On Sep 13, 2010, at 12:02 PM, david buchanan wrote:

> 
> Marsha said to Horse: 
> 
> Having been on the receiving end of one of dmb's trashy little posts full of 
> insults, I was a bit sensitive to the tactic.  But I get your message loud 
> and clear.  It won't happen again on my part.
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> 
> If my purpose were merely to insult, the so-called "tactic" of sending a 
> private message to one person rather than to the whole group would be 
> counterproductive in the extreme. If my purpose were merely to shame or 
> bully, it would be far more effective to do the insulting in front of as many 
> people as possible. That's why politicians put their attack ads on TV - at 
> great expense.  And that's why you "needed" to take my private post and make 
> it public. Somehow, by your calculations, you imagined this would embarrass 
> me. It doesn't. But if I were John, I wouldn't be too happy about it. You 
> dished up the embarrassment that I was trying to spare him.
> 
> I think this little episode says a whole lot about where you're at, Marsha. 
> This behavior only shows that your heart is full of vengeance and spite. The 
> reason is obvious; I'm very critical of your position on the MOQ and of your 
> evasive style and you don't like it. Rather than respond to the actual 
> criticisms, you'll just do sleazy stuff like this. Dropping the "F" bomb, 
> playing the (mixed-up) tattle-tale and declaring your intellectual autonomy 
> and your intention to ignore me are just more of the same. Altogether, it's 
> just one big temper tantrum. I doubt that anyone is going to take you or your 
> position more seriously because of it. 


Marsha says:
I don't think you can speak for ALL anything, and personally having read what 
you wrote think it says volumes about you.  I don't like to discuss issues with 
you because of your propensity to fall into the name-calling mode when you 
don't get agreement.   But I've had enough.   

You may continue this thread without me, because I am going back to refusing to 
participate in a discussion with you.  I wish you well, of course.  





> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Sep 13, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Horse wrote:
>> 
>>> [Message from MD Administrator]
>>> 
>>> I agree completely with Adrie here.
>>> Emails that are sent off-list should remain off-list.
>>> If they are to be posted to the list then ALL participants should agree to 
>>> their being published on MD AND they should run it past me first.
>>> If there is some particular reason that you feel something should be be 
>>> brought from the private to the public domain (threats or whatever) then 
>>> please contact me with your concerns.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Horse
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> And i strongly dissaprove the usage for unclear purposes of list-ommitted
>>>>> mails.
>>>>> Mails that are meant to be kept confidential, have no right of existence 
>>>>> in
>>>>> the public domain.This is unnaceptable.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'v stayed away from the conflict DMB, Jc,i try to keep my options open as
>>>>> long as possible.try to settle the conflict Jc, without cheap
>>>>> use of relaying mails in the public domain.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Adrie
>                                         
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html


 
___
 

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to