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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Poet who wrote (12158)	5/5/2002 10:52:13 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Oops. I should have added that I'm not interested in getting neck-deep in the heebie-jeebie thing again. Oops, is right. Too bad I didn't see that before I went back and reread all that stuff. <g> No, I'm not interested in that either. We've already exhausted the topic many times over. The pathologizing was what had irked me the most over time, however. You may not agree, but as the person to whom your remarks were made, that is how they were interpreted and that is what has made me angry. I can certainly understand that it doesn't feel good to feel "pathologized." It was not my intent to do that. I was merely trying to put the matter to rest. I think my avoidance of private discussion was reasonable under the circumstances. 1. I didn't count the posts I just reread but there were at least thirty or forty of mine in the bunch, in which I tried to respond to your comments and explain in various ways that I wasn't contemptuous of believers as you charged, although I could see how you might interpret it that way, and then several more in which I offered that there was no point to further discussion. Both the subject and I were exhausted. I couldn't come up with a satisfactory explanation for your extended persistence on this point. That was a month ago. 2. I was generally aware of other prolonged disputes in which you had been involved and which prominently involved PMs. I wanted to avoid being party to another. It seemed to me safest to keep any further discussion on the record. I wouldn't used the word, pathologize, at least not as regards the intent rather than the effect. It was an exercise of caution on my part. I can understand why you might feel anger. Hopefully, you will understand why I opted for caution.