poo lausen wrote:
> >Who are you typing to? Thomas seemed to be addressing you; but you
> seeming to be talking to...well...i guess it's that turd in your pocket.
>
>
>Your hostility is interesting.
out of a few lousy words, you were able to discern hostility? quit your day job fast, lou. you could be the Next Miss Cleo. woohooo!
>Who was I typing to? I was typing to the
>rest of the list - just as Seay was. You aren't misled by the form of
>Seay's jibe into believing that he was actually "addressing" me, offering
>to begin a constructive dialogue with me, are you?
blahfuckedetyblah.
hint: that's a signal of boredom. not hostility, b o r e d o m.
i'd say you that you can b o r e me, but i don't know you well enough, yet. :)
> But his post can also be construed as not a message at all, but just a
> military action - an attempt to drown out or disrupt any thread in which
> I participate, exactly like heckling or jeering or spitting in the
> speaker's face. In its own minuscule way it was an attempt to
> terrorize: "Don't write here any more, Paulsen, on any topic, or I may
> vilify you some more."
dude. you belong to a party. you have to answer for your party. you don't like that, then please don't make out like you're an oppressed minority -- or you're going to start sounding like oblate.
hey! they could do what comrade carrol does: 1. try to get you booted off the list by offlisting the list owner or 2. get everyone else to filter you.
chill out and crack a can: it's an email list.
kelley