The discussion was about a specific subject, a subject on which I had sufficient interest to post.
It was in full flower when I was shut out and JLA's standard unsupported ad feminam insults continued unabated.
You appear to consider it eavesdropping for me to have read the rest of the discussion in which I had been, until minutes before, a lively participant, and consider it a a "wrong" of mine, as well.
I can not express how odd I find that assessment.
For analogies, think of this: in the middle of a public discussion, perhaps in Town Hall, or perhaps on a radio station, a bouncer has been retained by an individual to clap his hand over the mouth of a person with whom that bully disagrees, and to push that person out the door while the coward heaps insults on them and their position without contradiction, in Town Hall, or over the radio, as do his cowardly, cheering friends.
It is apparently your view that if the person thus silenced listens to what the cowards are saying about him, or her, for a few minutes, that's very wrong of him. Or her. Both the coward and the suppressed voice are committing "wrongs," in your view, the suppressed voice for listening long enough to know what is being said about him or her in the remnant of the public discussion he or she has just been ousted from.
Really, there is not much reason for us to communicate, Jewel. We are like people from different planets. |
