On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 9:48:09 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 12:50:32 AM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 3:31:24 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 1:19:39 PM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 11:38:49 AM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:58:29 AM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 9:23:25 AM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > > > > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 8:32:29 AM UTC-4, George Dance wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 8:26:28 PM UTC-4, Michael Monkey aka "Michael Pendragon" wrote:
> > > > > > > I said that Will's story in its current form has undergone several revisions since it first appeared.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since you don't seem to understand what "revision" means, allow me to explain: it means that Will has *replaced* the previous versions with the current version.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The previous versions, to the best of my knowledge, no longer exist.
> > > > > > So you claim to have seen previous versions, but you also claim they "no longer exist" -- meaning we'll just have to take your word for what they say.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I'm sure you've seen them as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, yes. Since Will followed my advice and revised his autobiography, the older versions no longer exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > You are free to discount Jim's and my recollection of the contents; however, you should bear in mind that if the original story hadn't presented Will in an extremely unflattering light, I would not have urged him to revise it.
> > Considering that both you and "Edward" have been trying to "present" Will in the most unflattering light possible for the past six years, 'll have to discount that statement of yours as well.
> >
> Wake up and smell the coffee, George!
>
> Will has made a career of presenting himself in the worst light imaginable.
> > > > > > > However, Will's comments to Jim and myself (included in the current version) show that this latest version was written to address points that Jim and I raised regarding the previous versions.
> >
> > > > > > Presumably, since you two were interviewing about these "previous versions" on aapc, he'd posted those "previous versions" on aapc. What happened to them? Are you saying Will deleted them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > Do you know how to revise a wiki page, George?
> > > > Better than you, apparently.
> > > Apparently not.
> > > > > You delete a word/sentence/paragraph and type a new one in its place.
> > > > And when you click "save" the wiki saves a new version of the file (which is displayed). Meanwhile, the older version, which was previously saved), is still there on the wiki, along with all the earlier versions.
> > > >
> > > The earliest version in the "history" is listed as: "Revision as of 19:25, 14 December 2019."
> > The page was moved from the main "Will Dockery" article. Will added the chapter in question ("1981 and It All Falls Down"). there in June 2014; from then until Oct. 2017 it was unchanged. Which means there's just one version until you and "Edward" began raising "points" about it. Almost all of that version is still in the current Bio, as are his replies to your "points.."
> >
> See below:
> > > However, this "Revision" is just that -- a revision. This is confirmed by both its listing as such, and by its content:
> > >
> > > [START QUOTE]
> > >
> > > Michael Pedragon [sic]: "In the wiki bio, it seems like you were only living with T, and went straight from squatting in an apartment with her to squatting at a lumber yard alone..."
> > >
> > > WD: Okay, that was off...
> > >
> > > [END QUOTE]
> > >
> > What you told Will was not true. Both the oldest version of the Bio, and the current version, say the same thing: "The part of the story you probably don't know is we moved out of those La Maison Apartments, owing at least two months of rent (since none of us ever paid rent!) (which was like $365 a month utilities not included!) into her grandmother's house ..."
> >
> See above.
>
> Read the quoted exchange, George. It's from the oldest version of the bio that appears in the history -- yet Will and I are both referring to an even earlier version.
> > > It is clear that I am referring to an earlier version in the above (earlier than that which existed on 12/14/2019).
> > There is no such version. The above is what the bio has said since the "Late 1981" chapter was written. Will, Kathy, Will, and Clay moved from La Maison to 590 Sherwood.
> >
> Then how do you explain Will and I discussing an earlier version (above)?
> > > > > IOW: Yes, to all intents and purposes, Will deleted them.
> > > > Which means they're still on the wiki. All I needed to know.
> > > Wrong. See above.
> > They were still on the wiki, as I thought. Though there's really only one version up till the time you and "Edward" began reading it and writing about it here in Nov. 2017.
> >
> Are you dense, Dance?
>
> The oldest version saved in the history includes the following exchange:
> Michael Pedragon [sic]: "In the wiki bio, it seems like you were only living with T, and went straight from squatting in an apartment with her to squatting at a lumber yard alone..."
> WD: Okay, that was off...
>
> We are specifically speaking about a version "in the wiki bio" that *predates* the oldest version currently displayed there.
> > > > > > > > > How do you explain her holing up at the Hernandez house for a month?
> > > > > > > > For example, let's see the account that says she was "at the Hernandez house for a month." From my reading of the Bio, I got the impression that Melody's "kidnapping" and Victoria's "rescue" happened the same night.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I take it that you don't bother reading Will's AAPC posts. Will recently clarified that he had been told that she had been at the Hernandez house for about a month, and in the mental institution for about the same period of time.
> > > > > > > He hinted that he suspects she might not have been at the Hernandez's the entire time, but that he has no way of knowing where else she might have been.
> > > > > > I might have missed that post (which I'd like to read rather than take your word for). So, once again, let's see. As is, according to the Bio they'd planned to move to Mexico that weekend (they already had their stuff packed in a U-haul). I'm skeptical that they changed plans and decided to stay in Atlanta for another month.
> > > > > >
> > > > > According to the bio, that was on the night that Kathy's sister found her there. This was approximately a month after she'd gone missing, and Kathy was supposed to have been going to Texas (not Mexico) with them.
> > > > The Bio doesn't say when her sister found her, as you know. I think that happened the same night. You're just repeating your earlier claim to support it; arguing in a circle.
> > > >
> > > I have listed my reasons for dismissing your speculation in the "Day the Mill Shut Down" thread.
> > Then they were dealt with there.
> Whatever. The local papers will show it in the police reports. Will could also request copies of the actual reports from the police. If Will has any interest in documenting the actual timeline of events he as capable of doing so.
>
> Further speculation (regarding the dates), without supporting evidence, is fruitless.
> > > > > > > > > > > If you believe Dockery had health insurance after being bounced out of places to live, well that is his lie.
> > > > > > > > > > Maybe, maybe not. Don't expect me to take your word for that.
> > > > > > > > > It's unclear from Will's story whether he had insurance. The lumber yard had been contacted by "the mental hospital she was checked in up in Marietta, Georgia [which] wanted to get my insurance papers or whatever, to pay her bill!"
> > > > > > > > That sounds like he had insurance through his work, meaning his company paid the premiums (and that his ability to make rent wouldn't be a factor).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > He had insurance through his job at the lumber yard.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > So much, then, for your boy "Rochester's" claim that he didn't.
> > > > > Jim clearly stated that it was a speculation on his part. He never made any such "claim."
> > > > No, Michael. In fact, "Rochester" actually called Will a liar for saying that he had insurance. "If you believe Dockery had health insurance [....] that is his lie." When I called him on it, you then tried to back him up by saying it was "unclear" whether Will had insurance or not. Thank you for eventually admitting that "He had insurance through his job."
> > > >
> > > You are taking Jim way too literally on the above. Yes, he's saying that your belief would be based on one of Will's lies, but he is clearly speculating that Will never had insurance. This becomes clear when one reads his *complete,* *unedited* sentence:
> > > "If you believe Dockery had health insurance after being bounced out of places to live, well that is his lie."
> > > He is saying that Will could not have afforded health insurance if he was unable to pay his rent. That's a fair, and probable, conclusion for one to draw.
> > No, it is not. Will never claimed that he was buying his own insurance -- he's said since 2014 that his company was paying for it.
> >
> What's your point, George? We have already agreed to accept Will's story that the lumber yard provided insurance.
>
> Generally, one would not think that a lumber yard provided insurance for its workers and their families. Most of the blue collar jobs that I've had did not offer insurance of any sort -- including a construction job.
>
> Jim's conclusion that Will was uninsured was, however, the fair, and probable, conclusion to draw.
> > > I "admitted" that Will had insurance only *after* Will said that he had. Prior to Will's admission, I would have drawn the same conclusion as Jim.
> > Michael; Will wrote on the Bio in June 2014 that he had health insurance through his work: "The only way I found her was the mental hospital she was checked in up in Marietta, Georgia wanted to get my insurance papers or whatever, to pay her bill!" It's still on the blog today. Both you and "Edward" read it. Maybe "Edward" didn't believe it; but he should know, as I expect you do, that company health insurance does not depend on whether you pay your rent or not.
> >
> You're beating a dead donkey, George. We have already agreed to accept Will's story that the lumber yard provided insurance.
>
> Generally, one would not think that a lumber yard provided insurance for its workers and their families. Most of the blue collar jobs that I've had did not offer insurance of any sort -- including a construction job.
>
> Jim's conclusion that Will was uninsured was, however, the fair, and probable, conclusion to draw.
>
> And FYI: Will does not say that he had insurance through his job in the bio passage you've quoted. He says that the mental institution called his employers because they "wanted to get my insurance papers or whatever, to pay her bill!"
>
> IOW: The hospital contacted the lumber yard to find out if Will's wife was insured.
> > > > > Money was *very* tight:
> > > > >
> > > > > Tina: "Since they wouldn't fix it if I remember right the burners worked but the oven didn't we had to do everything on the top..."
> > > > >
> > > > > Will: It was an excuse, but the rent was just too high at that place, for the money I made back then.
> > > > >
> > > > > That was really what run me back down here, none of that rent I could afford... I did find a little apartment over near Little Five Points that was $200 a month but that was still a lot of money with only one job, and a little child. There must have been jobs in Atlanta, but I didn't know any of the right people.
> > > > >
> > > > > The part of the story you probably don't know is we moved out of those La Maison Apartments, owing at least two months of rent (since none of us ever paid rent!) (which was like $365 a month utilities not included!) into her grandmother's house, and then right after Halloween she just vanished, like she was kidneapped.
> > > > >
> > > > > [END QUOTE]
> > > > None of which has anything to do with whether he had insurance or not. Again, one has to ask:
> > > > WTF is wrong with you Michael?
> > > You certainly are a sneaky little cunt, George.
> > >
> > > Here's the statement you'd made that I was actually responding to:
> > >
> > > GD: There's nothing in the bio about him not being able to pay "any" rent. He was employed through the whole period. I'm sure money was tight, but again that has nothing to do with whether he had insurance.
> > >
> > > I was showing you where Will stated that he didn't have the money to pay the rent.
> > You responded to my statement that what rent he paid has nothing to do with what we're discussing (whether he had insurance) by talking about what rent he paid. I'll repeat: WTF is wrong with you, Michael?
> >
> You claimed that "There's nothing in the bio about him not being able to pay 'any' rent."
>
> You were either mistaken, or lying.
>
> I quoted the passage in the bio where Will specifically says that he didn't have money to pay rent.
> > > > > > > I suggest that you review my current exchanges with Will on the topic (in this and other threads). Will has confirmed that Kathy left him in the spring of 1981 and that he and Tina began living together that summer.
> > > > > > I'm not interested in what Will said about your account. I would like to see where you got that account in the first place.
> > > > > Who knows? Who cares? Why bother?
> > > > >
> > > > > Will has already confirmed it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Kathy's dead, I've never spoken to Tina, so I obviously got if from Will.
> > > > If you "got if" from anyone. That still remains to be seen.
> > > How many times do you need Will to confirm it?
> > Once that I can read. I don't care how many times you say it.
> Your lack of reading skills is none of my concern.
> > > Why do you think it's too Will's benefit to have taken a live-in mistress while living with his wife and son?
> > Michael: Will has confirmed that he and Kathy "split up" in the early part of the year, when he moved to the boarding house. But I haven't read any details from him either on aapc or in the Bio (in any version). From the fact he's the one who moved, it sounds to me like he's the one who left; while it looks like you adopted the idea that she left him because it fits your narrative of him as a
> >
> Another broken off sentence/thought? You've been doing this much too frequently for it to be passed off as typos. I think you should consider seeking medical advice at this point.
>
> As per your incomplete claim... what's your point? Does it matter whether Will left his young wife and 3-year old son or whether his wife took her three-year son and left him?
>
> IMO it makes Will look 100 times better to say that Kathy left him.
>
> This is the second time where you have attempted to paint an even less flattering picture of Will than mine. Whose side are you on, anyway?
> > > I should think you'd *want* to agree with Will and me on this.
> > I have no trouble accepting Will's claim that he'd split up with Kathy (again). And if he says that Kathy ran from him either time, I'll accept that's what happened. What I *want* to be true doesn't affect what *is* true. (It's the same for what you *want* to be true, as well.)
> >
> Again, I don't see how who left who is relevant.
>
> All your speculations on the matter achieve is to make Will look like an even bigger asshole than he (probably) is.
> > > > > > > > > 2) Will met Tina and she moved in with him. They weren't paying rent because the stove in their apartment didn't work.
> > > > > > > > That's sort of in the Bio: "'In the Summer of 1981 the constructive eviction happened, I was living with my wife Katherine, room mate named Tina, and my young son." That would be La Maison, where Will, Kathy, Clay, and Tina were all living.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Again, it has been elaborated on by Will in our current discussions.
> > > > > > See above.
> > > > > > > > > 3) Will and Tina planned on running off to Canada to avoid alimony and child support payments.
> > > > > > > > That's not in the Bio. Source?
> > > > > > > The source was Tina's FB page, which I do not have a link to. When Will found Tina on FB, they had several lengthy discussions wherein Tina was initially still angry with Will regarding his treatment of her (at La Maison). They eventually reconciled.
> > > > > > I have a link, so I just sent her a friend request. We'll see.
> > > > > Assuming that the discussion is still there.
> > > > > > > > > 4) Kathy returned late in the summer of 1981 and moved in with Will and Tina.
> > > > > > > > That's not in the Bio. Source?
> > > > > > > Again, that was discussed on Tina's FB page and confirmed by Will in our present discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 5) Since Will was in the process of a "constructive eviction," he and Kathy moved into an apartment owned by her grandmother, and Tina left for parts unknown shortly thereafter.
> > > > > > > > That's mostly in the bio: "one afternoon my Brother Dave drove up from Columbus in his pick up truck, we loaded all our meager belongings and moved to 590 Sherwood Road, K's grandmother's house, with the apartment in back." There's no indication that Tina moved to Sherwood with them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > That's because she didn't.
> > > > > > So she didn't leave "shortly thereafter." Will and Kathy moved out, and Tina left either then or before then.
> > > > > She left La Maison shortly thereafter. She did not move to Sherwood with them.
> > According to the earliest version of the bio, Tina moved out less than a week before Will, Kathy, and Clay did.
> Yes, that is what he says in the bio. I'm not going to sift through our conversations to find a contradictory quote, as I can't imagine why this would possibly matter.
>
> I have never said that Tina moved to Sherwood with Will and Kathy.
>
> I said that Will and Tina were living together, as a couple, at La Maison when Kathy showed up with Clay in tow and told him that she wanted to get back together with him.
>
> Apparently the four of them (Will, Tina, Kathy, and Clay) lived together in La Maison for an undisclosed (but probably very brief) period of time, during which Will was (infamously) banging Tina in one room while Kathy and Clay waited in the room next door. Will soon broke up with Tina and moved to the Sherwood property with Kathy and Clay.
> > > > > > > Kathy left Will in the spring of 1981. Will and Tina started living together that summer. They discussed running away to Canada (alimony and child support were not mentioned, but it was obvious from the context that they were attempting to escape the financial responsibility of supporting Kathy and Clay). Kathy returned in late September and reconciled with Will (who broke off his relationship with Tina). Will and Tina did not part on friendly terms (again, from Tina's FB discussions with him). Will and Kathy moved into an apartment owned by Kathy's grandmother and Tina was left to find a place on her own.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > She and Will remained out of touch until reconciling on FB a few years ago.
> > > > > > > > > 6) Kathy then ran away/disappeared in early November of 1981.
> > > > > > > > According to the Bio, that happened "in the early days of December 1981."
> > > > > > > The bio is garbled and lists both months at different times.
> > > > > > It says "around November", "late fall," and "in the early days of December" at various points.
> > > > > It also says: "and then right after Halloween she just vanished, like she was kidneapped."
> > > > >
> > > > > "Right after Halloween" would be in the first few days of November.
> > > > > > > However, Will and I have discussed this as well, and Kathy left in early November (just after Halloween). She was gone from early November until sometime in January.
> > Will and I have discussed it, and he's told me he thinks it was early December.
> > > > > > > > > Since Tina moved out in late September at the earliest, "long before that" would be a little over a month.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You have left out the Texas travel, but why bother.
> > > > > > > > > > No problem pasting in what the Bio says about that:
> > > > > > > > > > 'When her sister found her she was blanked out crazy, and was about to go to Texas with a Waitress friend she used to work with, Melody, a blonde she worked with at the BBQ place who was married to a Mexican from Texas. I never got the whole story but I think the "kidnapping" was Melody and Andy Hernandez taking her to their house instead of home where I was waiting. I found out later they had a U-Haul packed to go back to Texas and were going to take Kathy with them, when Kathy's sister came up with the police and got her from them, and had her checked in the mental institution.'
> > > > > > > > > Will has told numerous contradictory versions of this story (again, even the current version contradicts itself on several points). If anyone spread any lies about Will, it was Will himself.
> > > > > > > > The Bio has inconsistencies and holes (chiefly around dates and times), as he's merely pasted in what he's said about it on Usenet -- mainly to you and "Rochester" when the two of you were writing your story in Dec. 2017. I think those can be cleared up easily, but with you two challenging what's in there (on the basis of these "numerous" other accounts that neither of you have produced) I won't be touching it at present.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I had originally told Will that his story painted him in a highly unflattering light; pointed out several things in particular which he later took my advice and removed; and suggested ways for him to approach the story from a less trashy angle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The "numerous accounts" refer to the older versions of his autobio -- in a rare instance of his following our advice, he has since rewritten. This means that the former accounts no longer exist (except possibly in portions discussed on AAPC).
> > > > > > The "former accounts" would have ceased to exist only if he had deleted them. Since you can't give me anything, I'll have to ask him about that, and your other claims about what he's since told you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Again, I have to ask: Do you understand how a wiki page works?
> > > > And I'll repeat: obviously better than you do.
> > > See above. The earliest version in the history refers to an even earlier version that no longer exists.
> > The earlier versions all exist. They were originally written on the main "Will Dockery" article, and that's where you'll find them.
> You've got somewhere between 250 and 500 revisions there, George. The oldest version does not include the bio. I'm not going to scroll though each of the revisions to look for whatever factoid it is that you are disputing.
> > > > > When you revise it, you *replace* the old text with new text.
> > > > >
> > > > And you save the new version of the file. Now you have two versions of the file with different text. And so on; every time a page is revised, another version of the file is saved. All of Will's "earlier versions" are still on the wiki, and can still be read.
> > > >
> > > Once again:
> > >
> > > The earliest version in the "history" is listed as: "Revision as of 19:25, 14 December 2019."
> > >
> > > However, this "Revision" is just that -- a revision. This is confirmed by both its listing as such, and by its content:
> > >
> > > [START QUOTE]
> > >
> > > Michael Pedragon[sic]: "In the wiki bio, it seems like you were only living with T, and went straight from squatting in an apartment with her to squatting at a lumber yard alone..."
> > >
> > > WE: Okay, that was off...
> > >
> > > [END QUOTE]
> > >
> > Once again, what you told Will was not true. Both the oldest version of the Bio, and the current version, say the same thing: "The part of the story you probably don't know is we moved out of those La Maison Apartments, owing at least two months of rent (since none of us ever paid rent!) (which was like $365 a month utilities not included!) into her grandmother's house ..."
> > > It is clear that I am referring to an earlier version in the above (earlier than that which existed on 12/14/2019).
> > No, Michael: there is no such version. The above is what the bio has said since the "Late 1981" chapter was written. Kathy, Will, and Clay moved from La Maison to 590 Sherwood.
> > >
> So Will doesn't have the money to pay rent in any of the versions.
>
> Are we disputing the date that Will lived in the lumber yard? Somewhere, either in those 250-500 revisions or in an AAPC discussion (possibly since deleted), Will wrote that he'd invited Kathy to drop acid with him at the lumber yard when she got off work -- but that she disappeared.
>
> Since Will has told conflicting stories about where he was living at the time, neither version can be trusted. The date of the missing persons report coupled with the date of the apartment fire is the only thing that can satisfactorily establish his residence on the night of K's disappearance.
> > > > > Will didn't delete the older versions -- he *revised* them.
> > > > >
> > > > Which means his "older versions" all still exist, and will all still be available to read.
> > > Wrong.
> > >
> > > See above.
> >
> > No, they're there, just on a different page.
> Okay, so they're on a different page.
> > > > > Do you understand what a *revision* is?
> > > > What a silly question, Michael. You've been seeing me post revisions of poems for years, all without *replacing* any of the older ones, and calling them "revisions." Why would you think I've suddenly forgotten the meaning of a word?
> > > >
> > > Where is the older version Will and I are speaking about in the afore-cited exchange?
> > The one that has him moving from the boarding house straight to the lumber yard? There isn't one. The earliest version of the story (June 2014) has him moving from La Maison back to 590 Sherwood with Kathy and Clay: "The part of the story you probably don't know is we moved out of those La Maison Apartments, owing at least two months of rent (since none of us ever paid rent!) (which was like $365 a month utilities not included!) into her grandmother's house, and then right after Halloween she just vanished, like she was kidneapped."
> > >
> Again, I don't feel like scrolling through up to 500 revisions to see if the "Pretty Colors"/LSD post is included. Jim and I both remember Will's saying that he invited Kathy to the lumber yard after work to drop acid and look at the "pretty colors" the night she disappeared. I'm sure that others here remember it as well.
>
> I don't have any need to prove you wrong regarding its existence (either here or in the bio), and don't see any point to finding an alternate version as to Will's living quarters at the time. He obviously was so doped up during that period of his life that he doesn't even know what month/months his wife was gone.
>
> The only satisfactory means of establishing where Will was living at the time would be to compare the date of the missing persons report with the date of the apartment fire. Both should be obtainable via Will's local library and/or police department. If Will is interested in establishing his whereabouts on the night of Kathy's disappearance, I advise him to do some research into the matter.
> > > The earliest version in the "history" is listed as: "Revision as of 19:25, 14 December 2019."
> > >
> > > However, this "Revision" is just that -- a revision. This is confirmed by both its listing as such, and by its content:
> > >
> > > [START QUOTE]
> > >
> > > Michael Pedragon[sic]: "In the wiki bio, it seems like you were only living with T, and went straight from squatting in an apartment with her to squatting at a lumber yard alone..."
> > >
> > > WE: Okay, that was off...
> > >
> > > [END QUOTE]
> > >
> > Once again, what you told Will was not true. Both the oldest version of the Bio, and the current version, say the same thing: "The part of the story you probably don't know is we moved out of those La Maison Apartments, owing at least two months of rent (since none of us ever paid rent!) (which was like $365 a month utilities not included!) into her grandmother's house ..."
> >
> What I told Will (in the above-quoted passage) was obviously correct, as Will admits that it was "off" in his reply.
> > > It is clear that I am referring to an earlier version in the above (earlier than that which existed on 12/14/2019).
> > No, Michael: there is no such version. The above is what the bio has said since the "Late 1981" chapter was written. Kathy, Will, and Clay moved from La Maison to 590 Sherwood.
> >
> Deny it all you want to, George, but both Jim and I (and probably others) remember the "Pretty Colors"/LSD post.

Verified. Dunce is just trying to save his fat little boy Dockery, whose lies caught up with him years ago.