Re: Understanding vs. Accessibility

Richard wrote:
> I apologize for subjecting the rest of the group to this, 

Sure you do.  Which is why you posted this?

> but your
> "two-word" reply comment to Anne was the last straw.  You don't have to say
> the words because we all know what that means. It's the same as saying it. 

Mmhmm.

> This is terrible behavior and has no place on any IG list.  How dare you
> play the helpless victim?

What exactly do you call your letter, anyway?

> I didn't notice Ms. Pemberton attacking you personally, rather your ideas,

You missed the parts where I was told I am discriminating and only
want access for a certain group of people?  Read for comprehension,
Richard.

> which is part of what argument: the exchange and examination of contrary
> ideas/assertions is all about.

Which is what I've been doing.

> Since you raised the issue of nastiness, let me offer a few
> of your statements from your postings, uncensored, un-editorialized albeit
> necessarily out of context for the sake of brevity.  (I believe reproduced
> within context they would have the same effect)

Right, if you get a chain of comments out of context, you can make me
look bad.  Big deal, Richard, big deal.

> Your call for civility seems a bit hypocritical and self-serving, and
> reminds one of the kid who wacks another kid with a stick, then hides
> behind momma.

Self-serving?  This is twice that I've been accused of this, when really
the problem is that Anne can't make her point.

> You certainly dish it out but ...

You're just saying that because you're a racist and a sexist.
(Note:  The above makes as much sense as anything I've been accused
of lately.)

--Kynn

Received on Sunday, 13 June 1999 12:43:17 UTC