At 16:55 11-07-2002 -0500, Julia Thompson wrote: >Erik's been around longer than you have, BTW. I'm just wondering if >he's going to make a comment to anyone about the Good Old Days Before >Jeroen or something like that. (It's not his style, so I doubt it, but >there is always that possibility.)
Given his style, I think it is quite possible, actually. >I think (but I'm not sure) that right now he's yanking your chain, and >you're the only person who hasn't gotten that that's what he's doing. What he is trying to do here, is trying to get away with gross misbehaviour. Unfortunately for him, he is messing with the wrong guy. >And he's not the only one around here who hasn't answered all of >someone's questions to their satisfaction, either. And were all those "someones" being "diagnosed" by someone like Erik as having mental problems, without ever being shown any evidence for it and without getting answers to their questions (even after repeatedly asking for it)? >I'd recommend just dropping it. Every post you make on this thread just >makes you look more and more like a stubborn ass (the animal, not the >body part). Well, sometimes I *am* stubborn. I am one of those (apparently rare) people who believe misbehaviour like Erik's should not go unchallenged. What if I would drop it? It would send a message that such misbehaviour is acceptable. It would stimulate people like Erik to pick another victim. And another one. And another one. If we accept such behaviour now, we have to accept it in the future. We would also have to accept rants and flame wars. If that is what this list wants, then we might as well ditch the Etiquette Guidelines right now. Where to draw the line? Would it be acceptable to say someone has mental problems? Would it be acceptable if someone would call you (Julia) a bitch who terrorises the neighbourhood (the "evidence" being the fact that you are moving to an other house -- the neighbourhood chased you away)? Would it be acceptable if someone would call Dan Minette an intolerant Christian fundamentalist and a fake scientist? All this of course without giving any actual proof and a refusal to answer questions. >There *is* honor in walking away from an argument. There is also honour in backing your claims and answering the ensuing questions. There is also honour in admitting that everything one claimed was a lie. But I doubt Erik will do either of those. >(If you really want to continue, you might consider taking the >discussion off-list and then once some resolution is reached, let the >rest of us know how it turned out.) Given Erik's blatant refusal to provide proof and answer questions on-list, hell will freeze over before he will provide proof and answer questions off-list. Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
