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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (51566)	6/4/1999 12:59:00 AM
From: jbe	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 67261

Bill, I don't think that calling someone "bonkers" amounts to a defense of his behavior. And you DID try to get Dan thrown off the thread, didn't you? If you did, you may have done him a favor, actually. He should have left of his own accord long ago. It is not good for the health to hang around people one has come to detest, still less to indulge in insult-exchanges with them. At the same time, I found myself intrigued by your description of Dan as "the man who initiated, perpetuated and canonized the low dialog on this thread." In fact, it inspired me to go back a little in time, and to explore the origin of the said "low dialog." I found that the characteristic combative style of the thread, founded in August, had already "taken shape", as it were, long before Dan made his first appearance in late September. Furthermore, almost all of the present thread regulars -- yourself, JLA, Michelle, pezz, bp, les horowitz, etc. -- joined the thread before Dan did, and some of you helped shape that...umm....style, again, before he encountered it and eventually embraced it. The first contribution to <ahem!> "low dialog" was made by shoot1st, in post No. 8. You're all FREAKING NUTZ and would you please line up for the Dickheads of the Month Awards! Message 5531078 Zoltan! made his debut shortly afterwards, in a lapidary post addressed to thread founder Les X: Re: Sanity check - the jury's still out. Intelligence check - you fail. Message 5534685 Bill, you showed up at about the same time, only to be pounced upon by Les X for making a couple of insignificant typos. You gave him a sock in the chops, which he deserved, especially after his reference to his Mensa membership. But that does not quite explain why you started picking on a fellow newcomer, Michelle Harris, as in the following: Typical unwitting hypocritical leftist response. You invent an issue, convince yourself of its validity and then make a fool of yourself pushing your phony agenda. Message 5608954 And so forth and so on. When Dan came on the scene, he encountered a combative atmosphere, and developed his own defensive-offensive technique of re-posting everyone's most discreditable posts and/or requoting their most inept insults. After a while the repetition got tiresome, and in time (after my own departure from this thread, whenever that was) it apparently became a veritable mania. But how can you deny that you, and others, gave Dan material for it in the first place?? As my mom -- and yours too, probably -- used to say: "It takes two to make a quarrel." At least two, I would add. jbe