>From some of the messages that were posted on the "voluntary simplicity"
thread, I got a strong feeling that I was being judged and labeled without
an examination of much more evidence than a couple of words which caused
non-thinking, gut-level responses.
Given Lee's comments about ugly lesbian tree huggers, I decided to take a
look at this person's forestry site. Was he or she an environmentalist? A
tree hugger? In fact, the site has to do with the forestry industry,
including data bases of sawmills and loggers. The "environmental" site has
to do with how to file an impressive environmental impact report. So it
looks more like this person is a tree-chopper rather than a tree hugger.
Judging a person or situation without sufficient evidence doesn't seem like
a good way to prolong or enhance one's life. In fact, it's one of the most
limiting things I can think of that people do.
Hey, most of the people on this list seem to be fairly intelligent; so why
do you leap to unwarranted conclusions? This is not a rhetorical question.
I'm truly curious.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 9:22 PM
Subject: Re: get me otta here
Not a bot, but an environmentalist. A quick check finds :
mailto:email@example.com listed on the EnvirOnLine Products Directory at
environmental organizations, wood products, forestry
This person also advertised their environmental site by leaving a comment on
the Decmber 1998 Evolve Your Environment Report at
And of course, her home site is obviously http://forestworld.com.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:12 MDT