--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Better watch what you say, then, and make sure you > > > > don't come out with anything that might embarrass > > > > Daddy. > > > > > > Judy, > > > > > > Why would I read anything you guys write to each other? > > > > Why would you comment on something I wrote to Barry > > that you hadn't read? > > > > Come on, Curtis. Either stay out of it, or take > > responsibility for getting into it. > > I commented on the post that used my name. Of course I > read those.
OK, you wouldn't read anything Barry and I write to each other except the posts that use your name. Exactly how does that change my point? And don't you have to at least skim a post to see whether your name is mentioned? Or do you use the Search function to make sure you haven't missed any such instances? <snip> > >, but I can also understand why you did so. I was not > > > asking you not to express your opinion using me as an > > > example but was expressing how I feel about it. > > > > Riiiiiiiight. "When you do this it hurts me terribly. How > > can you possibly think I'm asking you to stop?" > > I am drawing different intellectual boundaries than some > who make such requests and am being clear about the lines > I am drawing. I never assume that how something makes me > feel is a motive for people I don't have a personal > relationship with. But I am letting you know so you can > do with the information as you wish. Curtis, where you're drawing your intellectual boundaries is way too subtle for me, I'm afraid, even after you've gone to the trouble to explain them. The above makes no sense to me whatsoever. And what "such requests" are you talking about? I can't recall ever having seen anyone here complain because somebody quoted and/or referred to them in a post to somebody else, as long as they weren't misrepresented. > In this case your choice was to mock me. If you want me to understand why those intellectual boundaries are actually coherent, you're going to need to take another crack at spelling them out. > > > > But I'll tell you this, dear. If Daddy or anybody > > > > else said bad things about you that I knew weren't > > > > true, I'd give them what-for. I wouldn't wait for > > > > you to use my name. > > > > > > While I appreciate the sentiment I am skeptical of its > > > application since Nabby used the phrase "idiots like > > > Curtis" with no response from you. > > > > Oh, please. Given that comment, *I* say you're an idiot. > > Nice touch. So in your mind, Nabby calling you an idiot equates to Barry's reference to "the Judys of the movement" wanting to exonerate MMY of any blame in the Great Marriage Secrecy Scandal. Sorry, but I think that's idiotic. As does the notion that I'm trampling on your feelings when I point out to Barry that the scenario he was mocking of Tony having insisted on the secrecy was one you had entertained, given his professed respect for your "real world perspective."
