[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[Ravi Yogi]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
 
  Barry I have read your message and I disagree with
  everything you say :-).

 Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
 continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
 several other people's approach on this forum,
 in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
 but an indication of a fatal character flaw.

 I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
 only seem to be able to come up with something
 to say when it's piling on to one of the three
 folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
 other conversations here, and contributed to them.
 I commend you for that and hope that you continue
 that trend.

Thanks for that Barry, mighty gracious of you :-). I'm going to skip the
rest, I think the obsession between you and Judy runs both ways, truth
might be somewhere in the middle. Sure I might get carried away in my
piling on and exaggerations from time to time but its not that different
from yours.

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@... wrote:

 Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
 everything you say :-).

Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
several other people's approach on this forum, 
in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
but an indication of a fatal character flaw.

I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
only seem to be able to come up with something 
to say when it's piling on to one of the three
folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
other conversations here, and contributed to them.
I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
that trend.

My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
to play pile on. Another thing I was pointing
out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
same five people, over and over. It's as if --
from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
and are desperate to get in the last word. 
And not just once, but over and over and over.

We have an opportunity right now to see whether
I am correct. One of these instigators, told in
no uncertain terms that from the other person's
point of view the long, protracted discussion /
argument he'd been lured into had reached its
conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
to be said, the person who wanted (some would
say desperately) to prolong it responded by
posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
her last word. 

I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
what happens. The other party has an opportunity
here to allow her to *have* the last word she
craves so desperately, and just let the matter
drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
one more attempt to get him to punch back against
Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
argument again. I personally hope that he takes
the latter route, because if he does that will
set up an interesting experiment.

How would the instigator react if he fails to?

Will she let the argument drop and post about
other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
week but for weeks and months in the future, or
will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
insult him back into a head-to-head again? 

My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
things that the instigator carefully snips out
of her compulsive replies to every post in which
I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
is OBSESSION. My suspicion is that whether the
victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
into this particular argument or not, she will
within a very few days attempt to start another
one. It's like a law of nature. She's obsessed.

Or, I could be wrong about this. Watch, and 
decide for yourself.

I no longer reply to anything she says, and rarely
bother to read any of it because by this time I've
learned that I can tell what is going to be said
in the first two lines. As, I suspect, can pretty
much everyone else on this forum. Vaj also rarely
bothers to interact with her one-on-one because
he's seen the movie before, and know that doing so 
will inevitably devolve into a long waste of time
ended by her declaring victory. Maybe Curtis -- 
saint that he is to still be willing to talk with 
her at all -- will do the same, and limit himself 
to the first two exchanges in any post in which 
she hides her true intent and hasn't managed to 
turn it into a Bash Curtis Session again. 

If so, WHAT WILL SHE DO? What will her posse do?

My suspicion is that they'll go a little batshit
crazy and turn up the OBSESSION dial to 11, and 
over the next few weeks redouble their efforts to 
start all the bickering up again. 

But only time will tell. I've made my prediction.
Now it's up to the instigator herself -- and you,
as one of her co-dependents -- to see what you're
going to do. If we ignore you, will you have the
strength of character to do the same with us?

Your call. Over and out...

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

Damn dude, when does your vacation end? You need a good boot in the pants and 
some decaf.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
 
  Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
  everything you say :-).
 
 Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
 continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
 several other people's approach on this forum, 
 in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
 but an indication of a fatal character flaw.
 
 I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
 only seem to be able to come up with something 
 to say when it's piling on to one of the three
 folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
 other conversations here, and contributed to them.
 I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
 that trend.
 
 My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
 as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
 here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
 to play pile on. Another thing I was pointing
 out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
 Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
 same five people, over and over. It's as if --
 from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
 and are desperate to get in the last word. 
 And not just once, but over and over and over.
 
 We have an opportunity right now to see whether
 I am correct. One of these instigators, told in
 no uncertain terms that from the other person's
 point of view the long, protracted discussion /
 argument he'd been lured into had reached its
 conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
 to be said, the person who wanted (some would
 say desperately) to prolong it responded by
 posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
 her last word. 
 
 I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
 what happens. The other party has an opportunity
 here to allow her to *have* the last word she
 craves so desperately, and just let the matter
 drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
 one more attempt to get him to punch back against
 Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
 argument again. I personally hope that he takes
 the latter route, because if he does that will
 set up an interesting experiment.
 
 How would the instigator react if he fails to?
 
 Will she let the argument drop and post about
 other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
 week but for weeks and months in the future, or
 will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
 post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
 insult him back into a head-to-head again? 
 
 My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
 things that the instigator carefully snips out
 of her compulsive replies to every post in which
 I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
 is OBSESSION. My suspicion is that whether the
 victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
 into this particular argument or not, she will
 within a very few days attempt to start another
 one. It's like a law of nature. She's obsessed.
 
 Or, I could be wrong about this. Watch, and 
 decide for yourself.
 
 I no longer reply to anything she says, and rarely
 bother to read any of it because by this time I've
 learned that I can tell what is going to be said
 in the first two lines. As, I suspect, can pretty
 much everyone else on this forum. Vaj also rarely
 bothers to interact with her one-on-one because
 he's seen the movie before, and know that doing so 
 will inevitably devolve into a long waste of time
 ended by her declaring victory. Maybe Curtis -- 
 saint that he is to still be willing to talk with 
 her at all -- will do the same, and limit himself 
 to the first two exchanges in any post in which 
 she hides her true intent and hasn't managed to 
 turn it into a Bash Curtis Session again. 
 
 If so, WHAT WILL SHE DO? What will her posse do?
 
 My suspicion is that they'll go a little batshit
 crazy and turn up the OBSESSION dial to 11, and 
 over the next few weeks redouble their efforts to 
 start all the bickering up again. 
 
 But only time will tell. I've made my prediction.
 Now it's up to the instigator herself -- and you,
 as one of her co-dependents -- to see what you're
 going to do. If we ignore you, will you have the
 strength of character to do the same with us?
 
 Your call. Over and out...

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[turquoiseb]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote:

 Damn dude, when does your vacation end? You need a good boot 
 in the pants and some decaf.

Like the events you continue to obsess on and carry 
a grudge over, Jim, my vacation ended long ago. 

Do you remember the famous Zen story about the two monks 
whose order prohibited contact with women? Approaching
a river, one noticed a woman unable to get across, so
he offered to give her a piggyback ride over on his
back. They got to the other side, the woman thanked
him, and went her way. 

The two monks walked on in silence, but the other monk,
the one who had not helped the woman across the river,
was quietly simmering inside. He finally couldn't control
himself any more and said angrily, How could you have
dishonored your vows like that, to touch a woman?! The
other monk said, Put her down. I did, back at the river.

Put the vacation thing down, dude. 

You might also re-read the post you're replying to and
consider it a challenge to you, too. Your call. Over
and out...


 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
  
   Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
   everything you say :-).
  
  Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
  continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
  several other people's approach on this forum, 
  in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
  but an indication of a fatal character flaw.
  
  I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
  only seem to be able to come up with something 
  to say when it's piling on to one of the three
  folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
  other conversations here, and contributed to them.
  I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
  that trend.
  
  My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
  as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
  here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
  to play pile on. Another thing I was pointing
  out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
  Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
  same five people, over and over. It's as if --
  from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
  and are desperate to get in the last word. 
  And not just once, but over and over and over.
  
  We have an opportunity right now to see whether
  I am correct. One of these instigators, told in
  no uncertain terms that from the other person's
  point of view the long, protracted discussion /
  argument he'd been lured into had reached its
  conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
  to be said, the person who wanted (some would
  say desperately) to prolong it responded by
  posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
  her last word. 
  
  I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
  what happens. The other party has an opportunity
  here to allow her to *have* the last word she
  craves so desperately, and just let the matter
  drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
  one more attempt to get him to punch back against
  Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
  argument again. I personally hope that he takes
  the latter route, because if he does that will
  set up an interesting experiment.
  
  How would the instigator react if he fails to?
  
  Will she let the argument drop and post about
  other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
  week but for weeks and months in the future, or
  will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
  post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
  insult him back into a head-to-head again? 
  
  My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
  things that the instigator carefully snips out
  of her compulsive replies to every post in which
  I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
  is OBSESSION. My suspicion is that whether the
  victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
  into this particular argument or not, she will
  within a very few days attempt to start another
  one. It's like a law of nature. She's obsessed.
  
  Or, I could be wrong about this. Watch, and 
  decide for yourself.
  
  I no longer reply to anything she says, and rarely
  bother to read any of it because by this time I've
  learned that I can tell what is going to be said
  in the first two lines. As, I suspect, can pretty
  much everyone else on this forum. Vaj also rarely
  bothers to interact with her one-on-one because
  he's seen the movie before, and know that doing so 
  will inevitably devolve into a long waste of time
  ended by her declaring victory. Maybe Curtis -- 
  saint that he is to still be willing to talk with 
  her at all -- will do the same, and limit himself 
  to the first two exchanges in any post in which 
  she hides her true intent and hasn't managed to 
  turn it into a Bash Curtis Session again. 
  
  If so, WHAT WILL SHE DO? What will her posse do?
  
  My suspicion is that they'll go a little batshit
 

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[whynotnow7]

Glad to hear it Barry, though I was also referring to your apparent vacation 
from your Self. As to whatever challenge you are posing to me, I am perfectly 
happy with things as they are, until they change, in which case that is fine 
too. What's the problem?

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@ wrote:
 
  Damn dude, when does your vacation end? You need a good boot 
  in the pants and some decaf.
 
 Like the events you continue to obsess on and carry 
 a grudge over, Jim, my vacation ended long ago. 
 
 Do you remember the famous Zen story about the two monks 
 whose order prohibited contact with women? Approaching
 a river, one noticed a woman unable to get across, so
 he offered to give her a piggyback ride over on his
 back. They got to the other side, the woman thanked
 him, and went her way. 
 
 The two monks walked on in silence, but the other monk,
 the one who had not helped the woman across the river,
 was quietly simmering inside. He finally couldn't control
 himself any more and said angrily, How could you have
 dishonored your vows like that, to touch a woman?! The
 other monk said, Put her down. I did, back at the river.
 
 Put the vacation thing down, dude. 
 
 You might also re-read the post you're replying to and
 consider it a challenge to you, too. Your call. Over
 and out...
 
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
  
   --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
   
Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
everything you say :-).
   
   Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
   continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
   several other people's approach on this forum, 
   in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
   but an indication of a fatal character flaw.
   
   I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
   only seem to be able to come up with something 
   to say when it's piling on to one of the three
   folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
   other conversations here, and contributed to them.
   I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
   that trend.
   
   My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
   as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
   here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
   to play pile on. Another thing I was pointing
   out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
   Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
   same five people, over and over. It's as if --
   from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
   and are desperate to get in the last word. 
   And not just once, but over and over and over.
   
   We have an opportunity right now to see whether
   I am correct. One of these instigators, told in
   no uncertain terms that from the other person's
   point of view the long, protracted discussion /
   argument he'd been lured into had reached its
   conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
   to be said, the person who wanted (some would
   say desperately) to prolong it responded by
   posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
   her last word. 
   
   I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
   what happens. The other party has an opportunity
   here to allow her to *have* the last word she
   craves so desperately, and just let the matter
   drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
   one more attempt to get him to punch back against
   Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
   argument again. I personally hope that he takes
   the latter route, because if he does that will
   set up an interesting experiment.
   
   How would the instigator react if he fails to?
   
   Will she let the argument drop and post about
   other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
   week but for weeks and months in the future, or
   will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
   post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
   insult him back into a head-to-head again? 
   
   My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
   things that the instigator carefully snips out
   of her compulsive replies to every post in which
   I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
   is OBSESSION. My suspicion is that whether the
   victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
   into this particular argument or not, she will
   within a very few days attempt to start another
   one. It's like a law of nature. She's obsessed.
   
   Or, I could be wrong about this. Watch, and 
   decide for yourself.
   
   I no longer reply to anything she says, and rarely
   bother to read any of it because by this time I've
   learned that I can tell what is going to be said
   in the first two lines. As, I suspect, can pretty
   much everyone else on this forum. Vaj also rarely
   bothers to interact with her one-on-one because
   he's seen the movie before, and know that doing so 
   will inevitably 

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[authfriend]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote:

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
 
  Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
  everything you say :-).
 
 Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
 continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
 several other people's approach on this forum, 
 in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
 but an indication of a fatal character flaw.

Not only a sin, but a fatal character flaw? You
lost track of your rhetoric here again, dude. Should
be, Not only a fatal character flaw, but a sin.

I don't think anybody here sees disagreement this
way in any case. (Well, if you take out the sin
part, Barry does.)

 I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
 only seem to be able to come up with something 
 to say when it's piling on to one of the three
 folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
 other conversations here, and contributed to them.
 I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
 that trend.

Says Barry, inadvertently revealing that he read
the post in which I pointed this out.

 My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
 as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
 here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
 to play pile on.

Which is why Barry does it so often, I guess.

 Another thing I was pointing
 out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
 Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
 same five people, over and over. It's as if --
 from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
 and are desperate to get in the last word. 
 And not just once, but over and over and over.
 
 We have an opportunity right now to see whether
 I am correct. One of these instigators,

She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, which would, of course,
be me...

The main reason Barry doesn't use my name is so
nobody can do a Yahoo search on it to determine
how many of his posts are devoted to demonizing
me.

 told in
 no uncertain terms that from the other person's
 point of view the long, protracted discussion /
 argument he'd been lured into had reached its
 conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
 to be said, the person who wanted (some would
 say desperately) to prolong it responded by
 posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
 her last word.

Now, this is funny. The dude who so insistently
boasts about how he ignores me actually goes to
the trouble to *count the words and lines in one
of my posts*.

And then, of course, wildly inflates his count 
by including all the quotes. In fact, I wrote
164 words and 908 lines--and that was in response
to *three different posts*.

 I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
 what happens. The other party has an opportunity
 here to allow her to *have* the last word she
 craves so desperately, and just let the matter
 drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
 one more attempt to get him to punch back against
 Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
 argument again.

Hard to figure how I could *both* want to have the
last word *and* want to lure Curtis back into the
argument to keep it going. Make up your mind, Barry.
You really would do well to reread your posts before
sending them so you don't make silly errors like
this. Your off-the-cuff thinking isn't clear enough
to keep track of what you're saying as you write;
you need to go back and check when you're finished.

 I personally hope that he takes
 the latter route, because if he does that will
 set up an interesting experiment.
 
 How would the instigator react if he fails to?

As I said in a previous post:

I believe Curtis when he says he isn't going to
respond. That's been his habit, after all, for quite
a while, bailing when he finds himself in a corner.

I see no reason to expect otherwise.
 
 Will she let the argument drop and post about
 other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
 week but for weeks and months in the future, or
 will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
 post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
 insult him back into a head-to-head again?

IOW, the only way I can disprove Barry's prediction
is to never address a post to Curtis again.

 My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
 things that the instigator carefully snips out
 of her compulsive replies to every post in which
 I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
 is OBSESSION.

Good grief. What I tend to snip from your posts
about me is the stuff you've said over and over
and over again.

 My suspicion is that whether the
 victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
 into this particular argument or not, she will
 within a very few days attempt to start another
 one. It's like a law of nature. She's obsessed.

Well, for sure, I'm not going to refrain from
addressing Curtis just to falsify Barry's
prediction. If he says something I want to comment
on, of course I'll do so.

 Or, I could be wrong about this. Watch, and 
 decide for yourself.
 
 I 

[FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)

[Bob Price]

Has everyone heard the story  

Milarepa used to explain 
resentment to his devotees? 

Three Repa monks (with
control of their inner heat)
were meditating on the top
of a mountain of ice. They wore
nothing but light cotton and sat
on rough wool blankets.

After 10 years of meditating through
blizzards and ice storms one monk 
opened his eyes and said:

You're sitting on my blanket

He then closed his eyes
and the three continued 
to meditate for another 
10 years of cold and severe 
storms.

And then the second Repa
opened his eyes and said:

No I'm not!

He then closed his eyes and
for another 20 years 
the three monks meditated 
radiating nothing but peace 
and serenity until the third 
monk jumped up, grabbed
his blanket and said:

I'm sick and tired of all this
bickering, I'm outta here!

 







From: turquoiseb no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:54:20 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Your Call (was Re: Maharishi's Sandals)


  
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, whynotnow7 whynotnow7@... wrote:

 Damn dude, when does your vacation end? You need a good boot 
 in the pants and some decaf.

Like the events you continue to obsess on and carry 
a grudge over, Jim, my vacation ended long ago. 

Do you remember the famous Zen story about the two monks 
whose order prohibited contact with women? Approaching
a river, one noticed a woman unable to get across, so
he offered to give her a piggyback ride over on his
back. They got to the other side, the woman thanked
him, and went her way. 

The two monks walked on in silence, but the other monk,
the one who had not helped the woman across the river,
was quietly simmering inside. He finally couldn't control
himself any more and said angrily, How could you have
dishonored your vows like that, to touch a woman?! The
other monk said, Put her down. I did, back at the river.

Put the vacation thing down, dude. 

You might also re-read the post you're replying to and
consider it a challenge to you, too. Your call. Over
and out...

 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote:
 
  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi raviyogi@ wrote:
  
   Barry I have read your message and I disagree with 
   everything you say :-).
  
  Ravi, that is your right, and I encourage you to
  continue doing so. :-) Compare and contrast to
  several other people's approach on this forum, 
  in which disagreement is seen as not only a sin,
  but an indication of a fatal character flaw.
  
  I will, in fact, retract my suggestion that you
  only seem to be able to come up with something 
  to say when it's piling on to one of the three
  folks on the Enemies List. You have gotten into
  other conversations here, and contributed to them.
  I commend you for that and hope that you continue 
  that trend.
  
  My comment was to poke you a little over the -- 
  as I see it -- LAZY aspect of your contributions
  here. It really doesn't take a lot of intellect
  to play pile on. Another thing I was pointing
  out is that the *instigators* of the ongoing 
  Bash The Three Bad Guys sessions tend to be the
  same five people, over and over. It's as if --
  from my point of view -- they harbor a grudge,
  and are desperate to get in the last word. 
  And not just once, but over and over and over.
  
  We have an opportunity right now to see whether
  I am correct. One of these instigators, told in
  no uncertain terms that from the other person's
  point of view the long, protracted discussion /
  argument he'd been lured into had reached its
  conclusion and that nothing new was ever going
  to be said, the person who wanted (some would
  say desperately) to prolong it responded by
  posting 360 lines (2,345 words) of retort, as
  her last word. 
  
  I think it'll be interesting to watch, and see
  what happens. The other party has an opportunity
  here to allow her to *have* the last word she
  craves so desperately, and just let the matter
  drop. He also has the opportunity to fall for 
  one more attempt to get him to punch back against
  Uncle Remus' tarbaby and get himself stuck in the
  argument again. I personally hope that he takes
  the latter route, because if he does that will
  set up an interesting experiment.
  
  How would the instigator react if he fails to?
  
  Will she let the argument drop and post about
  other things -- NOT just for the rest of this 
  week but for weeks and months in the future, or
  will she just lie in wait for the victim's next
  post, no matter what the subject, and attempt to
  insult him back into a head-to-head again? 
  
  My point in all of this -- IMO proven by the 
  things that the instigator carefully snips out
  of her compulsive replies to every post in which
  I mention them -- is that what we're dealing with
  is OBSESSION. My suspicion is that whether the
  victim becomes one again and gets sucked back
  into this particular