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: Lane3 who wrote (65716)	11/4/2002 5:21:13 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"You mentioned earlier dealing with one piece at a time. I had responded to E's post about multiple, concurrent elements. I really, really think that it's essential to look at the totality of this matter to have any understanding of it. Poet IS manipulative; JLA IS harsh; X DID pull the rug out from under the plan; CH DID wrong Poet, etc. It's all part of the stew. The single-minded focus on squashing CH did not accomplish anything. I agree. I personally have made several attempts to address the intelligent and rational CH, in efforts to deal logically with the elements of this thing. I find him to respond personably and fairly up and to the point where he is expected to account for his own behavior. It is a, happy to talk the talk...long as its only the talk we're talking about, problem. I have found him to be deceitful and inconsiderate when he sees the opportunity to, as he puts it "make points." He sees everyone else as he sees himself in the scenario. The problem is, they are not. Most of the participants have bent over backward to see his POV and to work from that to seek some progress toward resolution. A few have gotten totally fed up with the gamesmanship response and have written him off. Not everyone has been singlemindedly attempting to quash CH during the course of this "thing." E has been falsely accused of it even though she tried very hard to come up with an ameniable solution for a while. The same is true of JLA. Laz has offered to be a doormat solution on more than one occassion. etc. etc. etc. Many people have put their best efforts into seeing this worked out in a way that saves face for CH only to have their own faces spat upon. To his credit Neocon refused the opportunity.

To: Lane3 who wrote (65716)	11/4/2002 5:39:24 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

This post points out one of many essential differences between you and Jewel (and others). Jewel (and others) basically call names and look backward, rehashing all the terrible things they see in the past, based on real or perceived grievances, without any concern for problem solving. You analyze, figure out, state your findings dispassionately and clearly, and focus on moving forward, not on perpetual recriminations. Where moving forward requires recognition of past wrongs, you're not hesitant to say so, but your focus is foward looking, not backward looking. One can see why you were a success as an administrator. I think that CH and X have in common that they are distant, analytical, outspoken, and indifferent to some things that others value. That makes them less than endearing to the schmaltzy crowd, and visa versa. I'm not sure I know what you mean by distant, so am not sure whether to agree or not, but the others are, I think, spot on. I'd like to see closure on this. I would say "wouldn't we all?", but it seems pretty clear that some people here don't want closure. I have become, in some ways, a great convenience to certain people. It's always nice to have a handy villain to dump on when you feel like dumping. So I suspect that there will never be closure because I am too valuable in the role they have chosen to impose on me, and I don't care enough about their villification to do yield to any demands just to get them off my back. If everyone came to the table, as Neo suggested, genuinely interested in resolution, I don't think it would be that hard to accomplish. Neo probably could have done it; you certainly could. But I don't see, frankly, much possiblility that some of the people here are the least bit interested in resolution. And that being the case, I see little chance that it can happen. Is that too pessimistic?

To: Lane3 who wrote (65716)	11/4/2002 5:52:56 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

The single-minded focus on squashing CH did not accomplish anything. Well, here I think you have made one of your few errors. It did --and does -- accomplish something for those doing it. It makes them feel good, like they're protecting some innocent victim. I'm sure jla enjoys every barb he throws out, even though none has any effect on me any more. But I'm sure he enjoys them. So they do at least accomplish something for the perpetrators, just as my posts to Poet accomplished something for me. What is interesting to me is how alike, in the end, they and I really are.