Every word (seven or eight emails in) is an admission of guilt.

Edit: G. B. claims that this page has "gone viral" and he has had more than 28 separate people email him complaining about it pro or con. In the past week there have been 23 views and half of them were probably HIM reading it over and over. Your "friend" of many Yahoo accounts is lying to you Gene, or else you are lying. I wish my pages would go viral but the only pages that get any traffic are the ones HE reads over and over about HIMSELF. He and you are apparently my only customers.

Gene Bourne keeps writing me exhorting my friendship and complaining that I am posting "private communications". 

Here is my response (which I sent to him):


I am not and never have been your friend. Nothing you say to me is under any condition of privacy. 

If you are not the one who synchronized the report attack on me to coincide with your offensive letter then it is the one person with whom you communicated that you were about to send it. Anything and everythiing you email me that is less than that name is an admission of guilt. 

You think you are so "clever" all the time, do nothing but flatter yourself, insult me and then grovel and say you are ignorant of all things that require cleverness and you then expect something from me of friendship???

What seriously is wrong with your ability to reason and to see yourself as you are? 

Do not write me another word except the name of the person you are in collusion with to attack me. Every other word convicts yourself.

HH

What Pseudo-Thomas doesn't want you to read

Edit2: So after I wrote an email to pseudo-Thomas stating that I knew he was not Thomas because he answered a person's spiritual question w/o mentioning Jesus and because he said he thought "Tori" had gone "back to the celestial spheres" instead of back to Jesus (the recent return of Tori was fake because I believe she HAS passed away, sadly.) One Christian to another does not say celestial spheres, but NOW, everything pseudo-Thomas says is about God and Jesus. When I said Thomas uses only overpriced words he started posting old Thomas stuff with big words in it. If I tell him Thomas used the word "sugar" a lot, every third word will be sugar. Thomas HIMSELF was complaining of someone impersonating him, but "this Thomas" put in his about me page a request for people to stop complaining that he is not him. The real Thomas would be slightly more self-aware.

Edit: Judging by the fact that he re-blocked me, I'd say rabbit is running for his whole (other persona that is...)

Pseudo-Thomas (the person masquerading as Thomas 7 and posting old poems of his mixed with syrupy garbage) blocked and then unblocked me, saying "People who think I am a fraud please leave me alone."

I asked, should I continue posting then or are you just going to report every answer I make?

Immediately I got this reported:

"That Thomas would write a doctor Seuss rhyme like this is unlikely. That he would do it without trumpetifying it with verbiage, is impossible. Garbage. Noise would be a step up."

Either 

A) through some miracle, Thomas (and Gene) happened to interact with me once all month EXACTLY as I get one of my lately rare violations,

Or

B) someone is INSTIGATING their communications to dovetail with these reports (if they don't name names IN PUBLIC then they are denying B...)

Or

They are my reporters.

At least Thomas believes in miracles, so he has a fig leaf to drape himself in.

I think the new Thomas is a fraud. Either that or he is a report hound. Most likely both.

More Appeal/Violations Games

Update: I think Yahoo may be turning a corner in the appeals process. This question was RESTORED!!!

From my appeal to Yahoo Answers:
I asked the question "Would you rather half empty praise or harsh criticism" and it was reported. Later it was returned to YA! because I won the appeal. Before that I tried to soften the question as:

"Truthful criticism or empty praise of poetry?"

And NOW the softer version of the question that already won the appeal has been reported. You need no further evidence that this is a personal attack masquerading as a report, and the evidence that the appeals board is run by those report hound vedetta-types will be the softer version of a question failing its appeal when the harsher version was restored.

Hello Happy Hiram,

The question on Yahoo Answers was reported and deleted by one or more trusted members of the Answers community:

"Truthful criticism or empty praise of poetry?"

Those who disavow criticism are so good at it in secret

If you are wondering why your questions are being reported look no further than Gene Bourne,
I critiqued one of his poems so he decided to bad mouth me by email today,  claiming he was defending newbies, and when I responded my violations started to roll in.

Gene writes:

Message: HH

Over the past (almost 4 years) reading your answers, 

I'm fascinated as to what events have catapulted you

into the most bitter individual I've ever encountered.

I've read your answers to "beginners" that made

my skin crawl.

I've never read a poem you posted; just those

you post as "critique" answers.

You are a human wrecking ball, who invalidates 

positive critisism.

Are you aware the harm you might have caused

a young person, at a certain crossroads in their lives,

especially in today's declining culture.

This is not a message of anger, rather angst and sadness over

the trail of wreckage, left in your wake.

You came to mind yesterday when I received a message from

a member I critiqued when she was 15.

Her poem was a technical disaster, but I sensed "color"

and heart", the way she phrased certain passages.

I wrote a long paragraph, encouraging her to continue

writing, for I sensed and innate gift for composing.

I was the only member who answered.

She messaged me 3 years later,

voicing her appreciation for my giving

her a boost...just when needed.

We had never communicated after I answered her poem.

It saddens me to think the influence you've had on so many.

I don't understand your motives. I don't understand you.

Gene Bourne.

So I posted this and got reported:

Happy Hiram

Your Open Question

Show me another

»

Truthful criticism or empty praise of poetry?

Which do you find more useful, and why is this question against guidelines? Is asking how poetry criticism should be pursued objectionable to some in here? Is personal like or dislike of the poster a new guideline?

• 2 seconds ago
 
• - 4 days left to answer.

• 
  

PS: My four reports all month turned into Eight simultaneously with his email. He says we are being set up against each other. Let him say who put him up to this garbage and exonerate himself. Or if he is not a stooge he is the culprit.

Speaking True is against Yahoo Guidelines.

Postmortem: unfortunately for the humor of the matter, Yahoo Answers decided that truth is indeed not against their guidelines. 

Roann wrote a poem about mind interfering with happiness. I answered her post with one word:

"True"

Yahoo says:
Hello Happy Hiram,

The answer on Yahoo Answers was reported and deleted by one or more trusted members of the Answers community:

"True."

Hiram's Appeal:

So now agreeing with the content of a person's post is chat, gibberish or a rant? I suspect that Yahoo Guidelines are rewriting English so that chat means letters, gibberish means sense and a rant means expressing ideas. 

How can this stand unless Yahoo is a fraud?

Stay tuned for Yahoo's automated response. Will they ever read their own words? No. They are too busy data mining.

Cassie Had It Right is Incomprehensible

My friend posted a poem. Another answerer suggested some good changes and I said "Cassie had it right" which got reported. 

Here is Yahoos response to my appeal: 

Hi Happy Hiram,

We're sorry, but upon review we found that the following answer was indeed in violation of the Yahoo Answers Community Guidelines:

"Cassie has it right."

Violation Reason: Chatting / Not a Question or Answer / Incomprehensible

Go to the Yahoo Answers Appeals Board:

Which board stopped existing in 2008!!!!