--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
Just as I thought Judy, no smoking gun, just your own self created animosity. There is nothing in those posts to support any of your vague innuendo charges. > Sometimes it's just plain nastiness, other times it's > pretty gross intellectual dishonesty. Lets see some of these that were not in direct response to your treating me poorly. Again with the vaguely insulting accusations with zero evidence. Your fantasy isn't holding up under closer scrutiny. The reason I dug this up is because I never have understood how you turn on me after a few friendly posts. Now I know it is just an old grudge. One you created on your own. I re-read them and it is as I remember it. My best guess is that you don't even know what your problem is with me. It is just a locked-in feeling that hasn't seen the light of day for a while, with no specific reference point. The last post also contains unspecified claim of my "dishonesty" without proof. It deserved no response because there is none except this: show me one example. So to recap. You claimed that I had said things after you had warned me that caused you to go off on me, and it was my fault because of the specific things I said after your warning. But you can produce none except the whole posts which I re-read and say nothing more than me trying to figure out what set you off. You have failed to show me one example of what you claim. But you think that maybe another vague charge of nastiness and dishonest will distract me from your failure to produce any evidence for your insult? You should have taken the better road on this one Judy. But having re-read your responses, I am not surprised. You've been running the smoke and mirrors animosity program for a while now. But better yet, prove me wrong with specific example so compelling that any reasonable person will take your side. >From the last post you referenced: ME:> I still would like to know what upset you about my post. Judy:I wasn't "upset" by it, Curtis. Mildly disappointed, but not surprised, that you hadn't changed, as I said to start with. So the whole thing about me having to take responsibility for you getting upset was all bullshit too? There was never anything for me to own up to for provoking you. You were never upset by anything I said, just "disappointed." And when everyone said they thought you were acting unfairly to me, that had nothing to do with me setting you up. It was all you and your fantasy all along. Nursing a grudge from almost a decade past. I see you with much better clarity Judy, I'm glad we had this little exchange. The compliment that you seem to have trouble with in the last post is that you keep the ball in play. The same compliment I have always paid you. But the fact that you include negative vague accusations makes dealing with you difficult and annoying. Just as I said in one of my first posts back here. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > You disappoint me every time you drop the oh-so- > > > charming facade you showed up with here and let us > > > see what's underneath (which is what I had been > > > familiar with from alt.m.t). > > > > I would like to see an example of what I have been saying > > that is so horrible, my underneath. > > Have a look at the exchange quoted below for a number > of examples. > > Sometimes it's just plain nastiness, other times it's > pretty gross intellectual dishonesty. > > > While you are at it you can give some of the grievous > > examples of what I wrote after your warning that forced > > you over the edge against your will. I would like to > > see some examples of things I said that could be used > > as evidence for a reasonable person to become unpleasant > > in an online discussion. What was the trigger that you > > have alluded to so often but not produced for examination? > > "Not produced for examination"? I even gave you the > post number. Then I quoted it (see below). And you > already knew what it was: > > "I've never understood why you took such offense to me > telling you that I used to get pissed off at you and it > made me write more back in the ALT Med era. I remember > that as a key point in the breaking of our initial > rapport." > > Or if you mean what was the last straw after I'd warned > you off, start with post #97529, the first in the "Hi > from Curtis" thread, and you'll see how it developed. > You have to see the posts in context; isolated quotes > won't give you the picture. > > It pretty much ends with my post #97718, to which you > never responded. > > > > > > As far as you trying to tell me how I felt about AMT, whether it was a > > blast for me or not...that is for me, not you do decide. Obviously I > > enjoyed it enough to carry one a very long posting relationship with you > > Judy. I have repeatedly explained the value of it for me. I said > > everything I wanted to say to you right then and there, I came here with no > > unfinished business with you. As you well know my overtures to create a > > more cordial relationship extended beyond FFL at the time. What I said was > > what I meant, interacting with you on AMT was difficult and often > > unpleasant. But I got a lot out of it. The idea that this is a cover for > > a hidden agenda is something you are making up. > > > > > "I look back on the AMT days as an important > > > experience for me.There were times when I > > > felt misunderstood and very frustrated, but > > > that stressful dynamic was the reason I kept > > > at it so long. It was incredibly useful for > > > me to articulate my thoughts about the > > > movement in such detail, and it never would > > > have happened without me being so pissed off > > > at your messages." > > > > > > Misunderstood, frustrated, stressed out, and > > > pissed off. Oh, and relentlessly attacked > > > to boot. Some blast. > > > > Nice spin avoiding the more substantial and important to me, "Incredibly > > useful to articulate my thoughts about the movement in such detail." Many > > of my posts had the same humor I post with here and I had my fans just as > > you did for the writing produced. So yes Judy I did have a blast. And if > > you are somehow unaware of how you came across in those days, that is a > > glaring gap in your self perception. Now if you wanted to counter charge > > me with everything I said to you, I wouldn't complain. I gave as good as I > > got and had fun doing it. And we both felt justified and like we came out > > ahead in the debates. Very human of us. > > > > When I came here I was new to this group and was feeling my way. It had > > been many years since I had communicated with you and was happy to find a > > fresh perspective to communicate from with you. Many of our interactions > > here have that fresh quality. More respect. I prefer that. I'm not sure > > you do. I am coming to think that you have to demonize me somehow as > > intrinsically bad underneath. > > > > Of course I could be persuaded with some of your evidence of my wickedness. > > You are a good archivest, lets see some quotes. The kind that would make a > > sweet good natured poster here get uncontrollably angry. So far your only > > charge is a sin of omission, me not taking responsibility for your anger. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You warned me that you couldn't control your vitriol > > > > > > towards me and I didn't care if you went off. > > > > > > > > > > No. I said I *was* controlling it, and that you > > > > > might want to think about whether you really > > > > > wanted to set me off. > > > > > > > > ME set YOU off. Thanks for giving me all your power. > > > > > > Everybody has their limits, Curtis. I told you where > > > mine were, but you refused to respect them. > > > > > > > > Obviously, you did want to set me off. You kept > > > > > working at it, and eventually you succeeded. > > > > > > > > Everybody needs a dream. I wanted to be the one > > > > person in the history of a TM discussion board to > > > > set you off. It was an almost insurmountable task > > > > and I know that many had failed in the past, but I > > > > put my heart and soul into it. Yup. One might > > > > even say you were a victim. > > > > > > Sez Curtis, neatly sidestepping the point. > > > > > > > > > And as predicted, you did. The group didn't dig it > > > > > > and said so. Then you tried to pin it all on me, > > > > > > which failed since everyone could read all the posts > > > > > > and decide for themselves. > > > > > > > > > > Most people don't read the posts carefully enough to > > > > > be able to analyze what's going on in an exchange like > > > > > this. You knew they hadn't gotten it. You engineered > > > > > the whole thing, getting back at me for our alt.m.t > > > > > clashes. And that was despite the effort I made when > > > > > you first joined us here to be cordial. > > > > > > > > Nice taking responsibility there Judy. What an evil > > > > genius I must be in your mind. And you even know my > > > > motive for my diabolical scheme! > > > > > > Oh, I don't think you had it planned. Rather, > > > you saw an opportunity, and you ran with it. > > > > > > > I had nothing to get you back for from the past, > > > > I had a blast on AMT and your relentless attacks > > > > were a part of it. I told you that when I joined > > > > here. > > > > > > I mean, who could ever think that you might > > > want to get back at me for those "relentless > > > attacks"? > > > > > > As to your having a "blast": > > > > > > "I look back on the AMT days as an important > > > experience for me.There were times when I > > > felt misunderstood and very frustrated, but > > > that stressful dynamic was the reason I kept > > > at it so long. It was incredibly useful for > > > me to articulate my thoughts about the > > > movement in such detail, and it never would > > > have happened without me being so pissed off > > > at your messages." > > > > > > Misunderstood, frustrated, stressed out, and > > > pissed off. Oh, and relentlessly attacked > > > to boot. Some blast. > > > > > > As I said at the time, you're a master of > > > the backhand. You actually had the stones > > > to pretend you'd intended the above as a > > > *compliment*. > > > > > > > The consensus opinion at the time did not follow > > > > your evil Curtis angle. I seem to have much more > > > > respect for the ability of the posters here to > > > > see through any such bizarre schemes than you do. > > > > > > Especially when their verdict is in your favor, eh? > > > > > > > What went on was obvious and not too subtle > > > > for a casual reader to grasp. > > > > > > We disagree. It wasn't that subtle, but it did > > > require paying attention. (Same deal with those > > > who find Barry's posts "insightful," BTW.) > > > > > > Plus which, a lot of the folks who didn't get > > > why I didn't take what you said as a "compliment" > > > hadn't been on alt.m.t for our exchanges there. > > > They assumed the basis for your being so "pissed > > > off" was that I had "relentlessly attacked" you, > > > rather than that I had been pointing out that a > > > lot of what you said simply wasn't so. > > > > > > > I was disappointed by your reaction then as > > > > I am now. > > > > > > You disappoint me every time you drop the oh-so- > > > charming facade you showed up with here and let us > > > see what's underneath (which is what I had been > > > familiar with from alt.m.t). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Snip > > > > > > > > > It was Curtis-created. And my expectation was that > > > > > you'd tell the truth about how it developed. > > > > > > > > That was very weird Judy. We will never see eye to eye on this. > > > > > >
