--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" lurkernomore20002000@ wrote: > > > > Hey Share, como sa va? > > I understand how you might be offended by Barry's comment. I > > mean out of context it appears far worse than it is, at least > > IMO. But the crudeness of the comment does not seem to be the > > issue, at least with Raunchy and Judy. The issue is whether > > or not it is a death threat. And they are trying to make the > > case that it is, and I'm afraid they have fallen short in that > > regard. > > Steve, these last two sentences are bullshit. You are > very, very far from understanding what's actually > involved. You just decided to go along with what Curtis > and Barry have said without questioning or examining it. > > You resist complexity, but reality is often quite > complex, so you end up with a simple version that you > find satisfying but that varies significantly from the > actual reality. This one, the reality of this specific > issue on FFL, is messy for many reasons. > > Some aspects of it are subtle, some are ambiguous, > some involve outright dishonesty on Barry's and Curtis's > part. Some are just pieces of data which, if they're > missing, make it impossible to see how the various parts > connect, so you end up with a highly distorted picture. > > The picture you've formed may be simple and > comprehensible, but it isn't the reality.
Well, I must give you the benefit of the doubt. I likely read posts too fast, often do not go back for second reading where I may pick up some subtleties, (as you say), and I tend to go with the feeling level of a post as opposed to looking at them more analytically. On the other hand I have learned to trust my feelings and emotions about things. They have been pretty good guides for me. So I apologize if I have missed some of the complexities around this issue. And thank you for what I take to be a very civil reply.
