--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@...> wrote: > > What you omitted here, no doubt "by accident," was the fact that > I coined the moniker Saint Share not in response to the post of > hers that you place next to mine (making my response look as if > I am being insensitive to Share), but to a comment by Emily on > that post.
Feste, you've lost it. I did not, of course, intend to make it look as though your post was a response to hers; if you can't figure out why that's obvious, go stew in your own inane juice. Nor do I have any idea how you think what you wrote would appear to be "insensitive" to Share. That's some kind of weird fantasy of yours. I chose those two posts from early in Share's tenure on FFL because in light of subsequent developments, they are supremely, if inadvertently, ironic. Let's have another look at the post of Share's I quoted, since you conveniently deleted it (can't say as I blame you under the circumstances): "This is an apology to anyone whose feelings tender heart [sic] I may have hurt. I'm willing to do what I can to make amends. And I'm doing my best to develop so that I don't continue hurting people knowingly or unknowingly." Share has demonstrated very effectively that the last two sentences are bullshit. Either that, or her "best" is appallingly inadequate. When she's under any kind of pressure, and sometimes even when she's just feeling punk, she lashes out repeatedly with the intent to hurt people. She has *no* inhibitions whatsoever about attempting to hurt people, nor has she the slightest interest in making genuine amends. And she writes far nastier snark than Stupid Sal ever did. > This is part of Emily's response: > > Dear Share: You are a gem of a human being. I'm not sure what > inspired you to write this, but you seem the least likely to > hurt anyone's "tender feelings." [end quote] Yup, Share fooled even Emily. > I was gently tweaking those who were responding to Share in > the way that Emily did. Oh, I'm not so sure of that. > It is one thing to tweak someone in a post and then drop it > (as I did) but it is quite another to pursue an ugly > vendetta against a particular poster, as you have done for > months with Share. I don't think anybody is comparing your posts to mine, feste. What you don't seem to want to deal with is that seven of the sharpest posters on FFL--Emily, raunchy, Ann, Robin, Alex, Ravi, and me--find Share's behavior appalling and have criticized her for it. You look pretty foolish when you just take wild swings at me. > You seem so contorted with rage against her that you cannot > think straight. Sorry, no, feste, I'm thinking very straight, and I'm not "contorted with rage." What an idiotic thing to say. And if you were to go look at my posts to Share in the archives, you'd discover that when I first began to criticize her I did so quite gently, until recently, when she has just lost control of herself completely. > You deliberately interpret everything she writes in the worst > possible light. No more vague generalizations. If you have an accusation to make, support it with examples and be accountable for it, or shut your face. The *fact* is that those of us who feel Share is in need of some very serious healing have been very specific in pointing out her misbehavior; whereas her defenders spout these nitwit accusations that they can't or won't back up. They--very much including you--are fundamentally cowardly, just as she is. This is very much a "shoot the messenger" situation. <snip> > Regarding Share, she has given you a response that is far kinder > than you deserve, Nothing she said was true, feste. > and I think you should now STFU about her. Find some other > outlet for your psychic demons but leave Share alone. If you don't mind, I'll continue to criticize Share as long as she continues to behave with zero integrity and maximum ill will toward other people.
