At 10:54 09-05-2002 -0400, Gautam Mukunda wrote: >If I did give up my wallet, I would do so in the expectation that >I would be able to remember his face and assist them in nailing his ass to >the wall. I wouldn't consider an interaction that would end with him in >jail my submitting to a threat.
Then how do you call handing over your wallet at gunpoint? There is really only one description for that, and that is submitting to a threat. >But this has nothing to do with superior to others. My statement about you feeling yourself superior to others was related to your refusal to apologise for caused harm. >It is simple. You are, essentially, attempting to blackmail everyone on >this list whom you don't like into giving you something. My exact words were: >I am willing to indefinitely shelve the idea of a Wall of Shame (or >whatever you want to call it). However, since it is my opinion that all >key players in the Dirt Wars must support the apology/amnesty proposal for >the sake of this list's future, I must make that a requirement for the >Wall of Shame not being built. > >John, Gautam, Tom, swallow your pride, guys. This is not easy for any of us. So, if you had bothered to read my post carefully, you would have noticed that I am not "attempting to blackmail everyone into giving me something" but that I was stating that for the process to work, all the key players (including you) to support it. The "blackmail" only exists in your mind. >What matters now is if we submit to blackmail. As shown above, there is no blackmailing here. It only exists in your mind. BTW, I could make a similar accusation against various people (including you). People have threatened to unsubscribe if a Wall of Shame would be erected. Following your logic, I could now complain that people are trying to blackmail me into not erecting a Wall of Shame. Because of that, I should actually build a Wall of Shame, because otherwise I would be giving in to blackmail. >I agree with Dan - if the threat is withdrawn, I'm sure many people will >join in a general amnesty and forgiveness. You probably have not noticed it, busy as you were trying to find something to attack me for, but that proposal came up *before* I made that alleged threat. Several people immediately supported it, *before* I posted my message (and some people after I posted my message), but you (being one of this list worst offenders) said NOTHING. >But under threat? I would be shocked and disappointed if a single person >did. You recently threatened to unsubscribe if the Wall of Shame would be erected. Following your own logic, you were trying to blackmail me into not doing that. That means that if I would use your threat as a reason to refrain from building the Wall of Shame, I would be giving in to your blackmailing. Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
