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: epicure who wrote (51366)	6/18/2002 1:43:36 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Sadly things were just too pleasant here, I think. Ain't that the truth. Some people were actually having a non-combative, positive, interesting discussion. jla and E just couldn't stand it.

To: epicure who wrote (51366)	6/18/2002 7:09:17 PM
From: E	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 82486

What you just did is unfair, and I feel bad about about it, and, so few posts being involved in this case, I can explain exactly why. First, Rambi wrote a nice post about the School Project. In response, you wrote this to her. As near as I can see, it was a non-sequitur, relating to nothing in Rambi's post. Sadly things were just too pleasant here, I think. Interesting and non-combative conversations always seem to be like magnets for other forces. CH responded to you, "Some people were actually having a non-combative, positive, interesting discussion. jla and E just couldn't stand it." As though that jibe is an accurate description of what happened, you reply to him, "I think perhaps we should just carry on anyway." But this is what actually happened, X and Rambi: You, X, introduced nastiness into a perfectly civil conversation. And now, with the post to Rambi implying it was "other forces" who did that, you have revised history. I enter the conversation: Note the pleasant final paragraph, which follows a most civil disagreement: Message 17601294 My second post, a P.S. to the above one, about "I Remember Mama" Also entirely civil, though it does express my opinion and not yours: Message 17601322 This is your response to my first post, and is the first appearance of any nastiness whatever in a pleasant, civil conversation: Message 17610287 There is more, but that makes the point, which is: I was engaged in an interesting, pleasant, non-combative conversation with you (unless any dissent whatever from your views offends you) which you, personally, assisted later by CH, decided to make nasty. And at the end, decided to claim it was "other forces" who did that. Have I misstated anything?