Ooooopsie, you forgot, you're not supposed to be
reading any of my posts.

But thanks for making my points for me.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Translation: "I have no explanation for why I've spent a
> large portion of *every week I've posted to a.m.t. or FFL
> in the last 16+ years* obsessing about Barry and trying 
> to 'get' him and trying to get other people to do the same 
> thing, so I'll do it again. Maybe it'll work this time."
> 
> :-)
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> >
> > OK, I do have to intervene at this point to deal with
> > some comments made about me.
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
> > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote:
> > > >
> > <terasnip>
> > > Still, what you insist is the case with Judy, that does seem 
> > > interesting to me. Even as your friend Barry insults her in the 
> > > bitterest and most scathing (and, I believe prejudiced and 
> > > unwarranted) ways. Me, if I have a friendship with someone and
> > > I notice they are being unfair and hateful—and usually
> > > ridiculous—in their behaviour towards someone else (who I hold
> > > in very different terms), then I feel forced to say something
> > > to my friend [Barry]. 
> > > 
> > > ME:Hang around a bit and you will see why I feel that it is
> > > not so lopsided.  This is an actual feud and neither side is 
> > > blameless.
> > 
> > Curtis has said many times that he doesn't read my
> > exchanges with Barry. That's OK, but on that basis
> > he is not in a position to remark on the balance of
> > blame.
> > 
> > I don't claim to be "blameless," but I utterly reject
> > the notion that blame in the Barry-Judy situation is
> > anything but *hugely* lopsided.
> > 
> > Just for one thing, if one were to read my posts that
> > comment on Barry's, one would find that a significant
> > number of them--I'd guess at least 50 percent--are not
> > simply insults; quite a few are not insulting at all.
> > Rather, they involve reasoned, noninflammatory analysis
> > of points that Barry has made.
> > 
> > That is never the case with Barry's posts that have
> > to do with me.
> > 
> > There are other lopsided elements as well. I don't
> > *make up* stuff about Barry, for instance.
> > 
> > > R: But you won't do this, Curtis, because of the fragility
> > > of his psyche—*in relation to yourself*. He approves of, he
> > > depends upon, yourself. Were you to speak directly and
> > > candidly to him, you would shatter him. This is the only
> > > reason you don't speak up on Judy's behalf.
> > > 
> > > ME: No its not.  It is because Judy made her own bed with
> > > him.  There were other choices.
> > 
> > Sure. I could have ignored him completely, I could have
> > spoken sweetly to him when he attacked me, were I a saint.
> > But I don't pretend to be a saint.
> > 
> > Curtis doesn't stand up for the people Barry attacks
> > because if he did, Barry would put Curtis on his shit
> > list, and Curtis doesn't want to be on *anybody's* shit
> > list if he can possibly help it.
> > 
> > But it would be very interesting to see what bed Curtis
> > would make with Barry were he to land on Barry's shit
> > list and be subject to the same treatment Barry gives to
> > the others on that list. Curtis might not be quite so
> > sanguine about the availability of "other choices."


Reply via email to