Max asked me to post this to the transhuman list.
At 11:22 AM 10/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
>This is my one and only message to the Extropians list on this topic. I
>have not been reading the list for a few weeks and do not want to be
>involved in Kathryn's issues. However, after receiving a slew of private
>mail from her I scanned the posts that involved this latest outburst and
>I'm responding. I have no interest in or time to continue after
>
>Lee Daniel Crocker made sense to me:
>
>> "...the fact that you are now putting together media material cannot
>> discount earlier materials put together by people who have been doing
>> this for years. Also, the fact that we have been doing this for years
>> does not discount the work of your or other people who are putting
>> media materials and press kits together..."
>>
>>I suppose if you really stretched the limits of the language you might
>>be able to interpret that as an accusation that you've ignored earlier
>>efforts for some unspecified reason, but I certainly don't read it that
>>way. It reads to me like just idle chest-pounding: Hey! Look at me!
>>I've done that too!
>
>I think Natasha was pointing out what had already been done and was being
>done. Probably a good idea since Kathryn seems to see us as enemies
>(something entirely of her creation) and so we can't expect to receive any
>credit from her.
>
>Eliezer wrote:
>>As near as I can tell: Kathryn started it when she misinterpreted
>>Natasha, then Natasha gratuitously used a curse-word. I would say
>>you're both about equally to blame for all this. Furthermore, as far as
>>I can tell, you don't have anything to actually argue about, since as
>>*both* of you have stated your respective publications have nothing to
>>do with each other.
>
>Eliezer's comment also made sense, from what I read. However, I can
>understand Natasha's use of "crap" since we *have* been getting crap from
>Kathryn for no good reason. Kathryn has said that I "yelled" at her, which
>is untrue, and she has caused trouble for Natasha over and over. Natasha's
>use of "crap" may seem gratuitous, but given what she's put up with I think
>it's *entirely reasonable*, if not as informative as it might be to those
>not involved.
>
>I'm not going to go over everything issue and past problem point by point.
>I simply am not willing to expend my time and energy on this. Kathryn (and
>one or two anti-extropians on the Transhumanist list) may want to fantasize
>that I see her as an enemy. I do not. I see in Kathryn someone with many
>good qualities, but I also see someone who persistently misinterprets,
>makes harmful assumptions, and engenders conflicts. I don't have time for
>this. I would not even post this message, except that I'm sick of seeing
>Natasha being the object of this nonsense.
>
>With the time that I'm finally about to see opening up, I'm looking forward
>to getting back to working on the ExI website, which badly needs updating,
>and getting out an issue of the Exponent newsletter.
>
>Max
>
>
>
>
>