect Rosa for himself.
Daniel, there is not one single person here who believes you when you say that Don Rosa is suicidal. This has escaped from the realm of being simply annoying to becoming a frightening obsession.
>In those emails, Rosa (reportedly) told that the Dutch editors are >stingy,
>and that people from The Netherlands are the worst people in the >world, or
>something like that.
Again, I find it hard to believe that Rosa said this. And if he DID say it, that's totally his business. What is NOT OKAY under any circumstances if for people to distribute private conversations that anyone has with another person. IN FACT, Daniel, it is illegal, and punishable by law. You, Daniel, broke the law when you opened the e-mail and read something that was never intended for you to read.
So.........not only are you slandering the character of another person through continual vicious lies, you've broken the law. This obsession is going to get the better of you if this keeps up.
>The correspondence is directed at me. So, may I please know what Rosa
>exactly is writing about me, in emails directed to me?
Don Rosa is a very busy man and has better things to worry about than what you think about him. Don't be so self-important. You'll find that you'll be happier that way.
___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!
>and that they contain my name. He read some excerpts to me. He is >afraid
>that Don Rosa will commit suicide if they would get into my hands. He >said
>he wants to protect Rosa for himself.
Daniel, there is not one single person here who believes you when you say that Don Rosa is suicidal. This has escaped from the realm of being simply annoying to becoming a frightening obsession.
>In those emails, Rosa (reportedly) told that the Dutch editors are >stingy,
>and that people from The Netherlands are the worst people in the >world, or
>something like that.
Again, I find it hard to believe that Rosa said this. And if he DID say it, that's totally his business. What is NOT OKAY under any circumstances if for people to distribute private conversations that anyone has with another person. IN FACT, Daniel, it is illegal, and punishable by law. You, Daniel, broke the law when you opened the e-mail and read something that was never intended for you to read.
So.........not only are you slandering the character of another person through continual vicious lies, you've broken the law. This obsession is going to get the better of you if this keeps up.
>The correspondence is directed at me. So, may I please know what Rosa
>exactly is writing about me, in emails directed to me?
Don Rosa is a very busy man and has better things to worry about than what you think about him. Don't be so self-important. You'll find that you'll be happier that way.
___________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Correspondence between Bomer and Don Rosa
Message 40 -
2005-03-13 at 14:44:13
RODNEY SELFHELPBIKECO, 12-03-2005:
> Daniel, there is not one single person here who believes you when you
> say that Don Rosa is suicidal.
Thanks for telling this, Rodney. I've used your conclusion to convince the
person who suggested this suicide nonsense. I got a print-out of some texts,
so I guess I finally know what seems to be going on here:
Don Rosa complained to Ingmar Bomer about notably one Dutch "kid". Then he
(Rosa) sent a second email, about a day later, apparently theorizing that
this Ingmar could be that very Dutch "kid" he just was complaining about.
Ingmar then sent a message back, asking what Rosa means. This question
remains unanswered, and Ingmar decided to ask around, spreading copies of
the correspondence.
> What is NOT OKAY under any circumstances if for people to distribute
> private conversations that anyone has with another person.
Ingmar reportedly is happy showing off his/her correspondence to people.
And Rosa seems to suggest to post the reply across the internet.
> IN FACT, Daniel, it is illegal, and punishable by law.
Which country's law do you mean?
> So.........not only are you slandering the character of another person
> through continual vicious lies, you've broken the law.
Is that so? Then Don Rosa is free to sue me, if he wants to.
> Don Rosa is a very busy man and has better things to worry about than
> what you think about him.
I also thought that Rosa was too busy for such activities. That's why I was
startled when I heard about this circulating Bomer-correspondence.
> Don't be so self-important.
Don't kill the messenger. I'm just putting material online to protect
myself against weird stories. The Bomer-correspondence refers to DCML, so
anyone reading it, will be able to find my explanation here.
--- Dani?l
> Daniel, there is not one single person here who believes you when you
> say that Don Rosa is suicidal.
Thanks for telling this, Rodney. I've used your conclusion to convince the
person who suggested this suicide nonsense. I got a print-out of some texts,
so I guess I finally know what seems to be going on here:
Don Rosa complained to Ingmar Bomer about notably one Dutch "kid". Then he
(Rosa) sent a second email, about a day later, apparently theorizing that
this Ingmar could be that very Dutch "kid" he just was complaining about.
Ingmar then sent a message back, asking what Rosa means. This question
remains unanswered, and Ingmar decided to ask around, spreading copies of
the correspondence.
> What is NOT OKAY under any circumstances if for people to distribute
> private conversations that anyone has with another person.
Ingmar reportedly is happy showing off his/her correspondence to people.
And Rosa seems to suggest to post the reply across the internet.
> IN FACT, Daniel, it is illegal, and punishable by law.
Which country's law do you mean?
> So.........not only are you slandering the character of another person
> through continual vicious lies, you've broken the law.
Is that so? Then Don Rosa is free to sue me, if he wants to.
> Don Rosa is a very busy man and has better things to worry about than
> what you think about him.
I also thought that Rosa was too busy for such activities. That's why I was
startled when I heard about this circulating Bomer-correspondence.
> Don't be so self-important.
Don't kill the messenger. I'm just putting material online to protect
myself against weird stories. The Bomer-correspondence refers to DCML, so
anyone reading it, will be able to find my explanation here.
--- Dani?l
Kai Saarto
Bomer Affair
Message 41 -
2005-03-14 at 01:18:06
Dear friends in the DCML,
I apologize in advance to those people who are sick and tired of this
whole issue. I am tired too, in fact this is probably the last message I
will ever write to comment Daniel van Eijmeren's (DvE from hence on)
actions on this list. Its a long message, but I hope you will read it.
There are few surprises included.
In past few days I've lost the last bits of respect I had for DvE.
Despite his activity and undeniable knowledge about Carl Barks he has
became nothing more than an anarchist. An anarchist who uses every
little trick he can to make Don Rosa look bad.
This whole ?Bomer Affair? is a farce par to none.
In my mind, I am 99.9% sure that DvE is himself Bomer. To me whole
affair is some kind attempt to hurt Rosa's reputation or more likely DvE
is a on some self-destructive journey. I got an email from Don Rosa on
7th of February. In it he showed me the very same Bomer-letter and
expressed his suspicions that Daniel might be behind it. It was just too
absurd to be true. I immediately agreed. Ever since I've feared DvE will
try to do something with it on his personal and very public crusade
against Don Rosa. I hoped a few short replies would once again shut him
up, but I fear now is the time to finally confront him and go into the
details. You are free to disagree, but here's why I think DvE is behind
the letter. I think many of you have come to same conclusion, but
decided to be quiet about, once again deciding to just ignore DvE's
ramblings.
If you, fellow members, read the said Bomer letter, it is pretty
obviously written by someone who is actually trying set a trap for Don.
?Bomer?wanted Don to reply with something he could later use against him
publicly, probably on this list.
You can detect the poorly hidden spite behind every sentence of the letter:
- Bomer barfing on the magazine containing ?Trash and Treasure? because
it was so good? That is just ridiculous.
- Bomer belittling Barks's ?rather common fairy-tale world?: another
bait, probably made in hopes Don would say something bad about Carl.
- Then there is this part: ?For example a very close friend of mine,
that used to be a big fan of yours is now talking bullshit about your
work sometimes, and I hate him
for that. Don't wanna see him anymore.? - Description fits DvE.
I believe whole Bomer character is just caricature of stupid Rosa-fan as
the writer sees them. Rather insulting even, since he seems to think
that Don and rest of us are actually stupid enough to fall for this scam.
Don replied to Bomer's strange message as he would to any fan. He
thanked him for writing and politely told Bomer just to ignore those
cranks whose criticism seemed to so upset him as he himself does. In
case that DvE was behind the letter, Don set a bait. He told about his
problems with Dutch publisher (whom DvE always vocally defends, even
when they omit credits and such), he also mentioned actually seeing only
one Netherlander who fits Bomer's description of "nasty dutch comic
fans" and that his name was Daniel something or other. Don asked if such
person was one of those who Bomer was referring to. This should not have
bothered a honest fan one bit, but what if it was someone we all know
behind it...
You probably all remember the strange message DvE sent the list on 4.
February. In it he told us about mental problems that some Don's
messages to him FOUR YEARS AGO had caused him. What was that all about?
Makes no sense? It might once you know that this message was sent to ML
only HOURS after Bomer got his first reply from Don Rosa. What a
coincidence, don't you think? This had allegedly bothered DvE for four
years and then he decides to come out with only hours after Bomer got a
message from Rosa. There is no way Bomer could have contacted DvE at
that time span, especially when Bomer at that point had no problem
(according to DvE) with Rosa's reply, it was that second reply that made
Bomer to "spread the letter in the internet".
Now, DvE claims that ?Bomer? is spreading the letter across internet in
hopes of figuring out what Don Rosa meant by addressing him as Daniel.
Well, once again why on earth would Bomer do that? Is he just so stupid?
I think he is, because I believe he is Daniel trying to make a fool of
us all. Let me ask you: has anyone seen Bomer spreading this thing
around? Can anyone google his name? Can he be found writing in that
Dutch McDuck-fan page? Bomer also uses a yahoo-email address, anyone can
make one, so it is popular among those nice people who want to pose as
someone else.
Earlier today DvE again continued to beg attention. Now he told us he
has somehow obtained the replies he was so craving for. Even that won't
make him shut up. He has everything he originally asked for in front of
him. Yet, he still goes on. Why? Because he has not attained his goal,
which is something altogether different that he claims to. Daniel makes
references to ?reports? and ?Bomer correspondence?, he even has ?some
printouts?. He is making two emails by Rosa (other consisting of one
sentence) to sound like they are reports from Warren Commission.
Then there is this mysterious deep throat who apparently provided DvE
with Bomer's original letter, and yet is afraid that Don commits a
suicide if he provides DvE the rest! If there really is someone who
provided him with the original message, he obviously chose his friends
poorly by confiding to Daniel. DvE at least makes him to look like total
bozo. All Rosa fans always seem to be total bozos if you read any of DvE
messages.
Its my belief that DvE started the whole thing based on a poorly
constructed lie. Since Don figured it out the minute he read Bomer's
message, it was doomed to fail from the beginning. DvE still tried to
pull it through by offering us only certain tidbits of information.
After couple of comments against him, he just couldn't help himself and
revealed enough for us all to see that it was him who posed as someone
else all along. He knew stuff that only Bomer himself would know. I've
seen Rosa's replies and DvE told us everything said in them before he
supposedly got his hands on them. He just bended them to his own needs.
With his constant libel (written slander, had to check that on
dictionary) DvE breaks the law ? and even jeopardizes the DCML while
doing it. Why? Because should Don want to sue Daniel for this, it
wouldn't be just Daniel who would be held responsible. Axe would fall
also on Per Starback, since he is legally responsible for everything
that is written here. Now, if I was Per and simply would not have time
or interest to moderate the list, I would probably just close it down.
Who would want to take responsibility for DvE's antics?
DvE probably thinks he is terribly clever, and that we all are terribly
stupid. If you agree with my reasoning above, I have to ask you: Do you
really want to have a person like this on this list? I suggest everyone
who has a moment to write to Per - or otherwise think would you like to
see more of these disgusting messages appearing on YOUR list? This is
not DvE's personal playground, even if it sometimes appears to be. Its
up to you to decide who leaves: you, me, DvE? At least I have decided to
leave this list, unless DvE gets promptly banned. I do not wish to have
anything to do with people like him. If someone tries to deceive me like
that, it just insults my intelligence. I don't want to be involved in
any way with people like that.
Daniel: It is my firm belief that you tried to trick Don, who set an
innocent trap to see if it was you. You fell for it and still tried to
use it against him. You failed miserable, showing us all that you are
Bomer or in this with him. There really is no other explanation. There
are just more coincidences than in a Barks story. Checkmate, game over,
you lose.
I apologize in advance to those people who are sick and tired of this
whole issue. I am tired too, in fact this is probably the last message I
will ever write to comment Daniel van Eijmeren's (DvE from hence on)
actions on this list. Its a long message, but I hope you will read it.
There are few surprises included.
In past few days I've lost the last bits of respect I had for DvE.
Despite his activity and undeniable knowledge about Carl Barks he has
became nothing more than an anarchist. An anarchist who uses every
little trick he can to make Don Rosa look bad.
This whole ?Bomer Affair? is a farce par to none.
In my mind, I am 99.9% sure that DvE is himself Bomer. To me whole
affair is some kind attempt to hurt Rosa's reputation or more likely DvE
is a on some self-destructive journey. I got an email from Don Rosa on
7th of February. In it he showed me the very same Bomer-letter and
expressed his suspicions that Daniel might be behind it. It was just too
absurd to be true. I immediately agreed. Ever since I've feared DvE will
try to do something with it on his personal and very public crusade
against Don Rosa. I hoped a few short replies would once again shut him
up, but I fear now is the time to finally confront him and go into the
details. You are free to disagree, but here's why I think DvE is behind
the letter. I think many of you have come to same conclusion, but
decided to be quiet about, once again deciding to just ignore DvE's
ramblings.
If you, fellow members, read the said Bomer letter, it is pretty
obviously written by someone who is actually trying set a trap for Don.
?Bomer?wanted Don to reply with something he could later use against him
publicly, probably on this list.
You can detect the poorly hidden spite behind every sentence of the letter:
- Bomer barfing on the magazine containing ?Trash and Treasure? because
it was so good? That is just ridiculous.
- Bomer belittling Barks's ?rather common fairy-tale world?: another
bait, probably made in hopes Don would say something bad about Carl.
- Then there is this part: ?For example a very close friend of mine,
that used to be a big fan of yours is now talking bullshit about your
work sometimes, and I hate him
for that. Don't wanna see him anymore.? - Description fits DvE.
I believe whole Bomer character is just caricature of stupid Rosa-fan as
the writer sees them. Rather insulting even, since he seems to think
that Don and rest of us are actually stupid enough to fall for this scam.
Don replied to Bomer's strange message as he would to any fan. He
thanked him for writing and politely told Bomer just to ignore those
cranks whose criticism seemed to so upset him as he himself does. In
case that DvE was behind the letter, Don set a bait. He told about his
problems with Dutch publisher (whom DvE always vocally defends, even
when they omit credits and such), he also mentioned actually seeing only
one Netherlander who fits Bomer's description of "nasty dutch comic
fans" and that his name was Daniel something or other. Don asked if such
person was one of those who Bomer was referring to. This should not have
bothered a honest fan one bit, but what if it was someone we all know
behind it...
You probably all remember the strange message DvE sent the list on 4.
February. In it he told us about mental problems that some Don's
messages to him FOUR YEARS AGO had caused him. What was that all about?
Makes no sense? It might once you know that this message was sent to ML
only HOURS after Bomer got his first reply from Don Rosa. What a
coincidence, don't you think? This had allegedly bothered DvE for four
years and then he decides to come out with only hours after Bomer got a
message from Rosa. There is no way Bomer could have contacted DvE at
that time span, especially when Bomer at that point had no problem
(according to DvE) with Rosa's reply, it was that second reply that made
Bomer to "spread the letter in the internet".
Now, DvE claims that ?Bomer? is spreading the letter across internet in
hopes of figuring out what Don Rosa meant by addressing him as Daniel.
Well, once again why on earth would Bomer do that? Is he just so stupid?
I think he is, because I believe he is Daniel trying to make a fool of
us all. Let me ask you: has anyone seen Bomer spreading this thing
around? Can anyone google his name? Can he be found writing in that
Dutch McDuck-fan page? Bomer also uses a yahoo-email address, anyone can
make one, so it is popular among those nice people who want to pose as
someone else.
Earlier today DvE again continued to beg attention. Now he told us he
has somehow obtained the replies he was so craving for. Even that won't
make him shut up. He has everything he originally asked for in front of
him. Yet, he still goes on. Why? Because he has not attained his goal,
which is something altogether different that he claims to. Daniel makes
references to ?reports? and ?Bomer correspondence?, he even has ?some
printouts?. He is making two emails by Rosa (other consisting of one
sentence) to sound like they are reports from Warren Commission.
Then there is this mysterious deep throat who apparently provided DvE
with Bomer's original letter, and yet is afraid that Don commits a
suicide if he provides DvE the rest! If there really is someone who
provided him with the original message, he obviously chose his friends
poorly by confiding to Daniel. DvE at least makes him to look like total
bozo. All Rosa fans always seem to be total bozos if you read any of DvE
messages.
Its my belief that DvE started the whole thing based on a poorly
constructed lie. Since Don figured it out the minute he read Bomer's
message, it was doomed to fail from the beginning. DvE still tried to
pull it through by offering us only certain tidbits of information.
After couple of comments against him, he just couldn't help himself and
revealed enough for us all to see that it was him who posed as someone
else all along. He knew stuff that only Bomer himself would know. I've
seen Rosa's replies and DvE told us everything said in them before he
supposedly got his hands on them. He just bended them to his own needs.
With his constant libel (written slander, had to check that on
dictionary) DvE breaks the law ? and even jeopardizes the DCML while
doing it. Why? Because should Don want to sue Daniel for this, it
wouldn't be just Daniel who would be held responsible. Axe would fall
also on Per Starback, since he is legally responsible for everything
that is written here. Now, if I was Per and simply would not have time
or interest to moderate the list, I would probably just close it down.
Who would want to take responsibility for DvE's antics?
DvE probably thinks he is terribly clever, and that we all are terribly
stupid. If you agree with my reasoning above, I have to ask you: Do you
really want to have a person like this on this list? I suggest everyone
who has a moment to write to Per - or otherwise think would you like to
see more of these disgusting messages appearing on YOUR list? This is
not DvE's personal playground, even if it sometimes appears to be. Its
up to you to decide who leaves: you, me, DvE? At least I have decided to
leave this list, unless DvE gets promptly banned. I do not wish to have
anything to do with people like him. If someone tries to deceive me like
that, it just insults my intelligence. I don't want to be involved in
any way with people like that.
Daniel: It is my firm belief that you tried to trick Don, who set an
innocent trap to see if it was you. You fell for it and still tried to
use it against him. You failed miserable, showing us all that you are
Bomer or in this with him. There really is no other explanation. There
are just more coincidences than in a Barks story. Checkmate, game over,
you lose.
Daniel Van Eijmeren
Bomer Affair
Message 42 -
2005-03-14 at 17:54:13
KAI SAARTO, 14-03-2005:
> Daniel: It is my firm belief that you tried to trick Don,
You're wrong, Mr. Judge.
Someone plays a trick, so *I* must be that person?
Do I have to defend myself against your nonsense and libel?
> who set an innocent trap to see if it was you.
This is interesting, Kai. Can you explain it further?
What exactly did Don Rosa do, to catch someone who wasn't writing him?
--- Dani?l
> Daniel: It is my firm belief that you tried to trick Don,
You're wrong, Mr. Judge.
Someone plays a trick, so *I* must be that person?
Do I have to defend myself against your nonsense and libel?
> who set an innocent trap to see if it was you.
This is interesting, Kai. Can you explain it further?
What exactly did Don Rosa do, to catch someone who wasn't writing him?
--- Dani?l
H.W.Fluks
Time
Message 43 -
2005-03-14 at 18:40:13
Olivier:
> Same here, no not much time to even skim over the messages.
> If Harry, Rob, S?ren, whoever hasn't appeared lately on the
> list reads this:
> I hope you're all fine and wish you well, hoping to read from
> you soon.
Thank you. Yes, I have the same excuse: lack of time.
I'll take the opportunity to also anwer and old mail:
Don wrote on December 22, 2004:
> It would be nice if I could write up a list of FAQs so that I
> could save
> time in answering them again, but I already don't have enough
> time to save time.
> Maybe somebody will do it for me...?
> Actually, many years ago (gad, nearly 10?) somebody or
> several bodies wrote
> up a list of my responses to numerous questions and it was
> part of the DCML
> website, but it hasn't been updated since then (and may have even
> evaporated, I'm not sure). But those nice people probably no
> longer have the
> time to help me save the time I don't have time to save.
> Huh?
Indeed! I was the one who made that list of responses. I started in 1994, and I think I stopped updating it in 1996 or 1997. At that time, you wrote *so* many interesting mails to DCML, that it was hard to keep up! 8-)
And after that, I figured there were pleny of other Rosa websites that would carry the same information...
--Harry.
> Same here, no not much time to even skim over the messages.
> If Harry, Rob, S?ren, whoever hasn't appeared lately on the
> list reads this:
> I hope you're all fine and wish you well, hoping to read from
> you soon.
Thank you. Yes, I have the same excuse: lack of time.
I'll take the opportunity to also anwer and old mail:
Don wrote on December 22, 2004:
> It would be nice if I could write up a list of FAQs so that I
> could save
> time in answering them again, but I already don't have enough
> time to save time.
> Maybe somebody will do it for me...?
> Actually, many years ago (gad, nearly 10?) somebody or
> several bodies wrote
> up a list of my responses to numerous questions and it was
> part of the DCML
> website, but it hasn't been updated since then (and may have even
> evaporated, I'm not sure). But those nice people probably no
> longer have the
> time to help me save the time I don't have time to save.
> Huh?
Indeed! I was the one who made that list of responses. I started in 1994, and I think I stopped updating it in 1996 or 1997. At that time, you wrote *so* many interesting mails to DCML, that it was hard to keep up! 8-)
And after that, I figured there were pleny of other Rosa websites that would carry the same information...
--Harry.
Frank Stajano
Time
Message 44 -
2005-03-14 at 21:26:03
H.W.Fluks at telecom.tno.nl wrote:
> Don wrote on December 22, 2004:
>
>
>>It would be nice if I could write up a list of FAQs so that I
>>could save
>>time in answering them again, but I already don't have enough
>>time to save time.
>>Maybe somebody will do it for me...?
>>Actually, many years ago (gad, nearly 10?) somebody or
>>several bodies wrote
>>up a list of my responses to numerous questions and it was
>>part of the DCML
>>website, but it hasn't been updated since then (and may have even
>>evaporated, I'm not sure). But those nice people probably no
>>longer have the
>>time to help me save the time I don't have time to save.
>>Huh?
>
>
> Indeed! I was the one who made that list of responses. I started in 1994, and I think I stopped updating it in 1996 or 1997. At that time, you wrote *so* many interesting mails to DCML, that it was hard to keep up! 8-)
> And after that, I figured there were pleny of other Rosa websites that would carry the same information...
Of course it would be so nice to be able to suggest to those people to
go and read our (Becattini/Gori/Stajano) Rosa book---to which Harry also
contributed for the index. Pity an English-language edition never came
out, and the original Italian one is no longer available... That book
was a labour of love which I'm sure many Rosa fans around the world
would still enjoy to this day if they had a chance to read it.
(nostalgic...)
> Don wrote on December 22, 2004:
>
>
>>It would be nice if I could write up a list of FAQs so that I
>>could save
>>time in answering them again, but I already don't have enough
>>time to save time.
>>Maybe somebody will do it for me...?
>>Actually, many years ago (gad, nearly 10?) somebody or
>>several bodies wrote
>>up a list of my responses to numerous questions and it was
>>part of the DCML
>>website, but it hasn't been updated since then (and may have even
>>evaporated, I'm not sure). But those nice people probably no
>>longer have the
>>time to help me save the time I don't have time to save.
>>Huh?
>
>
> Indeed! I was the one who made that list of responses. I started in 1994, and I think I stopped updating it in 1996 or 1997. At that time, you wrote *so* many interesting mails to DCML, that it was hard to keep up! 8-)
> And after that, I figured there were pleny of other Rosa websites that would carry the same information...
Of course it would be so nice to be able to suggest to those people to
go and read our (Becattini/Gori/Stajano) Rosa book---to which Harry also
contributed for the index. Pity an English-language edition never came
out, and the original Italian one is no longer available... That book
was a labour of love which I'm sure many Rosa fans around the world
would still enjoy to this day if they had a chance to read it.
(nostalgic...)
Olivier
Time / Rosa references
Message 45 -
2005-03-14 at 22:11:16
Frank:
>>>> Of course it would be so nice to be able to suggest to those people to
>>>> go and read our (Becattini/Gori/Stajano) Rosa book---to which Harry
also
>>>> contributed for the index.
Great book, indeed-- though I cannot speak Italian, but at least I can make
out a few things.
Just in case someone would like to search for it and might have a stroke of
luck, the title is Don Rosa e il Rinascimento Disneyano, published by
Editrice Comic Art, ca 1997-- I can't check the exact date right now, but
that's the year I met Alberto Becattini, who sent me a copy-- please say
hello to Alberto for me, Frank. I've tried e-mailing him a few times a few
years ao but the address must have been obsolete, then I thought I'd call
him but procrastinated, then felt ashamed of not doing so and failig to
keep in touch, ...
Olivier
>>>> Of course it would be so nice to be able to suggest to those people to
>>>> go and read our (Becattini/Gori/Stajano) Rosa book---to which Harry
also
>>>> contributed for the index.
Great book, indeed-- though I cannot speak Italian, but at least I can make
out a few things.
Just in case someone would like to search for it and might have a stroke of
luck, the title is Don Rosa e il Rinascimento Disneyano, published by
Editrice Comic Art, ca 1997-- I can't check the exact date right now, but
that's the year I met Alberto Becattini, who sent me a copy-- please say
hello to Alberto for me, Frank. I've tried e-mailing him a few times a few
years ao but the address must have been obsolete, then I thought I'd call
him but procrastinated, then felt ashamed of not doing so and failig to
keep in touch, ...
Olivier