"Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
> I imagine, from the way you have conducted
> yourself here, that you are the sort of person
> who gives thanks every day for the fact that
> duels are no longer legal means of settling
> personal disputes of honor. If you conduct
> yourself in your real interpersonal relations as
> you have here, I would imagine that you would
> not last long in such an environment.
What a despicable thing to say. I conduct myself the same
everywhere, and I've never been involved in any physical
violence in my life.
I have received death threats, however, which is part of why
your comments are so chilling to me. You are saying, in effect,
"this is someone whose behavior would be seen by many as worthy
of death (or sufficient injury to no longer be 'lasting')."
How insensitive, unproductive, and one-sided. If what you say is
true, the people with such views are the ones in error.
Worse still, is this (note that this sentence followed the
previous, in the same paragraph):
> The idea that you think you can so offhandedly
> make personal aspersions about a mans wife
> and expect no adverse repercussions just
> boggles the mind.
First, I did not expect no repercussions. Second, it was not
offhanded. Finally, the property orientation towards Natasha is
not one I had in the forefront of my mind. She's an independent
human being who treated me badly, I did the same back. What's
the big deal?
> If you wish to retain any place here, I would
> emphatically suggest you make a sincere and full
> apology to both Max and Natasha and let the
> discussion drop at that.
I'm the one owed apologies, by an increasing number of people
(now you).
Whether I owe any, beyond those already given, I'm not yet sure.
It's a difficult ethical matter I'm putting much careful thought
into (unlike most others who have felt capable of chiming in
here).
-Brian.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:14:19 MDT