Text 8581, 166 rader
Skriven 2007-12-21 02:08:42 av Jeff Smith (1:14/5)
   Kommentar till text 8563 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
Ärende: George W. Bush
======================
Hello David.

21 Dec 07 10:55, you wrote to me:

 DD> Hello Jeff.

 DD> 20 Dec 07 10:56, you wrote to me:

 DD>>> to step past those messages. It is their problem, not the
 DD>>> posters.

 JS>>      Rubbish David. If I insult you and you take it as an insult
 JS>> then why are you wrong for taking the insult as I intended?

 DD> It is up to the insultee to be insulted.

     It is up to the insultee to choose to acknowledge or respond to the
insult by the insulter.

 DD>  Many choose to be insulted when none is offered.

     In that case the insultee is responsible for percieving that which
did not exist.


 DD> Even when the insulter has intended it, the insultee can just ignore
 DD> it.

     Sure they could but the fact that the insultee chooses to ignore or
not respond to an insult from someone does not mean that there was no
insult. If I throw a ball at you and it hits you. You have the choice of
throwing it back at me or ignoring the fact that it hit you and moving on.
The fact that you may have ignored the ball hitting you doesn't mean that
I didn't thow a ball at you with intent to hit you.


 DD>  It just words.

    I don't totally disagree with you David. Often times the insultee can
minimize the effect of an insult by ignoring it or at least by not responding
to the insult. People who insult or call others names often times feed off
the effect it has on the insultee and the manner in which they respond.


 DD> Do you remember the rhyme from your childhood "Sticks and stones may
 DD> break my bones, but names will never hurt me."?

    Sure do David.

 DD>  It is still relevant today.

    Can't speak for others but I have always tried to live by the principle
that I can argue or disagree without resorting to getting personal or calling
people names.  Lets take the original statement to Ward. I was not overtly
offended by the statement but Ward was and calmly stated so. My initial
question to Bjorn was why he felt the need to be insulting. And yes, the
same question could very well be asked of others here too.

 DD> Or is it that your litigeous society has you looking fro wrong in
 DD> other people all of the  time???

    I don't think that is the case but I imagine that I see things from
a slightly differant perspective than you do. Not suggesting better or
worse, just differant.

 JS>> It would be like if I were to rob you and you were blamed for
 JS>> choosing to be the victum.

 DD> Robbery is entirely different. No matter how I would look at it, the
 DD> goods have still been removed from the rightful owner. Words can be
 DD> regarded many ways, as hurtful, or as just hot air.

     Yup, the analogy could have been better.

 JS>> Indeed people choose how they take comments and statement
 JS>> made to them and choose to feel insulted. But why blame them for
 JS>> correctly taking a insult as it was intended? Better solution I
 JS>> would think is for people to learn not to insult others.

 DD> Or should people learn not to be insulted? Words are just words.

     Possibly. But that does not address the cause of the problem. Ignoring
something doesn't make it go away. If you were to ignore people insulting
you. That by itself would not make the people stop insulting you. If those
that are insulting you are convinced to stop. You don't have to concern
yourself with having to ignore anything. And others don't have to put up
reading the insults or coming to your defense.

 DD> [...]

 DD>>> What is the problem with that? Isn't that what this oft-touted
 DD>>> free speech is about?

 DD>>> Why do you think others should conform to your standards? Maybe
 DD>>> it is you who should be conforming to their standards.

 JS>>      How about the standards (Rules) specified by the moderator?
 JS>> The standards that I refer to are not my standards. They are
 JS>> Bjorn's.

 DD> As is the interpretation of those rules. You still seem to be working
 DD> with your interpretation even when Bjorn has explained his.

     He explained his re-interpretation of his rules which allowed him
more freedom cuss and swear and to express his personal views of who and
what he happended  to hate or dislike about people or their country,
government, or religon. I chose to speak up as I didn't see that as the
intended purpose of this echo. This echo is NOT Bjorn's personal soapbox.


 DD> [...]

 DD>>> As others have often mentioned, if you cannot stand the heat,
 DD>>> stay out of the kitchen. Self expression has been practised in
 DD>>> this echo for a long time. If you cannot come to grips with
 DD>>> that, maybe it is time you took your wont for being oppressed to
 DD>>> another echo.

 JS>>     Or it is time for this echo to once again be used for it's
 JS>> specified and intended purpose. That being the support for and
 JS>> discussion of things related to the Fidonews. You remember the
 JS>> Fidonews? Instead of the moderator using this echo as a forum for
 JS>> his personal use.

 DD> Then lead by example. Stop your bullshit in this echo immediately if
 DD> you fee that the echo is not for such.

     Ask and get Bjorn to do the same and I would be more than glad stop
further comments on the suject. As I have stated to Bjorn. I am reacting
to him and his actions. I would be willing to help but Bjorn has to take
the first step.


 DD> Even with the non-Fidonews related chatter in here, there is nothing
 DD> to stop people discussing Fidonews content (if there was any).

     How many have gave up or lost interest in Fidonews related content
due to the insults, name calling and general bullshit that one has to wade
through here?


 JS>>     Better solution would be for you and those that want such a
 JS>> forum to go and create one and let this echo get back to being a
 JS>> Fidonews echo. You would then have a echo that you want and the
 JS>> rest of us would would once again have the Fidonews echo back.

 DD> Except that the Moderator has mandated a certain amount of deviation
 DD> from just Fidonews discussion. It's right there in the rules.

     And I wouldn't see a problem with that. And that isn't what we are
talking about either now is it? There is a differance between the moderator
allowing some varying of the topics permitted and the allowing of anything
and everything be it insulting, profane. When Bjorn who is the moderator
here is among others who are doing the insulting and the name calling. The
importance and respect does that inspire in others for his rules.


 DD> David

 DD> --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7
 DD>  * Origin: Jabberwocky (3:640/305)

Jeff

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - region14.us (1:14/5)