--- In [email protected], "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dear Judy, > > Thank you for replying, and thank you, too, for your restraint. > My criticism was harsh and I'm normally reluctant to express > criticism so baldy. But even though my remarks were made with a > broad brush, so to speak, I don't believe that my perception is > overly skewed or my primary point incorrect.
Well, of course you don't, or you wouldn't have said what you did! But you've acknowledged that you don't read the exchanges you're complaining about, which necessarily limits your understanding of what's involved. <snip> > it's been my policy for several months to pass over yours, and > Barry's, and Sparaig's, and Shemp's, as well as a few others. > You all are part of a group that had previously traded barbs > and tirades on a.m.t. for a long while and then started doing > the same here. Yeah, just for the record, it was not I who started the trend here. I was being demonized by the alt.m.t TM critics on FFL well before I arrived, as I discovered when I was reading some of the back traffic to orient myself to the group. I'm curious to know if you're aware of the extent to which TM supporters on this forum are harassed and attacked and viciously mocked by these people when we say anything positive about TM or MMY, or our views are dismissed without consideration simply because we *are* TM supporters. Once in a blue moon someone will speak up in our defense, but it's the exception rather than the rule. <snip> > It is true that many people > engage in argument in what could be said to be an intellectually > dishonest fashion. I'm used to it. In my line of work, where the > metric of how well I make my own argument and how I respond to my > opponent's argument, is measured in the months and years my clients > spend either in custody or in liberty, I have to consider what I say > and what I don't and how it is conveyed very particularly. > > I'm always considering the final outcome. What it is that I want to > achieve. And my question to you is: what do you want to achieve by > fighting against the unfairness and dishonestly you find in the > posts of the few individuals on FFL that you so often engage? For > them to become less unfair and dishonest? What do you hope to achieve when you're defending someone you're convinced is innocent and you cross- examine a witness for the prosecution whom you know is lying? (Have you detected any progress on > that front?) Do you want those of us who also monitor FFL to be > aware of their dishonesty and unfairness? Do you think we can't > make our own evaluations or come to our own conclusions? If you've come to conclusions similar to mine, you-- or most of you--sure aren't acting like it. > Is your fight here on FFL against unfairness and dishonestly > more of a reflexive reaction to the personalities that you > have concluded are synonomous with unfairness and dishonesty? > That is my candid conclusion. And I don't think that it is a > misperception. It is confirmed by the many different remarks > made by several others on this forum at different times when > this same issue of the incessant bickering in which you are > a major contributor has arisen. Most, if not all, of whom admit they don't actually follow the exchanges. You'll forgive me, I hope, if I don't accept their (and your) perceptions as authoritative. In fact, I suspect it's those opinions that are reflexive. It also seems exceedingly odd to me that with very few exceptions, when these people complain, they don't complain about those who are dishonest and unfair, they complain about me, or at best draw a moral equivalence between me and the dishonest folks. <snip> > It's just a world. We're all just a bunch of naked monkeys trying > to figure out why we're here and where we came from. Just give > these guys some love. I can't sincerely give what I don't feel, and I decline to be insincere, sorry. > That's all anyone really wants. My apologies for > being so harsh before. No need to apologize, Marek. You're entitled to express your opinion.
