For pity's sake, ENOUGH! Why is it that whenever I run across a personal
attack or a slanderous comment, Mr.Atkinson is the author of it? I, for one,
am sick of it. Mr.Atkinson, I don't care about your opinions. Not at all. Your
conduct on this list has shown you to be unworthy of any further attention.
You are more than free to express
yourself, as long as you remain on-topic, but if you (or anyone else)
want to start getting abusive KEEP IT OFF THE LIST. If you chose to
take Mr.Burger's remarks as a personal affront, so be it. Tell him, and leave
us out of it.
I am addressing this to the list only because I feel that this is a point of
common etiquette that we should not have to be reminded of. I will make no
further comment upon this subject on this list, and I thank
you all for your patience.
madre de dios!
i take part in a pithy yet educating thread on the constitutional arrangement
of the NAC, i turn my back on the list for two days and what happens? flame
war!
i know mr atkinson is often grumbled at for being a little rowdy sometimes,
but generally those involved in this latest fracas have been the cooler heads.
i put it down to unusual sunspot activity.
> On Thu, 17 Dec 1998, Tom Sullivan wrote:
> it?
might i (in my usual and tiring way) play devil's advocate here? not that i'm
equating mr atkinson with the devil, of course. perhaps a minor demon
:-).
we have had complaints about john before, and, yes, he is a little more
extreme in his expression (if not necessarily his opinions) than some
others. and, yes, his tub-thumping on behalf of the engineers gets
little tiring sometimes.
however, most of the time he is on-topic and a positive contribution to
the list. he may get a little over the top at times, and when he does, maybe
we need to calm him down (same as we would anyone who gets badly overheated).
however, it is not fair to brand him the sole flamer of the list. this recent
thread has seen its fair share of imprecations aimed at all sorts of people. i
won't name any names, but if i had been keeping up i would certainly have been
one of them.
as john has said before, his somewhat rash streak is part of his makeup
-
i'm not sure it's his fault any more than some people's bad spelling. i think
we have to get used to him and tolerate him. in fact, i have learned to love
his simple, angry style. the list wouldn't be the same without it.
> I, for one, am sick of it. Mr. Atkinson, I don't care about your
so don't read his posts. i hate to say it, but john has a right to post to
this list, just like everyone else. i may not agree with him and dislike how
he says it, but i am with Voltaire on this one: "I may disagree with what you
have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say
it".
damn, that makes me sound like some sort of libertarian anarchist redneck
gun-nut :-).
> You are more than free to express
absolutely: i'm right behind this. let's keep things civil and on-topic.
> I am addressing this to the list only because I feel that this is a
I
> will make no further comment upon this subject on this list, and I
not at all. it's good to get this out in the open.
> Tom Sullivan
another tom? this is getting silly.
i'd add that laserlight's suggestion on the 24-hour rule is a good one.
i try to apply it to cases where i seem to be disagreeing with everyone,
although i'm not rigorous enough.