"New.Morning, it didn't get me worked up because of the context in which it appeared -- an online forum -- and because of the history of the two individuals, Peter and Richard, as I've come to know them on FFL. A different configuration could easily prompt a different reply."
I think you hit the nail on the head here Marek. Although I can understand the points being made here by all sides, I can't help thinking that the actual context is being ignored. It is the content of the posts themselves by Mr."Go Figure" that should have his PR team of spin doctors working through the night, not a comment by a person whose comments regularly use hyperbole for comedic effect. Being offended by what people say here by taking it out of the FFL bantering context and taking it seriously as if this was a serious publication, is a choice designed to allow re-visiting favorite emotions IMO. --- In [email protected], "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > New.Morning, it didn't get me worked up because of the context in > which it appeared -- an online forum -- and because of the history of > the two individuals, Peter and Richard, as I've come to know them on > FFL. A different configuration could easily prompt a different reply. > > ** > > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > It was a joke. > > > Abuse of power? I could see how it could be taken this > > > way. But it seems that Richard as well as many other > > > got my intent. Others misunderstood it and I > > > understand why they did. But apologize? PLEASE! > > > > > > > Any psychologist that says, over a period of weeks: > > > > 1) I have state sanction to declare you crazy > > 2) I have state sanction to commit crazy people > > 3) You are crazy > > > > and even if only as a joke -- and doesn't get the substantial abuse of > > position in those words, and crude, sick one-upmanship in that, well, > > is crazy, IMO. > > > > (Sorry if my words may/don't yet quite hit the mark, in defining and > > describing why those 3 points above are quite so odd -- and a bit > > chilling -- from a licensed psychologist.) > > > > But continue to laugh it away. It makes it all the more odd. > > > > Kevin -- the other licensed psychologist here, or Marek, a lawyer in > > good standing with the bar, does the above seem odd, from a > > professional standards point of view, to you? If you sincerely don't > > think so, I will reconsider why I think it is abhorant. (I reconsider > > most of my values and POVs regularly, so thats not a huge commitment.) > > >
