At 19:37 11-3-02 -0500, Jon Gabriel wrote:

><<Now, I do think you are being a bit too harsh here. You do not get treated
>differently from other people just because you are an AOL member.>>
>
>Baloney.  I and other AOL users and/or HTML-encoded e-mail users have been
>singled out _repeatedly_ online both on and offlist because of the
>unchangeable nature of my AOL posts.

I do not see those comments as personal attacks, but as complaints about 
posts being in HTML.


>In this case, Robert Chassel specifically wrote: <<Please, whoever is using
>AOL:  since you cannot use AOL email and also be frugal and readable at the
>same time, either stop posting in a crude, expensive, and unpleasant manner
>to the Brin list; or else write to and tell AOL that you are quitting them
>because their software prevents you from being frugal and considerate.
>Thank you.>>
>
>* What part of "stop posting to the list" seemed non-discriminatory to you?

In that post, Robert did not ask you to stop posting to the list; he asked 
you to stop posting in a crude, expensive and unpleasant manner (IOW: stop 
sending posts that contain HTML).


>* What part of telling me I am being "rude" and posting in a "crude" and
>"unpleasant manner" do you think I, as an AOL user, shouldn't take
>personally?

IMHO, Robert was not calling you personally "rude, crude and unpleasant", 
he called posting in HTML "rude, crude and unpleasant". (IOW, he attacked 
the posting method, not the poster.)


><< I can understand that people complain about HTML postings, and they have
>just as much right to complain about AOL and its stupid rules as AOL members
>have a right to post her.>>
>
>Sure they do.  But Robert was *not* complaining.  He was *demanding* that I
>"stop posting to the list" due to something I cannot change.

I think what he wrote was meant as a complaint, not as a demand. I will 
admit that he could have phrased his comments better, though. But again, he 
did not ask/demand that you stop posting, he asked/demanded that you try to 
send your messages as plain text.


>There is a difference.  A complaint might have taken the form of "Your
>e-mails are unreadable, is there nothing you can do to change your setting?"
>The demand took the the form of "change your settings or stop posting, then
>then quit AOL and write them a nasty letter."  He was being rude and
>presumptive and I said so.

I do not believe he intended to come across as rude and presumptive. But if 
you feel offended, that is something the two of you will have to work out 
between yourselves.


> >If the answer is YES, then please inform the entire list of this and
> >**please** change the rules of etiquette to reflect my right to post.
>
><<Speaking of "having rights": outside the US, Americans have a reputation
>for being sue-happy and demanding that their rights are respected. Despite
>that reputationm, has no AOL member ever bothered to say "hey, I have a
>right to use whatever e-mail client I choose!" and subsequently sued AOL
>for that? (Personally, I find it crazy that people let their ISP dictate to
>them what software they can use.)>>
>
>Do I *really* need to repeat myself onlist to the holder of the great Brin-L
>archive?

Well, I do not have the entire Archive memorised, and I only do a search 
when I think it is necessary.


Jeroen

_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website:                  http://www.Brin-L.com
Tom's Photo Gallery:                          http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com

Reply via email to