jstein wrote:
> In fact, as should have been obvious to both
> Willytex and Peter, the first paragraph
> Willytex quotes below and attributes to me
> (as well as everything else Willytex quoted)
> was actually Barry's.
> 
So, it's all about Judy AND Barry.

> > Rick, would you consider banning people from FFL who
> > continue to denigrate others, perpetuate these
> > mindless personal arguments and just waste everybody's
> > time with these very personal posts. Individually,
> > when these posters stay on task, they can have some
> > pretty interesting posts, but this continual childish
> > bickering is absurd. Ban them for a month. Maybe that
> > will straighten them out ala Paris Hilton....
> >  
Richard J. Williams wrote:
> > > 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?


Reply via email to