Mr Duke,

It is true that I have further information about "Mr Yi" and I am doing "research" on this. This research may lead to further development or it may not. At this stage I don't know but at least I am checking on things that come to light. He is a man who has NOT adequately justified his accusations against the college or the people he has named. He has concealed every important detail of his own circumstances. Yet, he has been vindictive enough to have accused three people, by name, of being "Scam Artists" when the incident he refers to was not a scam at all. His entire conduct of his own complaint stinks and there's you jumping to his side believing what he has said simply because he has said it. But it suits your mindset to defend those who slag off schools without bothering to ask whether they are being fair about it.

I have also told you that he has not used his own name in his postings. Under normal circumstances that is of little importance but in this case it is very significant indeed, considering the name he is using as the poster. This can be seen in his postings but in your effort to debunk me, you aren't bothering to read it. I took the trouble to read his words - why don't you do likewise?
********************************************

For some reason, you seem bent on reopening the matter of Mr Hemingway. You tried to get it moving again roughly a month ago in the un-necessarily testy posting you made following restoration of your broadband service. Not much happened after that except that some doubt was thrown on Mr Hemingway's location.

You were trounced by other people at the time he made his complaint and my own comments were made much later. The others who took issue with you over his complaint were referring to other events that I was not party to and made no reference to.

Although you made desultory references to my response you did not make such a song and dance as you are now doing. Why is that? Has something changed about my posting in the MANY weeks that have passed? No, of course not! It's just another transparent effort on your part to strike at me in any way that you can.

Some of the excerpts you have selected are taken out of context. Also, there are things I said that you have not cited here because they don't fit your case. Nothing I said about Hemingway's predicament was a lie. Here goes
................................
"Considering that Mr Hemingway's initial review appeared as far back as March, it is still reverberating well considering the substantial amount of unfairness contained within it."

The unfairness was to have spent so much verbage on much that - although it may have been true - was so irrelevant to his complaint. His first three paragraphs dealt with many factors that were not within the remit of the college. You choose to call it "background" but in fact it is nothing of the kind.

He also quoted the full text of the job advertisement he had composed for the college. What on earth for? Of what relevance was it to his complaint? Answer - none whatsoever! Nicely written maybe but absolutely unconnected with his complaint.
.....................................

"Hemingway wrote literally everything he could to depict only the negative aspects."

Quite true!
.......................................

"Mr Hemingway is being unfair - in my opinion deliberately so - by making out the Teacher's College to be a singularly bad establishment when many of the factors he cites are no better or worse than he would find at MANY other establishments all over China."

He himself alludes to this at the end of his posting and was trying to cover his backside against just such an observation as I made.
...........................................

"I have NEVER been jeered at or insulted by any students or Chinese staff. I have never heard of anyone else being similarly treated either. For some reason Mr Hemingway and his wife must have been disliked to have been subjected to such highly unusual treatment."

It is true - I have not been jeered or jostled. Neither have any of my friends among the foreign teachers in my vicinity. Anyone who is jeered and jostled in the way he described must be the subject of huge disrespect. That the students were from another department means little - bad reputations travel fast in the relatively closed society of institutions.
.........................................

"I get the impression from Mr Hemingway's lengthy diatribe, that he does like to ramble on at un-necessary length and if he does this in writing, then he almost certainly does it verbally too."

A man who devotes so much unconnected stuff to basically a simple complaint is guilty of 'rambling'
............................................

"Perhaps Mr Hemingway was a thoroughly and intensely unpopular teacher at the college. If all he can do is identify the negative aspects of everything around him this is hardly surprising - but to be jeered and jostled by his students? He must have been REALLY disliked for that to have happened on a routine basis."

His complaint comes across as a general whinge that he had to inflate by adding so much negative irrelevancy to it. I also repeat that to be jostled, jeered at and 'assaulted' by students can only have happened because they held him and his wife in contempt. Or perhaps I'm mistaken - maybe such behaviour is a sign of respect and high regard, after all!
.......................................

Now I come to what you chose to leave out:

I don't for a moment doubt that the college was a dump nor do I doubt that the Chinese staff were as bad as he said they were. However, I also teach in China and classes of 50 - 60 students are THE NORM in most government-run junior middle schools and in senior middle schools the norm is around 90 students per class. Badly kept toilets, cheating students, and decrepit school furnishings and equipment are also the norm. Note for the pickier among you - I said 'the norm' and I accept that there are some schools that are exceptions to this.

Your problem with this lay in the fact that I agreed with his assessment of the college conditions. But I also said that many of the things he was complaining about were NOT peculiar to the college but were typical of many other institutions.
...................................

We are all living and working in a Country where students universally respect their teachers and those who do not, keep their disrespect to themselves.

Very VERY true - which is why you chose not to quote it.
......................................
His attitude is unfair in that he brings into his complaint about the college many factors that are not the fault of the college and beyond the its power to improve or rectify. Other factors he uses as ammunition are not unique to that college at all and whilst that does not mean they are not deserving of complaint - neither does it entitle Mr Hemingway to use these to try making the college out to be any worse than hundreds and thousands of other educational establishments in China.

You only chose the first sentence of the paragraph of which the foregoing is the greater portion. As such the part you did quote is deliberately placed out of context. Why can't you be FAIR for once in your life?

One thing I am not, Mr Duke, is a liar. but it seems that your invective is becoming worse and worse as your arguments diminish. Sticks and stones are for children and we have to make allowances for them - evidently I have to start doing this for you as well.

You have lost your case, Mr Duke. I have stuck by my views through all of your increasing bullshit and as far as I am concerned you have revealed yourself in your true light. Anything will do for you to "get me" - anything at all. A sure sign of a desire for revenge and nothing more.

By the way, my name is not 'Bucky' - it's John. I refer to you by your proper name and title - kindly exercise control over your slack mouth and show me the same courtesy.

John