On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:44:06 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > But we know nothing about the Ratman. Who's "we"? And why does "we" need, or want, to know about him? > If he did not constantly and rudely > disagree with just about everyone else on the list, it would not matter (for > myself, So simply because of your perception, you've decided you want to know more. OK, for what end, then? > I also enjoy "hearing" a little about what people I meet on the internet > do and like to share with them-that is also an other reason. It doesn't *appear* to be the reason in this case, though, given your previous paragraph. > "When I say we, who is we?", was a question. Well there is myself and other > people on the list that I privately e mail. Even one other person would qualify > for use of the term "we". So you are speaking for others, then, with their permission, and for their needs? Did they convey this curiosity to you, and request that you ask the question? Curious that in previous paragraphs you simply state that it is you, *individually* that is interested in this information. The use of "we" hints at clique-ish perspectives, and potential group polarisation against individuals, which I personally find repugnant. > Don't you think that this list would be an even more interesting place to > exchange ideas if you knew a little about each member. Can't say as I'm particularly bothered either way. It seems a bogus question, at present, given your stated rationale for this particular curiosity. As it seems it's your individual curiosity, that assumes group potential by the foisting of the "we" word, it has disturbing overtones for me. > I have had e mails from people on the list as young as 14 with more wisdom than > someone 40. Non-sequitur. > I find the knowledge and maturity that some people of youth exhibit > here VERY impressive. I doubt that I was as sharp as they are, but as I have > mentioned before, I have been "into" Hi Fi (that's would we used to refer to it > as) since I was about 12. Relevance? > Back then most 12 year olds didn't even know what a woofer or tweeter was (but > then again, I couldn't hit a base ball or catch one if it was placed in the > glove :). I was different than the "average" kid. There was no term nerd back > then, but if someone interested in electronics and science, who knows very > little about sports and really couldn't care less is a nerd, then I guess I was > a nerd :). No doubt commendable frankness, but in reality - does this matter? In this context? > Except for my being interested in knowing about people in general, Francisco's > reply was exactly my point. Then why just now? Neither of you are new to this forum. > But, I personally feel too many people spend too much time on a keyboard > exchanging technical information without knowing anything about the other > person. If you just want technical answers and really don't care about people > (to me it seems like you are kind of using them) that's fine. But I am also > interested in the people behind the answers. Then why phrase your questioning as "we" - I mean if it's simply what you, *individually*, desire. > The people giving these answers are real flesh and blood. They are not a data > base. If a person does not wish to share anything about him/herself with > others, that's their right. But then I also have the right to be suspect as to > the accuracy of their data. Then why didn't you just be so overt, from the outset, and declare you had an agenda. Rather than hide it behind some presumed touchy-feely humanity. Neil _______________________________________________________ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/ ----------------------------------------------------------------- To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
