Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alexander who wrote (64086)	11/29/1999 9:43:00 PM
From: Edwarda	Respond to of 108807

Alexander, there are times when I think that negotiating the Peace Accord might not pose some of the difficulties that have arisen on this thread, LOL! It's like having multiple Ariel Sharons running around. Seriously, for all the blessings of the Internet and discussion forums such as this, there is a fearful downside. It becomes all too easy for people who disagree or who do not get along to forget that there is another human being on the other side of the connection. Not only have I watched this phenomenon on the "hockey stick" threads, where it is expected and part of the territory; I have been horrified and disgusted to see it corrupt some of the stock threads. I am as thoroughly in favor of free speech as X has posted that she is, yet I found myself requesting that Jill send a word of warning to a person on a couple of the stock threads who was contributing nothing but personal invective. N.B., I did not ask for his suspension and stated so clearly; because he was ignoring the requests from the rest of the thread to stop the nonsense (in the days before the "new" SI and the ignore function), I hoped that a similar request from the administration would prove effective. It did, but it should not have been necessary. There have been a number of very unfortunate interactions among some of the people on this thread, interactions that in some cases stemmed from other threads and moved to other threads. I say "unfortunate" because it pains me to watch people whom I have learned to respect and like in other contexts quarrel so viciously--especially when I suspect that if they met in person with no history, they would appreciate and enjoy one another. It pains me to see people whose contributions I value leave the thread because it has become an unfamiliar and mine-filled terrain. It pains me because I have seen things about the various players that I wish had not been placed on display, privately as well as publicly. I find it interesting that you come out so clearly against labels. I may have to "label" myself a libertarian--although nowhere near as "hardcore" as Terrence Bergh--precisely because I could not wholeheartedly endorse either major political party in the early seventies and still cannot. Putting aside Ayn Rand and all the flaws of her philosophy (which I debated with Terry at length if you ever are bored and want a good laugh), what attracted me most was its socially liberal stance on private life and yet conservative view on the intrusion into that private life "for the greater good"--as defined by whom? Personally, I reject "labels" and "sides"--sez the woman who financed a clinical psychologist's Ph.D. and who thought very seriously about changing careers to become one herself. I have never forgotten my mother's asking about a person she knew whose behavior was abberrant, "What is wrong with her? If I had a name for it, I'd feel better." I quietly told her, with no glimmer of a giggle, that a diagnosis (label) is meaningless. What I said to her was, "So, she's depressive according to DSM? So what? Do you feel better now that you have a label? She is still a person with whom you have to deal on a day-to-day basis and she is still troubled and showing it, so what help is the label? If you want to know how to help, this is a different issue; labels are irrelevent." Forgive me, I wander....