Re: The rape thread / apology

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Rob Quinlan: "Books on doing fieldwork"
• Previous message: Matthew Hill: "Re: anthropology of aesthetics"

Sorry, Michelle.
I write from several computers and I don't always have everything stored on
each. When I saw the thread heading I just assumed that your message was
posted to the list. I would also like to apologize to everyone else for
this oversight.

I do have a few questions and comments in this regard:

Why would anyone post a contribution to the thread to me PERSONALLY that
should not be posted to the list? What's going on here? Any contribution I
make, except to personal friends and relatives or for certain
administrative functions, are for PUBLIC consumption! Do with it then what
you may. I can't control what happens anyway. Should I judge a person's
words differently based on the intended addressee? Am I supposed to think
that there is some sort of political or other ulterior motive involved? The
more I think about it, the more I can categorically say that ANYTHING that
is said on a particular subject of public import, and that is not
specifically of a personal nature, and that cannot or should not be held up
to public scrutiny, is not worth the bytes its written with. I for one want
to let it be known that I have not and will not intentionally do the same
to anyone and definately don't want anyone to do it to me anymore! In other
words, if you can't say it publically, don't bother to say it to me or ...
treat others as you would have them treat you. I am sick and tired of
people not taking full responsibility for their actions, or standing up for
what they believe in. If you don't mean what you say all the time and to
everyone, DON'T SAY IT! Or, is this some new PC double standard where it's
OK to be descriminatory and disingenuous some of the time?

Mayby they are right, the internet needs to be controlled legally. Such
freedom, that universally and perpetually requires thoughtful reasoning,
consideration and responsibility, is dangerous. We simply can't have that.
It would mean that we would have to believe in something. ;-)


>Hello, all.
>
>So you know, the message that Bjorn refers to below was a message sent
>specifically to him, as opposed to a message posted to the list. I've
>very deliberately refrained from posting to the whole list on this
>thread.
>
>As I understand it, posting private messages to a public list without the
>author's permission is at best a breach of "netiquette" and at worst, not
>exactly legal. I realize that this may well have been an honest mistake
>on Bjorn's part, but wanted to point it out in any case.
>
>Michelle (mgolden@unix.cc.emory.edu)

<previous quote deleted>









********************************************************************
Let it be said, once again, that most of what is wrong, and of what
is most perfectable in this world, is located between our own ears.
If we don't first start living our own lives to the fullest, as
responsible individuals, in just fashion, and as empowered examples,
instead of languishing in the addictive maelstrom of blame, depen-
dency, and its powerlessness, there is little hope for us. - bcfry
********************************************************************

Bjorn Conrad Fry
Still just an American

bear@us.net (primary)
bjornbear@aol.com (alt.)

Bethesda, Maryland
U.S.A.

• Next message: Rob Quinlan: "Books on doing fieldwork"
• Previous message: Matthew Hill: "Re: anthropology of aesthetics"