Dear Rick,
You asshole.
Now, in response to Hal's posting, where he said,
>I literally never break that guideline. I speak (directly and
>truthfully) about the facts, the presentation, the formal logic of the
>statement ... I say again, the STATEMENT.
Rick. Thanks for bearing with me (pun intended) this far but my
STATEMENT is accurate, right? Direct and truthful? Maybe not logical
and it might be taken a bit out of context. But raised in a family of
proctologists, I tend to view things differently. (Just joking, my
father owned a trucking company.) But it is one's perspective and
history that filters our understanding, eh?
Butt, my issue has to do with direct personal attacks. I would like to
think that most of us write things with the hope of getting some
reaction. Personally, I don't mind being flamed in private; I don't
like it but sxxt happens. And a response can stimulate thinking and
alternative dialog among other things. But my intentions are positive
when I post.
It's that old exercise,
I didn't say he beats his wife.
Now we all know what that means, right.
How about (emphasis added):
*I* didn't say he beats his wife.
I *didn't* say he beats his wife.
I didn't *say* he beats his wife.
I didn't say *he* beats his wife.
I didn't say he *beats* his wife.
I didn't say he beats *his* wife.
I didn't say he beats his *wife*.
Now, one loses certainty of understanding. Emphasis would say that each
of these connotes a different meaning. And while some might attack me
for even *using* this sequence of words, they *are* just words.
We need to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to written
postings and believe that people's intentions are always positive.
So, I'll support you (or any other editor) on the editing of messages
when you, independently, feel that they might be ATTACKING people.
Let's be soft on the people and hard on the issues. Sometimes it is
hard to step back from the wagon.
And Rick, you can post this one or not. ;-)
[Host's Note: Well, I did think twice about this one... Your opening line
*did* get my attention. *Butt* I decided to distribute it for the fun...
and the content... of it. ...Rick]
For the *ongoing* FUN of It!
--Scott Simmerman Performance Management Company, Taylors SC USA 29687-6624 74170.1061@compuserve.com
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>