Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:06:34 -0500 (EST)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Alexis claims WSFA is considering legal action against me
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

Samuel Lubell <samlubell at verizon.net> wrote:

> Keith, the idea of you, Martin, and Alexis debating in print what
> WSFA is doing when none of you go to meetings seems rather silly.

Believe me, I am not at all happy about these incorrect statements
made about me.  Especially in a forum where my response won't be seen
for half a year.  Especially since this is not the first time it's
happened.  I'm sure WSFA members are also unhappy about incorrect
statements made about WSFA.

I was certain that WSFA was not considering legal action against me,
but I wanted to get official confirmation of this fact so that I can
say that in an email to be published in the next issue.

Please note that I have been entirely reactive in these "debates,"
simply defending myself and correcting the record.  And I never say
anything about what WSFA or anyone else has done or is doing unless
I have strong evidence of it, e.g. meeting minutes.  Unfortunately,
either the secretary or the webmaster seems to have disappeared last
summer, so except for tidbits I heard at Capclave, I have no clue
what the club has been up to since August.

> Any way to tell File 770, next time just email the president or
> secretary?  Aren't editors supposed to do fact checking?

I thought Elspeth had already spoken to Mike Glyer about that.  I do
plan to ask Mike Glyer to please, whenever an email for publication
says something about a person or a club, show that person or club the
email so they can have a chance to respond before publication.