Judy wrote:
> > I look forward to using the term "bigot" in
> > future posts here when referring to you,
> > secure in the knowledge that you (a profes-
> > sional editor, after all) have declared that
> > the use of this term is not critical.
> >
Barry wrote:
> Or perhaps, in light of the unprovoked attack
> you *started* this short week (for you, at
> least...you only have one post left) with,
> I should refer to you as "the pigot."
>
> :-)
>
So, it is all about Judy.
> I'm making this post while you've still got one
> post left, in case you want to get the inevitable
> response out of your system before you take
> another "long weekend." That way you won't have
> to carry your anger around with you all weekend
> like you obviously did *last* weekend.
>
> Within two hours of your arrival back on FFF, you
> had made one post calling Vaj a liar, and another
> slamming me by bringing up a three-year-old
> grudge that you're obviously still fuming over.
> I'm pointing it out because sooner or later you're
> going to trot out the line that you resort to ad
> hominem here because you've been "attacked."
>
> You *weren't* attacked. *You* attacked. And you
> didn't have to.
>
> And you don't have to next week, either. During
> the time you're sittin' in the penalty box this
> weekend (whether you're really away for a long
> weekend or just pretending to be to cover the
> fact that you blew out of FFL so quickly the
> last few weeks), I'm not going to make even one
> post critical of you. I'll try my best not to
> make even one post critical of anyone else here,
> or of TM and Maharishi (although you know the
> latter is tough because they provide so many
> *openings* for critical remarks).
>
> So when you come back next Saturday, or Sunday,
> or Monday, or whenever you come back, there will
> have been no posts from me "attacking" you. If
> you make a post attacking *me* -- personally, I
> mean, not my ideas -- then it will be clear to
> everyone on this forum "who started it."
>
> I have *no problem* with you taking to task any
> of the *ideas* may present in any of my posts.
> Go to town. Rip them a new asshole...Googlebomb
> them back to the Stone Age. That's kosher. But
> the moment you segue from taking on the ideas
> to taking on *me* -- making personal ad hominem
> attacks against me -- then you have pretty much
> established *yourself* as the attacker in this
> scenario.
>
> This is Yet Another Opportunity to clean up *your*
> act, Judy. Curtis has urged you to stick to counter-
> ing or criticizing the *ideas*, not the person. So
> have a great number of other posters here. And yet
> you continue to attack *the person*.
>
> Everyone here knows the difference between attack-
> ing someone's ideas and attacking the person. So if
> you resort to the latter next week, you have blown
> your victim act forever.
>
> But this post *can* be legitimately perceived as
> an attack, so you have a free ride when responding
> to it. Go to town...and feel free to use ad hominem
> all you want.
>
> But if you do it next week, don't ever try to cry,
> "Victim" again, eh pigot?
>
