Text 1121, 124 rader
Skriven 2004-10-22 17:44:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
   Kommentar till text 1115 av Robert Couture (1:229/2000)
Ärende: L'etat, c'est moi (was: FidoNews...)
============================================
Hello Robert,

 >  MvdV> I don't think so. Not when addressed to Robert Bashe.
 >  MvdV> Robert often includes comments like "stupid" in his
 >  MvdV> messages to me. As Robert B. is not a person that
 >  MvdV> would use insults, apparently in his environment
 >  MvdV> referring to the intelligence of the addressee is
 >  MvdV> not an insult.

 > My full name was mentioned.  Given your attitude, I
 > suspected that you were trying to degrade me.

Then perhaps next time you should set you bias aside and read what I write
first. Read what I wrote again and you will see that I expected *you* to
understand that there is a difference between rules imposed by law and rules
agreed between participants in a hobby environment. Robert B. Apparently did
not understand that. So if there was any snide remark it was addressed at him.

 > If I am wrong in that conclusion, please accept my apology.

Accepted.

 >  MvdV> On the contrary. My primary argument is "the rules
 >  MvdV> you refer to are not binding to me as I have never
 >  MvdV> agreed to them".

 >  MvdV> Very strict logic I'd say.

 > Not quite.  You keep missing the part where you rules are
 > not binding on Roy.

Where did I say they were?

 > It all comes down to you wanting things your way and only
 > your way.

No, I just don't want others to force their way on me.

 >  MvdV> In what way am I not getting my way?

 > You failed in your attempt at gaining control of the HAM
 > echo.

Ah, that again. How long will you continue beating that dead horse?

 > Now you continually go on the "my way, my rules, the rest of you be
 > damed."

Not at all. I repeat: all I want is that others refrain from forcing their way
upon me.

 > Hardly the attitude of someone who was recently speaking of
 > reciprocation.

 > I noticed that as soon as this hypocrisy was pointed out to
 > you, you switched to the "the offer has expired."

Nevertheless I am still open to offers of reciprocation. It is just that *I*
won't take the initiative any more as all my offers are turned down.

 > The only reason that it expired was because you expected
 > the "reciprocation" to be on your terms.

Nobody ever attempted to negotiate the terms. All my offers were turned down
flat. No attempt at negotiation and no counter offers.

 > Those terms were - "Everyone on the planet must accept my
 > view and do what I demand immediately before I will even
 > consider doing what you want."

You must have let your bias get in the way again when reading what I wrote.

 > It is little wonder that your idea of reciprocation failed.

I am indeed not surprised it failed. It failed because those that I offered it
to don't understand the basic concept. the only thing they know is: do it my
way.

 > Perhaps you should have thought about showing a little
 > leadership and actually showing some sincerity by starting the
 > reciprocation

I have done so in several occasions in the past. F.e. I have not used the term
"echolist mafia" for nearly two years without asking anything in return. When I
finally did after two years, it was refused point blank. So there you go...

 >  >> It is even more fun watching you avoid the hard questions.

 >  MvdV> What questions? Please eleborate.

 > You can start with the questions I aked you here.

Please state them again. I have lost sight of the forest through all the trees.


 > >> Poor, guy.  Someday you might realise that the world does
 > >> not revolve around you like you're trying to convince people.

 >  MvdV> I am not trying to convince people of that at all.

 > You certainly are.  You are going around making demands
 > that reciprocation be done on YOUR terms and telling the

The others were free to offer a counter proposal based on their terms...

 > you refuse to be bound by the rules as posted publically
 > outside and inside the echo.

No, I refuse to be considered as "having agreed to those rules". Slight
difference.

 >  MvdV> I am merely telling them that I refuse to dance to
 >  MvdV> the whims of those that think it revolves around them.

 > No.  You have been telling people that they have to dance
 > to your whims. You refuse to see any middle ground.

Come with a counter proposal that you think covers middle ground and we will
take it from there.

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 229kx
 * Origin: PA0MMV, Driebergen, NL (2:280/5555)