Rereading, I guess I had more than my usual grammar errors.  That's what
you get when you don't get to proof read even once.

--- In [email protected], "seventhray1" <steve.sundur@...>
wrote:
>
> > Really, thanks Judy for holding me accountble to what I write. Let
me
> respond as I go through.
>
> > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" jstein@ wrote:
> > And third, Robin "subtly deceived" the entire forum, not
> > just Curtis personally. But Curtis attacked him for having
> > done so on a personal basis, in return for what Curtis
> > considers personal slights to himself by Robin.
> >
> > So the equivalence Curtis tries to draw just doesn't hold
> > up when it's examined, as far as I'm concerned.
> >
> > > It's similiar to the Ravi situation. I worst Ravi ever got
> > > with me was to call me a "pea brained heartland retard". It
> > > didn't much bother me, but I did lose any affection I had for
> > > the guy. But over all, I felt that an appropiate sanction
> > > for him would be for a time out.
> > >
> > > But if I had been in, say, Curtis' position, where I was
> > > subject to vicious personal attacks, where my reputation and
> > > career were at stake, then I likely would have felt
> > > differently.
> >
> > Sure. And this relates to the Robin situation how? I'm not
> > seeing the connection.
The point I was making was each of us has different baggage when we
engage with one another.  > > Again, my beef with you is that when some
issue comes up
> > between other people, you tend to take whichever side has
> > been most recently expressed without ever really examining
> > the merits of the case that has been made for it. You said
> > in your defense that you don't have the time to go into
> > things that deeply, which is perfectly understandable. But
> > if it were me, I'd refrain from taking a side at all if I
> > hadn't been able to look at it in depth.
I may change my mind more than once depending on the point of view
expressed.  But I reserve this right, just as it is your right to point
out what you feel is a flip flop or a unthought out conclusion on my
part.  It would appear that you have more stringent standards as it
pertains to dialogue here.  I think that is obvious.  But I think we
will just have to accomodate what we feel are the deficiencies in each
other.
> > It's not the worst flaw in the world by any means. Pretty
> > small potatoes, in fact, especially in comparison to your
> > many positive traits. Your switch on the Robin issue was
> > just an especially clear case of this tendency, and it was
> > particularly annoying to me because it seemed to be such a
> > blase approach to what was a very sensitive, painful issue.
> > That's why I spoke up.
Well thank you for that.  You are a true friend to Robin.  And yes, I
thought he really exposed himself, so to speak.  But I have also
observed you sort of stick it someone to whom you are not so favorable
disposed under those same circumstances.  But thank you for the
feedback.  It is appreciated.


Reply via email to