SI
SI
discoversearch

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: E who wrote (51458)6/18/2002 7:25:33 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Have I misstated anything?

E, I don't think there's any future in trying to blame anyone for "starting it." "It" has been going on so long in various incarnations. Off and on, people try to tame things and we are successful for periods of time. They everything goes haywire again.

It seems to me that all the parties are reaching back into history to interpret current statements as provocations. And people are reaching back into history to construct comebacks. The history is so long that there is no longer any way to distinguish between chicken and egg.

This is your response to my first post, and is the first appearance of any nastiness whatever in a pleasant, civil conversation:

I know that you did quite a bit of research to come up with that argument. It makes a lot of sense. But I can find things that might be construed as provocation in your "perfectly civil" side of the conversation if one is predisposed to take offense. It all depends on how you look at it.

I don't think that there's any way to break the cycle by trying to find fault. It's everyone's fault. The only way to stop it is to stop it. Stop the provocations. Or stop interpreting as provocations things that may or not have been intended as provocations. Either one or both. Everyone. The blame game just adds iterations to the vicious cycle.

IMO.



To: E who wrote (51458)6/18/2002 7:45:16 PM
From: J. C. Dithers  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
I saw that X - Rambi dialogue around lunchtime.

As to X's "things were just too pleasant" comment, my take at the time was that she was referring to the in-comings from JLA, which more or less surrounded the X - Rambi exchanges.

I see your point, that when CH added you to the picture in his post, X did not specifically disclaim that.

Yet, neither did she endorse it with the "we should just move on" comment .... unless you focus on the omission of a disclaimer about you.

I don't see how anyone else who was watching would have thought X was picking on you, since you weren't posting at the time (as far as I know).

Just possibly ... mountain out of molehill?



To: E who wrote (51458)6/18/2002 8:12:40 PM
From: Lane3  Respond to of 82486
 
I realized after I posted that my response probably comes across as abrupt. That was because I was just thinking about the same problem before you posted.

I've had people in my ears a lot lately all saying that someone else was provocative. They all think that the other guy is baiting them and their responses are appropriate. It's enough to make you scream. My abrupt post was me screaming.



To: E who wrote (51458)6/18/2002 9:11:27 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
You do realize I was commenting on TODAY's posting- the latest post in your research article is from Sunday. I have been really wondering if I should point that out, and I feel, in the interest of clarity I will, even if it is pointless. It is TODAY's posts I was commenting on. not Sundays, or last Thursdays, ok?

So yes, you have totally misstated everything, at least in regards to my post. I'm sure you have properly stated your impression of things, it just seems totally wacky to me.

Here's once of your nice civil posts from today- in which I seem to recall you told me I called you a molester. I can't believe you thought you had NOT misstated everything, but I will try to believe that this is the way you think reality it is.
Message 17617730