At 8:51 AM 4/20/95, Jayne S Docherty wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Apr 1995, Wood Lee wrote:
>
>> >Is Wood Lee serious? "Women simply need to have children...[or] somehow=
I believe Wood Lee is "trolling" this list. He has no genuine desire
for legitimate discussion and it's called flame bait. I'm sure he's
enjoying our reactions immensely.
-T.
I agree. But, what delights me is how quickly Woodley was picked out
by the fish and has provided us with a with a tasty "flambe"!
Hurray! for women's intuition.
=========================
lea
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 20 12:01:47 MDT 1995
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:02:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: lea smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Woodley
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, 20 Apr 1995, lea smith wrote:
> At 8:51 AM 4/20/95, Jayne S Docherty wrote:
> >On Wed, 19 Apr 1995, Wood Lee wrote:
> >
> >> >Is Wood Lee serious? "Women simply need to have children...[or] somehow=
>
>
> I believe Wood Lee is "trolling" this list. He has no genuine desire
> for legitimate discussion and it's called flame bait. I'm sure he's
> enjoying our reactions immensely.
>
> -T.
>
> I agree. But, what delights me is how quickly Woodley was picked out
> by the fish and has provided us with a with a tasty "flambe"!
> Hurray! for women's intuition.
> =========================
Perhaps Wood Lee *is* trolling this list. However, we do not know that
for sure and by immediately dismissing his postings we run the risk of
creating a closed environment in which we only "talk to ourselves".
I decided to assume that Wood's communication skills were simply a bit
deficient -- i.e., he is not very good at the type of discussion that we
appreciate in this environment (perhaps because they are not comfortable
for him) -- but that his intentions were good. So, I chose to throw
him a lifeline before he drowned in the ocean of our displeasure. ;-)
That
is why I tried to respond by answering Wood's questions and posing a few
of my own for him.
So, how about it Wood? If you are serious about discussing these issues,
let's hear from you...
Jayne
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 20 12:35:05 MDT 1995
MR-Received: by mta WPB1; Relayed; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:34:54 -0500
MR-Received: by mta EPIC66; Relayed; Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:34:56 -0500
Alternate-recipient: prohibited
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:31:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Carol Meeds WPB 407-433-2650 x 113 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Woodley
In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: ecofem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Posting-date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 14:34:00 -0500 (EST)
Importance: normal
UA-content-id: A100ZVSMKTG15
A1-type: MAIL
Hop-count: 2
It wouldn't occur to me to find a male discussion list and troll.
I don't think I even want to lurk. It is now intriguing. How
about it? Has anyone checked out a male discussion list? lurked?
Trolled? Montague's new _Rachael_ would be good flame bait, I
think. (He talks about the deminishing virility of men.)
Carol Meeds
Jupiter, Florida
