Following up with a few caveats to the below. First, I am more than willing to admit that everything I posted below is my OPINION. She would contend, and has a long, long history of doing so, that *her* OPINION is more than that, and constitutes *fact*. I dispute this, based on doing the thing she is incapable of doing -- watching her TRENDS, for over seventeen years.
My "Attempts to 'get' someone who agrees with these three" are, of course, referring to her lighting into Steve, for the "crime" of feeling that something said by one of her three consistent targets might have made some sense. Doing this is a consistent TREND on her part. My "buttering up" category is, of course, OPINION on my part, but it is based on watching her TRENDS for a long, long time. The test of whether it's an accurate opinion will come in the future. It is very possible that she is laying on the flattery because she really likes the newbs she's laying it on, but IMO the test of whether this is true is whether or not she later asks you to "side with her" in criticizing or demonizing one of her three targets. WATCH FOR THIS. If it happens, remember my opinion, and then decide whether it was just opinion. I'm posting this as a kind of "heads up" for newbs on this forum, who have not had an opportunity to see how she "does business" here. I am far from the only person to perceive the same TRENDS in her behavior, or to have commented on them. You make up your own minds. My OPINION is that Judy Stein's "motivation" is more clearly seen in the TRENDS she exhibits over time, not in any one post on any one subject. WATCH FOR YOURSELVES. If you notice that she seems to spend a great deal of her time (historically, often 50% or more of her posts per week, for *years* now) ragging on one or more of these three people, and/or that she tries to convince you to rag on them, too, then feed that data into your own internal discrimination engine, and make your own determination of how to deal with it. Unlike her, I am not urging you to rag on her. Do whatever the fuck you want. I am merely alerting you as to TRENDS you might want to pay attention to, and to the fact that there is a possibility that the person complimenting you up one side and down the other just might have her own reasons for doing so. --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Since I've seen this word appear in Message View this > week, I thought I'd throw out a "Just the facts, ma'am" > tally of the subject matter of one person's 18 posts so > far this week. These are just the numbers; you may infer > from them whatever "motivation" you feel is appropriate: > > Direct attempts to "get" or criticize Vaj, Curtis, or > Barry -- 5 > > Attempts to "get" someone who agrees with these three > and/or try to get them to criticize one of these three -- 5 > > Attempts to butter up people whom she thinks she can > con into helping her "get" or criticize one or more > of the three above, either now or in the future -- 7 > > Other topics -- 1 > > Posts in which she criticizes Robin either for striking > his students, for feeling he had the right to, or for > intentionally lying to us all (or at the very least > attempting to mislead us) about whether he did -- 0 > > You don't need to be a "mind reader" to figure out what > a poster's "motivation" is here on FFL. All you have to > do is watch the trends. What they focus on is what they > have become. > > Now let's see what the remainder of her posts this week > will be about, shall we? >
