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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (49868)	6/10/2002 4:36:52 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

All this finger shaking and self righteousness to accomplish what? I guess we all think our objectives are clear as we state them, but perhaps not. My sole objective was to illustrate for Laz something that he and I had been discussing for some time, that is, the role of the gang members jumping into an incipient fight with X. I thought that the incident I described was such a clear example that I couldn't resist using it. I had planned to PM it to him, but he gave me such a good setup so I went ahead and posted it. It was not my intent to bash anyone, least of all you, but you just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time--right in the middle of my "perfect example." I can see why it would look to you like I was bashing you but I was just trying to describe a scenario where there was plenty of crankiness to go around, but that crankiness was all it was. I'm sorry if it was upsetting to you to play such a prominent role in my case study. If you were the even handed observer you claim to be you would have called him on this behavior. You are not. Since I wasn't calling anyone on anything but merely offering a case study, I don't think this is relevant. I overlook loads of stuff that I don't particularly approve of. It's not my job to be thread nanny. Ya gotta do something a lot worse than that to get any calls from me. You now confess your enjoyment and agreement with the whole thing. I wasn't agreeing with the whole thing. I laughed at one joke: "Is that simply because this high standard is very hard to meet and requires the Federal government's assistance?" I had just come in from the pool and was catching up on all the posts when I read it. I thought the way she connected a later discussion to the business of a Federal role was very clever. I can appreciate that you might not have found it funny, but after we all had been droning on and on about Federal roles, it just cracked me up. But it was just that one joke. I wasn't laughing about the "whole thing." You are well aware of the history of conflicts between X and I and that I have asked her repeatedly to leave me alone. Actually, I had forgotten all about that until you just mentioned it. That does put a different slant on some of the discussion. These are not IMO flame words I disagree with that. I think name calling is generally considered out of bounds. Of course, different people draw the line in different places. Some have a problem with any kind of criticism or disagreement. I think it matters how the criticism is framed and that slinging names at someone is an escalation.