Before I say what I need to say on the subject of being fair, let me quote you a few times to illustrate my reply which follows

Here, Frank is my reply - and a serious proposition
Posted By: John
<anotherforeigner@yahoo.co.uk>
In answer to the latter half of your paragraph I accept that you have claimed to be fair and I accept that you generally aspire to be but I have yet to see you raise even a doubt about any other teachers behaviour except that of Dr.Cross and even that expression of doubt caused you some evident anguish.

You want to be left alone, Frank? -
Teachers Discussion
Posted By: John <anotherforeigner@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: 1 August 2006
In Response To: Give a dog a bone - Teachers Discussion (Frank)
I have no intention of "putting you guys behind me" and when I wish to challenge complaints it will be me that decides which are deserving.
Frank, you have very loudly claimed to be a fair man. I have chosen to accept the principle of these claims - for you have claimed this more than once - but where is this fair play you so loudly proclaim that you have? In my posting of yesterday, I duly apologised for my transgression - which was by mistake rather than by deliberation and then I made you a serious, sensible and FAIR proposition.
Are you going to accept it and thus show that you do believe in fair play? Or are you going to run away from it and thus throw some doubt in your claims?
KJ is also suggesting something along similar lines though he has not been specific as to the form it should take.
Come on, Frank - let's see how fair you can really be!
John

Frank - What ARE you talking about? - Teachers Discussion
Posted By: John
<anotherforeigner@yahoo.co.uk>
You have declared yourself to be a fair minded man, not just once but a few times. I have made you a serious and even-handed proposition whereby you can show this fair-mindedness you claim to have - and that you defend so vigorously.
What are you going to do Frank? Are you going to accept it or not? Let's see just how fair you're prepared to be.

and now from Dave (a/k/a John):

To Whom It May Concern - Teachers Discussion
Posted By: Dave
You call yourselves good and fair teachers but that is untrue.

JOHN, DAVE, or whatever name you choose call yourself today

You have carried on in so many postings about this vigorous and loud clam of mine to a fair man or fair-minded. As I read these statements from you, time and time again, I kept thinking to myself, when did I EVER refer to myself as a fair (loudly, vigorously, or otherwise)???

Fair is not a term I would ever apply to myself. You love to quote me John, but the problem is, most of the time, you MAKE UP the quotes! Loudly calling myself fair would be a rather slippery slope, don't ya think?. I am very opinionated, and according to you, quite biased. I label myself as being "biased" much more easily than fair.

The only time, that I can recall in any of our exchanges where I employed the word fair, was that I replied to your requirement that schools should be treated fairly by complaining FT posters by saying that I agree that in fairness, schools should have the right to defend themselves here in this forum (something they almost never take the opportunity to do), but it is NOT the responsibility of some troubled and confused FT who is coming off an experience where they feel cheated, abused, conned, ripped-off, etc.

That is the only time I have uttered fair in any way.

With your latest self-serving stunt of posing as Dave, (in To Whom It May Concern August 5 2006) serving such manure as:

I think that some of you two in particular have dealt yourselves a serious blow. You have failed to knock John down but in your panic to do so you have acted in a way that is little short of disgusting in its unprofessionalism. You call yourselves good and fair teachers but that is untrue. Some of you carry a grudge against schools not just in general but in total. This grudge is so incandescent that its glow blinds you. Anyone who wears a grudge of such proportions on their sleeve cannot possibly carry out good teaching with the open mind it needs. I think that we need more like John (blah, blah, blah) is not only pathetic, its despicable.

The idea that you, of all people would challenge my (or anyone elses) fairness is outrageous.

Listening to you blather on and on and on about fairness is like a crazed sniper claiming he gave his victims a fair chance, but they insisted on leaving home and standing in his line of fire!

As we say in America, You really need to increase your dosage.

==============

Are we done? Not quite Now you insist on this laughable act of pretending to be potentially victimized:

I recall the big fuss you kicked up when I erroneously included a sentence or two from a private exchange we had about a week ago. I apologised for that and I have made very sure since then not to repeat that mistake.

It seems, Frank, that you now intend to deliberately make our private exchanges public. I don't think it is right for you to do that but I cannot stop you acting in that way, no matter that it be unfair and typically turncoat. If you go ahead, however, please be VERY sure to make all of the exchanges public (in both directions) and that you also make every word of them public, so that people can see how you have turned in such a short space of time. They will also see how clearly I put my points across to you and they will also see what nice things you said about me. Don't just pick out the bits that suit your current frame of mind, because if you do that, I will then make them all public myself.

John, Dave, etc., the only reason I am suggesting serving up our private exchanges to other readers is as proof that my allegations that John and Dave are one and the same. YOU chose to write that utterly unnecessary piece of slimy, underhanded self-aggrandizement, while posing as another person! (To Whom It may Concern)

You have spent so much time publicly and privately telling me Im the one who is without credibility; that you have debunked so many other posters, hit the bulleye, in destroying others assertions against schools, etc. Youve invested so much negative energy taking on people and calling me and others liars, that it became necessary to offer your private writings as proof and exposure of the real fat rat in our midst.

I implore you: John, Dave, Roger, Sybil, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE post ALL of our private messages for everyone to see! I have absolutely NOTHING to hide! If you werent so terrified of finally being exposed, why then would you write such paranoid and preposterous posts (Johns Identity) and private messages to me today begging for a truce???

I gave you plenty of FAIR (ha!) warning privately, that if you kept up this vicious cycle of madness I would withdraw my agreement to keep private things private. Instead, you chose to keep the fight going and going and going. Im sure when you post ALL of our private messages to one another, readers will see the truth for themselves

Welcome to the wonderful planet known as Karma!

Frank, I too am somewhat concerned about this. So let me explain to you the situation. I am not him though I do know him - please read on.

I work at an Experimental School of Foreign Language. It is but one school on a large campus that accommodates other schools. The schools are located around the playing fields and running track and are therefore well separated from each other. Basically these schools are run separately but they share certain management functions such as class scheduling, accounts, wages and salary payments as examples.

My forenames are David John and I am one of 4 foreign teachers employed in the language school just mentioned.

One of the other schools is a middle school that is much larger than the language school and it also employs foreign teachers. A third school on campus does not employ any foreign teachers at all.

One of those teachers working in the middle school has the name David and he was already around when I first arrived here.

The Chinese Admin staff felt that having two foreign teachers with the same forename was confusing (forenames being the address of choice here). Therefore, it was agreed that he would continue to be known by his first name and me by my second name. Things get confused easily enough in China and when even the Chinese say something is confusing, you'd better believe it! So I had no objection to dropping my first name. For the past two years I have been known as "Mr John" and he has been known as "Mr David"

Due to our different schools and schedules we don't often see each other on the premises, though we do meet from time to time in one or another of the favourite watering holes where FT's hereabouts tend to meet.

He has been away on holiday and returned the other day. Early this morning (Sunday) he came into my own Foreign Teacher's office and after a short chat about his holiday, he asked if he could use my office computer to check up on his e-mails. The Teachers' Office in his own school was apparently locked and he could not get into it. I agreed to him using my office computer and I then went off to town to do some shopping and left him to it.

On my return I found a note on my desk asking me to give him a call and upon doing so he told me he had seen the postings between you, me and the others and had posted his own message of agreement and support.

I want to be very clear here in telling you that I think what he has said is right on the nail. I also appreciate his thought in jumping to my support even though I didn't exactly feel the need for it. However, I was disappointed that he had taken it for granted. I realise that he acted in good faith, as you did when you chose to bring my first posting into this forum, not telling me about it until afterwards. Had he have told me of his intention beforehand, I would have asked him not to do it.

I am also concerned, however, that he has not included the fact that he and I know each other. There is nothing wrong in being supported by friends and/or colleagues - Mr Duke supported his friend, Mr Hemingway and I have seen in the review board occasions where other people have supported friends and colleagues too. You support Mr Duke, who you have numbered among your friends, and he supports you. Nothing strange about it nor worthy of any big issue being made of it. After all, support is one of the things that friends and colleagues do.

I have consistently said in the forum that those complaining about schools should give the whole picture in their account. I believe this should extend to everything else connected with it. Whilst I thanked my colleague for his support, I also had other words to say to him because he concealed the fact that he and I know each other.

That is the extent of it, Frank, and if you choose not to accept it, that's your business but please get it clear that having given you this explanation I have no intention of co-operating with you in another avenue for your vitriol by arguing about it.

I recall the big fuss you kicked up when I erroneously included a sentence or two from a private exchange we had about a week ago. I apologised for that and I have made very sure since then not to repeat that mistake.

It seems, Frank, that you now intend to deliberately make our private exchanges public. I don't think it is right for you to do that but I cannot stop you acting in that way, no matter that it be unfair and typically turncoat. If you go ahead, however, please be VERY sure to make all of the exchanges public (in both directions) and that you also make every word of them public, so that people can see how you have turned in such a short space of time. They will also see how clearly I put my points across to you and they will also see what nice things you said about me. Don't just pick out the bits that suit your current frame of mind, because if you do that, I will then make them all public myself.

John