On 23 Jun 2010 23:07:01 -0500, " +Grant. " <+Grant@grant.grant> wrote:
>In article <tfe526hpf0b6jqn82t3o4153n972pvq4ja@4ax.com>, NP-f31 wrote:
>
>> On 22 Jun 2010 20:19:02 -0500, " +Grant. " <+Grant@grant.grant> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I noticed his not so mistake mistake.
>>
>> If you were attempting to characterize Mephi's relationship with Y-Not
>> as being cooperative and harmonious, then you are being disingenuous.
>> My comment on the subject was harmless and played on the irony of the
>> collaboration of the two characters, you warned me ahead of time to
>> expect it and I playfully commented. My intention was not to drag us
>> back into a war that was pointless and long ago. If you did not
>> understand that before, please rest assured that it is NOT my
>> intention to pull the scab off of old wounds.
>>
>> >I think putting posters' names on the story characters was a mistake
>> >too. They are just names! I don't want them to be used to advertise a
>> >war he engineered and looks like he wants to bring back. I do *NOT*
>> >want my stories to hurt fort people even if they might be dead or cause
>> >more divisiveness.
>>
>> I appreciate the humor of your effort, the irony, the juxtaposition,
>> etc. I love everything about your Stevie stories. The names of the
>> characters from the Fort add fun to the stories. Please don't stop
>> now.
>>
>> > They are for entertainment and to promote good on
>> >topic discussions if people what to participate.
>> >I will keep the names in the stories I already wrote. It would be too
>> >much work I don't feel like doing to change them. I don't know if I
>> >will do it anymore with new stories if I write them.
>> >
>> >There is another thing I don't like. Doc says he wants on topic
>> >discussions and then says he has kill filtered good people who
>> >contribute good things to the fort groups *and* his discussions so he
>> >can't see them. How smart is that? What kind of message does that send
>> >to other people here and his kids who might see it? Does he really want
>> >good *open* discussions or is that just some manipulative lie? What
>> >should we think?
>>
>> I have enjoyed the discussion both here in The Fort and in the other
>> group. Part of the reason I have enjoyed it is because I don't see
>> certain people. The same goes here. Just because you like someone,
>> doesn't mean I have to. Killfiltering is an effective way to avoid
>> conflict. As an example, all I had to do was mention that I had KFed
>> your friend in the other group and suddenly there is a crisis and my
>> motivations are being questioned in THIS group. Is that really fair?
>> There are a lot of trolls that I KF. I am not interested in what they
>> have to say and they don't exist in my world. Just because I don't
>> have any interest in what certain posters have to say doesn't negate
>> the credibilty of discussions I'm involved in, it doesn't affect their
>> credibilty, nor does it affect my enjoyment of the discussions. This
>> certainly seemed to be the case for others who joined in the
>> discussion.
>> >
>> >You and Group Troll are funny and smart. You say things we should know
>> >disguised as fun sometimes. I like and respect posters for that and I
>> >don't like it at all when they are disrespected in public for no good
>> >reason. I lose respect for somebody who does that.
>>
>> So what you object to is the fact that I mentioned that I killfiltered
>> him? Why didn't you say so? Mover, if I in any way offended you by
>> mentioning in any group that I'd killfiltered you, then I apologize
>> most sincerely and publicly.
>>
>> Otherwise, Grant you must be losing respect for most of the people in
>> this group. There is a certain Mus.cled Kittens that is probably the
>> most KFed individual in all of usenet. He is nearly universally
>> ignored, although if your friend is communicating with him, then I
>> wouldn't know. ;)
>>
>> I hope this clears things up. I was stating a fact and did not intend
>> to insult anyone. I would have thought it was clear to M that I wasn't
>> reading him because I never mention or respond to him. He has every
>> right to be here and I have every right to ignore him. If that makes
>> me a manipulative liar or disrespectful, then that's just the way it's
>> going to have to be.
>>
>> Sincerely and affectionately,
>>
>> Doc
>> NP-f31
>
>What I expected. Too bad you are missing some funny and informative
>stuff you would enjoy. I still believe it is wrong of anybody to
>deliberately not see some of the people who participate with good ideas
>in the discussions *HE* wants. No real leader would be that
>hypocritical.
>
>There is something about a different post of yours here I want to
>discuss. We are discussing wisdom, the golden rule, and
>sympathy/empathy in this thread. While those things you didn't apply in
>regard to what I just wrote above (which is your privilege if you want
>people to think that of you), it reminds me that we shouldn't assume
>all the posters see the newsgroups like we see them, because people use
>different software with different settings, and use different servers
>or web interfaces like IFB uses. Some newsreaders separate text
>messages from posts with attachments by default, so people might not
>know there are text messages that go with file posts. Software groups
>usually post the info as an attachment because of this. Some people
>could have their newsreaders show only a week of posts to allow faster
>updates. Some servers have very poor retention too. Newscene does! So
>maybe we shouldn't be so hard on people who don't know that password
>info has been discussed in regular messages that are off their servers,
>or they wouldn't have seen at all.
I was being hard on a someone who was being rude to the most prolific
poster in the group. The point was don't be rude to posters. In the
course of that post I also pointed out where to find what he was
looking for. It's that gimme, gimme, gimme mentality that has driven
many posters away.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
|