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: Rambi who wrote (67184)	12/18/1999 2:43:00 PM
From: George S. Montgomery	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

thehungersite.com Come on, penni! You told Michael: "Your post seems to me an attempt to be provocative." Shouldn't that be "...an attempt to provoke?" Unless, of course, you feel Michael is somehow provocative. geo PS: I'm serious about this one. Zeus, goddamnit, has nodded. g. No, I am not serious. I am simply raveling. Eich. g.

To: Rambi who wrote (67184)	12/18/1999 5:25:00 PM
From: Michael M	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Since you said, "Tell me, Michael....." Re "dig" and "demean", you concluded your msg to Christine (a thoughtful and reasoned post, BTW) with the comment -- "It seems that people here are much more interested in demeaning studies cited or the person posting opposing opinions than in seriously , thoughtfully discussing the issue." I took that to convey your disapproval of the several people on Feelies (one in particular) who expressed lack of regard for studies cited by another individual. Mostly we know the names I think, but since this discussion is between us, why drag them back into it. Allow me to point out that those demeaning the studies, demeaned the studies. The party who did not appreciate the criticism of the studies, responded by some rather serious demeaning of the PERSON/S who had commented on the studies. So, Penni, your concerns about serious, thoughtful discussion really ought to be directed elsewhere. A personal opinion, of course. It can indeed be scary to offer an opinion when the threat of being called a liar looms. To sum up, I thought the "dig" was at those who dared to question the studies cited. That was horrible? I believe you answered your own question concerning "What issue.....?" The issue being, it seems, that Feelies isn't like it was in the old days -- isn't quite what you'd like it to be. So? Don't know about you, but I can't look in the mirror without noticing that change happens. You make quite a point (purposefully?) in your post of noting that Christine is the Feelies Founder and you are one of the earliest posters and how long you have been a part of the thread. Is there some sort of seniority system at work here? Are new posters less than welcome, or welcome only if they defer to the elders? If I am an agent of change at Feelies, that is for you and others to decide. I am simply being me. I have no motive to change anything and, whether I have, is not something I think about, much less feel defensive about. I have disagreed, often strongly, with many, if not most, regular posters here (and made my share of stupid remarks). I have also spoken up in agreement with these same people when other issues were on the table. I may have p***ed some people off but I doubt I've scared many off (I did tell that Dan guy to "buzz off" but it didn't work). Perhaps it's all a big mix-up. I thought you had an "issue" when, in fact, what you actually had was a "point". "You need a sense of humor/'cause life is funny" -- Delbert McClinton -- "Somebody to Love You" Peace Mike