| Re: Hi, Drew. Great to know you're still around! |
Company |
| Jerry (mail@mail.com) |
2008/09/04 08:34 |
+Grant <+Grant@grant.grant> wrote in
news:Grant-me-that-0309081@Grant.Grant:
> In article <Xns9B0E97EFA7BE4fort6789@216.151.153.34>, TomBa
> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> Mephistopheles <NotToday@empty.net> wrote in
>> news:682rb4h50lqucq21l95otfo3mai5nrl4jv@4ax.com:
>>
>> > Yep, sure is. But for you, me & the veteran Cosmos, seems everybody
>> > else has gone to the moon. Apart from the tedious spammers, that
>> > is. Even the ubiquitous ranter has stopped ubiquiting.
>> >
>> > Not just here either. Quite a few of the once heavily populated
>> > groups now lie unattended. You don't suppose it's the high cost of
>> > oil. do you?
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Messafloppies.
>>
>> Hey Mephi;
>>
>> I for one am still around, but choose not to join in the 'fighting'
>> that goes on... Perhaps once things calm down (and get back to
>> 'normal?') I and others might re-emerge!
>
> Hi TomBa.
>
> Is fighting not normal? LOL
>
> I think it depends on how you define it. Both "normal" and "fighting".
>
> For now I think there is no fighting because the people who start it
> are not posting. I think that will change again when they come back.
>
> I think more people cause or help along fighting than they think.
> Taking potshots at the arguers makes it worse.
> Giving moral support to an aggressive combatant after he said he would
> stop encourages him to keep attacking.
> No side needs lonely provocative cheerleaders.
> Those are some of the active things that encourage fighting but what
> about the inactive things? I think they could be worse.
> Ignoring all the obvious opportunities to ask and maybe demand *both*
> sides equally to stop fighting is the worse thing we could do. It
> shows we don't care and because of it we don't have the *right* to
> complain about the fighting when it happens and we do nothing to help
> it stop.
>
> I don't believe people really want the fighting to stop particularly
> the people who want to fight no mater what they say to the contrary.
> They can call it "playing" with people or anything else they want to
> lie about what it really is they are doing but they shouldn't be
> allowed to weasel out of their responsibility for the disruption and
> bad feelings they deliberately cause. We shouldn't let them but "we"
> do. Its so bad with people who want to fight and people who want it to
> happen through support or cowardly inaction that people who try to
> make it stop get accused of causing it!
>
> It all comes down to this. People get the kind of fort they are
> willing to "work" for. Avoiding problems doesn't work. It makes it
> worse. Complaining doesn't work. It makes it worse. Putting personal
> issues and friendships ahead of whats best for other people and the
> fort makes it very much worse. If we show we really *care* about
> *every* BL here (those of us who do), which is the first and biggest
> step to a fort we can all be proud of, we could actually have peace.
>
Thanks God we have the great Grant to set the rules. But tell us,
almighty, what came first?, the egg or the chicken? the praise or the
praiser? the fight or the fighters? the help or the helper? Oh, then,
excuse my ambiguity, I must be intoxicated by the oozing egotism of your
words. Nothing to be ashamed, nevertheless we are in the 'fort', lol!
|
|
|