Hi Dan, No, I was not talking to anyone in particular.
Marsha On Dec 27, 2012, at 12:48 AM, Dan Glover <[email protected]> wrote: > Are you talking to me? > > I mentioned that I was tired of the abuse I have received here, yes. > But how would you or anyone for that matter like it if they spent a > good deal of time answering someone's queries only to be told to go > stuff yourself? You must have read the responses I got from Ron and > Mark. Both very high quality posts, right? > > Not. > > I always thought this was a discussion group, not a place to be lured > into a trap or to be heaped with insults that have absolutely nothing > to do with the matter at hand. And yes, I know you have taken your > share of abuse too. I commend you for hanging in here. It isn't right > the way some contributors have treated you either. > > Mark was out of control. He obviously had nothing better to do with > his time than to type endless posts to the discussion group and worse, > his understanding of the MOQ was less than negligible. I for one found > it embarrassing to belong to the same list. There are actually people > out there reading his posts and taking them as indicative of the > quality here. > > Is it so much to ask that a person read Lila before contributing to > the list? Is it so much to ask that we (for the most part) stay on > task so far as discussing the MOQ? Horse grants us a lot of leeway > here. We shouldn't take advantage of it. > > Perhaps the discussion I am having with David H. isn't up your alley. > That's fine. Most all your discussions with Mark weren't up my alley > either so I left you alone. Until he started in with some really > incredible statements like the words Robert Pirsig wrote aren't > important. Come on. What kind of asshole statement is that? What was > he doing here if the books RMP wrote aren't important? > > Plus, you must remember, Horse asked us all to take a bigger lead here > if we wanted the list to maintain the quality it has been known for in > the past. I know I am not the most intelligent person here -- I > basically shun academia -- but I've been around a long time and I know > what he is saying. We've had some very high quality contributions in > the past. But the actions of those like Mark were pulling down > everyone. > > And just because I am not involved in academia doesn't mean I don't > respect those who are. I do! I guess I don't feel the pull for it that > they do. I envy them in a way. I'd like to belong to something bigger > than me. Perhaps that is part of the reason I've stayed with this > group for so long. I feel I have learned things here I could never > learn in a university. But I am probably wrong as I have never > attended one so how would or could I know that? > > Anyway, I never meant to whine or complain. I was just stating things > the way I see it. It is all there in the archives if you doubt my > words. And I do enjoy your posts comparing Zen Buddhism to the MOQ. I > am hesitant to reply to them as I am not as well-versed in Buddhist > literature as you. > > Thank you for reading, > > Dan > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 4:56 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Gents, >> >> I can't stand it. I just can't stand it. All the sighing, whining and >> complaining about Mark and I making intellectual discussion impossible. >> Where is the high quality intellectual discussion needing to be presented by >> you "intellectuals"? Where is it? >> >> Lucy > 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
