Hi All
On 9 Feb 99, at 2:17, David Buchanan wrote:
> > Richard Budd felt the need to scold me for
> > having the nerve to correct something he'd posted. I'd attempted to
> > clarify the difference between two words that look alot alike, but
> > have
> > completely different meanings; mediate and meditate. It seemed he'd
> > read
> > one as the other and been confused by it. His response to my efforts
> > was
> > a little scornful. He wrote, "Great job exposing that typing error.
> > You're quite insightful and should be very proud of yourself". That
> > was
> > it. He addressed none of the issues.
Are you surprised? If you are then you should really think about the way that you have
tended to address others on a number of occasions. But I doubt that this is the case as
you appear to be intelligent enough to realize that your patronizing comments (and
deliberate misinterpretation of what was obviously a typo) will only serve to annoy those
you use as a means to introduce your own posts. It was probably the case that Richard
didn't bother to address the issues you 'raised' because, like myself, as soon as he had
read the first paragraph he dumped the post, as I imagine did most others judging from the
overwhelming response you received.
> > Rick: I don't think there was anything about my criticism that could
> > be
> > viewed as a personal attack. It certainly wasn't intended that way.
> > Why
> > the sensitivity? Why the lashing out? Are you trying to SHAME me into
> > submission? Are you just trying to hurt my feelings? Please let this
> > serve as an apology, if you've really been injured.
> > I say we can disagree vigorously on the issues, but please refrain
> > from
> > snotty insults. Personal insults are almost impossible to take
> > seriously anyway, since we don't "personally" know each other. You
> > don't know me
> > well enough to deliver any genuine and valid insults. I just ends up
> > revealing too much about the attacker.
The insensitivity, hypocrisy and double standards displayed in your own posts are
sufficiently revealing of your own character. If you were interested in engaging others in
debate rather than showing how stunningly witty you can be you would address others
with the respect they deserve.
> > This is a forum where we all put our ideas on the table for everyone
> > to
> > examine. Criticism and disagreement are the methods we use to
> > discover
> > the truth. Our disagreements are more productive and fun than any
> > small-talk tea party ever was. Each of us has a reason to think these
> > are important ideas. We all care about this stuff or wouldn't spend
> > the
> > time. Sure, there's gonna be passion and some heat, but I think we
> > all
> > owe it to each other to be very clear about what we mean. We should
> > be frank and pointed in our objections. We should even try to use
> > proper
> > spelling and grammar, include descriptions and definitions of the
> > words
> > we employ, and otherwise respect the time of those who will read what
> > is
> > written. Each of us should be able to engage the debate fully without
> > fear of retaliation. We shoudn't have to walk on egg shells. That is
> > simply too dishonest and distracting.
I completely agree that criticism and disagreement are the tools we use to probe our own
and others beliefs. So perhaps you could utilize those tools instead of being patronizing,
condescending and hypocritical. Additionally, if you want to champion proper spelling
and grammar perhaps you should read you own posts before you send them, including
this one - I counted 3 spelling mistakes just from a quick glance through. Personally, I
don't think that the odd spelling mistake or grammatical slip is of any great consequence
except to a pedant.
> > I realize I may come off as a know-it-all here,
You certainly do.
> > but I really do have
> > alot of experience with discussion groups. (Been doing it for over
> > ten
> > years including five years as a talk show producer and a little time
> > as
> > a talk radio host. It sure is nice to have someone else taking care
> > of
> > things for a change.)
So what? I really couldn't care less if you're Jerry Springer in disguise. This is yet another
example of your patronizing attitude. Your experience counts for nothing if you are
incapable of showing sufficient respect towards those you wish to engage in conversation.
> > People will occasionally get their feelings
> > hurt
> > when a pet idea is rejected or ignored. Even when a flaw in logic or
> > factual error is discovered it can sting a little. We just have to
> > be
> > adult about it and resist the temptation to hurt the messenger rather
> > than address the criticism. If all you want in life is an un-bruised
> > ego, this is not your kind of hobby.
And yet more hypocrisy! You should also take some of your own advice sometimes.
> > I hate to point fingers after having said all that, but ask yourself
> > these questions. Do you imagine that threats and insults are
> > productive in any way? Do you imagine that behaviour has earned
> > any respect? Do think anyone was impressed reading abusive posts?
> > The answers are no, no and no.
Then why do you indulge in insults to the degree you do?
Why do you show so little respect to others?
I'm certainly not impressed by your abusive, derogatory and ill-conceived posts. I find
them risible in the extreme.
Incidentally, your last paragraph makes very little sense. At whom are you pointing the
finger? Which threats and insults? Which behaviour? Which abusive posts? You could at
least try and be a little clearer when trying to condemn others for the very behaviour you
continually exhibit.
I think you win this months award for the most pointless and irrelevant post.
Horse
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:52 BST