Or it may pertain to the notion that ideas can be discussed without one party resorting to needless parsing, or an unending need to find fault flaws in someone elses views, no matter how small or insignificant those flaws may be, or maybe they aren't even flaws, but mere differences in opinions. That may be more what I am trying to say. Perhaps the knife fight, gun fight was not a good analogy. If you look at the site where Judy and Barry and some others came from before, it became so toxic that it became uninhabitable. And I believe it would become the same way here, but there are many that seem committed to maintaining a more civil discourse.
--- In [email protected], awoelflebater <no_reply@...> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "seventhray1" lurkernomore20002000@ wrote: > > > > Okay. No biggie. > > --- In [email protected], Share Long <sharelong60@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Steve, I was asking why fight unfairly which only makes matter > > worse. I don't at all equate that with what you're talking about, > > getting into the conflict tho not having intended to. Share > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: seventhray1 lurkernomore20002000@ > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 3:06 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Eastwooding: PS to Ann "I'm not going to > > shut up; it's my turn!" > > > > > > > > >  > > > Share, > > > > > > With all due respect.  I think some of us can be guilty of this > > notion of "bringing a knife to gun fight". Or rather, we didn't > > originally come to fight at all, but realize we are up against someone > > who has come to fight, and fight to win and will deploy whatever arsenal > > is necessary to effect this outcome. > > Okay all you gunslingers and knife wielders out there, I think you have confused me here Share. I understand the concept of unfair fighting and what that might entail but I am unsure what your analogy of bringing a knife to a gunfight means here. Does the knife wielder hold an unfair advantage or is he/she at a disadvantage or are you saying the knife holder doesn't want to fight or, oh dear, I am really puzzled now. > > In my estimation someone who is fighting unfairly would be someone telling lies or untruths. Someone twisting facts to purposefully mislead others. And in addition, they would have to know that there was no way to prove these untruths to be otherwise. So to be unfair in a fight would be to intentionally lie in order to create conflict, a conflict that might never be able to be resolved because evidence is known, or at least believed, to be non-forthcoming at any point. That is the best definition I can come up with at this point for what I could describe as fighting unfairly. > > Now how that relates, if at all, to what you are speaking about then by chance I got it right. But feel free to correct me. > > > > > > > > And yes, I think Judy misses much of the humor and subtlety that takes > > place here.  She remains primarily focused on promoting the > > rightness of her POV. > > > > > > The bigger casualty is that the overall dialogue.  It is hard > > to discuss something without quickly coming up against what she feels > > are vital distinctions. > > > > > > And then before you know it, you are stuck in a never ending, > > meaningless discussion about some obscure point that has no bearing on > > the overall picture. > > >   > > > --- In [email protected], Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: > > > > > > > > I noticed that Judy did not recognize the humor in my exchange with > > Richard.àPerhaps something similar is going on here.à> > However Curtis, it was clear to me that you were making a joke with the > > called a meeting comment. > > > > > > > > > > > > The insinuation that you and Sal conspired about the email to Emily > > is unfair fighting and makes matters worse.àWhy do that? > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 12:42 PM > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Eastwooding: PS to Ann "I'm not going > > to shut up; it's my turn!" > > > > > > > > > > > > à> > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" authfriend@ > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <authfriend@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Curtis *could* have avoided all but #1 (at least as far as we > > > > > > > know; was the email really all Sal's idea? did she run it by > > > > > > > him, and if so did he encourage her to send it?). > > > > > > > > > > > > Judy at her finest. > > > > > > > > > > Too funny, after Curtis tried to insinuate that I had "called > > > > > a meeting" to get Ann and raunchy to criticize Curtis. > > > > > > > > > > His hypocrisy comes so naturally to him that he doesn't even > > > > > try to hide it. > > > > > > > > So desperate for manufactured material that you are even willing to > > make yourself look this thick? So you got that I was suggesting that > > you guys literally called a meeting? And you thought that other readers > > might be confused if you pretended it was as literal as your > > insinuation? > > > > > > > > That's why I call you the troll queen. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
