----- Original Message ----- From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 10:17 AM Subject: Re: Some things are too good to last
> Dan Minette wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:22 AM > > Subject: Re: Some things are too good to last > > > > But, Adam brought up an example of a past threat, and I was responding to > > Sonja's response to that, etc. That threat no longer seems operative, > > which is very good, but it is a reasonable example of a threat that could > > not have been ignored. > > Fair enough. I just prefer not to drag up negative things from the past > if it can be avoided. I tend to agree with Dan. There is always potential for unexpected consequences from "normal" posts (I think JDG will agree here), but when one is angry or somewhat excited when posting those potentials increase. > > > > I think that on the basis of this one .sig file change, some people are > > > overreacting. > > > > My reaction was at the time was "please let this not be the start of a > > pattern." It doesn't appear to be, Jeroen seems to write lotsa different > > things in the .sig file. > > Right. I just took it as momentary frustration (keeping in tone with > the rest of the post!) rearing its head, and might have glossed over it > altogether if it hadn't been pointed out. > > Rob, if you're going to point out stuff in Jeroen's .sig file, can you > point out the good things, too? I'm liable to miss those, as well. :) I try to do so actually. If you go back and look at posts I have written where I was critical and the post was longer than one or two lines, I usually do try to say something positive. I want people I disagree with to feel that I respect them and value them, and that my criticism is not an attempt to discount them in any way. Having said that, I am sure one could find examples where I did not do so. Me am far from perfect. <G> > > > >If he actually modifies content on his website to reflect > > > this negativity, that's another matter entirely, but he hasn't done a > > > damn thing to it this week as far as I can tell. All he has done is > > > modify his .sig file. Lighten up, guys, would ya? > > > > I have no problem with the .sig. However, I didn't respond to Sonja's > > first comment that the original protest of Gautam, myself, and others was > > just paranoia because I was willing to let things lie and because I allowed > > a bit of hyperbola by someone who was subjected to a number of rude emails. > > (That of course was wrong.) > > > > However, after it became a repeated theme for Sonja; I decided to respond. > > I have no problems with Jeroen put in his sig. I have a significant > > problem with any credible threat of RL consequences. That is not paranoia. > > Indeed, my issue is with Sonja's posts, not Jeroen's sigs. I differ with > > them and thus write a rebuttal. No hard feelings. Indeed, a casual perusal > > of my posting patterns indicates that I do tend to write rebuttals for > > posts I differ with, even when they are written by people I like. :-) > > Yes, you do. > > Actually, I expected nothing less from you when I hit "send". And I'd > like to take the opportunity to let you know that I appreciate the > cordial tone of your response to me. > > One thing I find interesting, going over this thread: All responses > spawned by that one post of Jeroen's that come through as being part of > the thread as threaded by Netscape come either from people in Jeroen's > town in The Netherlands, or people who live in Texas within 3 hours' > drive of each other. Does this mean anything, or is it coincidental? > :) Its coincidental I'm sure, but I noticed it too. Maybe those who are able to deal with Texas summers are less likely to put up with any crap? <G> xponent Boo Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
