Being an adult, eeey, I am able to determine what merits bringing to Jarkko's attention, and what can be set aside for the time being, until such time as I feel it necessary to bring to his attention. That I had not is no indication, whatsoever, of my decisions, present or future. I do not feel it necessary to notify Jarkko of the first offensive thing that comes along, nor to ask for his intervention, at that or any other juncture. My decision to do either remains purely my own, based purely on my own reasoning. This requires neither your understanding nor your agreement.
You apparently feel that PMs are of such sacred nature that the "esteemed" recipients of them are bound by sacred rite to maintain their absolute confidentiality. Someone who has already been previously notified that they are unwelcome in my private/personal life and who PMs me regardless, with offensive commentary or at all, does so at their own risk. You may call it underhanded if you like. I call the initial tactics and their initiator insidious. When it comes to true, underhanded tactics, there is more I could say on that, as well, but choose not to.
How I choose to "blast" partisan publicly also remains my choice. It interests me the rules that you feel have been violated here. It also interests me the extent to which you are incensed by what I've done, which in no way involved you. Or, perhaps you have an investment in it, of which I'm unaware. It further interests me that, whereas you have now engaged in three postings to me, you have no comment, whatsoever, as to the nature of "Heretic" 's post.....which, by the way, was the thrust of my posting. I guess you missed that.
Finally, the concept of confidentiality has never been a part of partisan's and my "relationship." I guess you missed that, as well. In the past, we have spoken openly, as well as in windows several times, in the chatroom. That was during the period, which I have already referred to on another thread, where I obviously had erroneously thought we had struck a peace of sorts. However, I have never said anything during those conversations that I would have a problem with being brought here. It remains that I refused to give him my MSN address. As time went on, both here and in my PM box, I was grateful for my instincts and wisdom, with regard to that decision.
~ Elizabeth
Leonard's Three Score Year and Ten
Last edited by lizzytysh on Sun Jun 29, 2003 8:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
If someone wishes to hurl insults in a private message while maintaining that they NEVER have said anything at all nasty about the person being messaged, in my opinion posting it on the forum is allowable evidence.
It's all very well pretending to be a (relatively) nice guy while being the opposite and being particularly nasty and insulting in private - there's too much of that kind of hypocrisy going on and it's time the perpetrators were honest enough to admit in public to the insults and mean spirited comments they made in private.
Jo
It's all very well pretending to be a (relatively) nice guy while being the opposite and being particularly nasty and insulting in private - there's too much of that kind of hypocrisy going on and it's time the perpetrators were honest enough to admit in public to the insults and mean spirited comments they made in private.
Jo
"... to make a pale imitation of reality with twenty-six juggled letters"
"... all words are lies because they can only represent one of many levels of being"
Sober noises of morning in a marginal land.
"... all words are lies because they can only represent one of many levels of being"
Sober noises of morning in a marginal land.
Lizzytysh,
You are the only one (so far) that has gotten into a lather over Heretic's post. LinMag and Pete both voiced their opinion on it without going into hysterics. It wasn't that rough of a post. I mean, Heretic didn't say: "I hope Leonard dies" did he? You are making a big deal out of nothing. Again.
What odd statements you make. All that about "It interests me the extent to which you are incensed by what I've done, which in no way involved you." Anytime a member posts they are involving everyone else. I fully expect someone to jump in and trounce me any minute now. So, tell me Lizzytysh, should I inform them: "You are not involved in this. Lizzy said so."
eeey
P.S. Are you quite certain you have never sent me a PM?
You are the only one (so far) that has gotten into a lather over Heretic's post. LinMag and Pete both voiced their opinion on it without going into hysterics. It wasn't that rough of a post. I mean, Heretic didn't say: "I hope Leonard dies" did he? You are making a big deal out of nothing. Again.
What odd statements you make. All that about "It interests me the extent to which you are incensed by what I've done, which in no way involved you." Anytime a member posts they are involving everyone else. I fully expect someone to jump in and trounce me any minute now. So, tell me Lizzytysh, should I inform them: "You are not involved in this. Lizzy said so."
eeey
P.S. Are you quite certain you have never sent me a PM?
What concerns me is not based on what concerns other people, eeey. It's based on what concerns me. I spoke for myself. Because I wish to bring awareness, to anyone who might find it of interest, as to who is behind the disguise in such matters, when he was directly urged to make his "insights" known on the original thread of Father's Day, but chose not to.....yet does so now from behind the door of concealment and in such tacky fashion, after informing me that I have "cheapened" a thread.......well, "Do not hide in disguise from me, I know that you are not pure."
I'm not what you refer to as "in a lather".......however, I do find his post offensive. To portend such knowledge is both arrogant and disgusting. It seems somehow to concern you more that "the gig is up" and that I should bring it into the open here, via connecting the dots. You focus, however, on how I did it, rather than that I did it.
If I am "making a big deal out of nothing. Again." ~ that is also my choice. If you feel that, you had the option to remain out of it. As for how this did or didn't concern you, you are taking it out of context if you suggest it as being anything other than, "I did not publicly post one of your PMs to me." The fact that you have chosen to publicly attack me for doing what I did ~ and not regarding something of yours ~ certainly does leave the door open for others to say whatever they want to you. How you respond to them is your choice.
I have no idea whether I've ever sent you a PM. If I have, it was a long time ago, and is long since forgotten....unless it's remembered by you.
~ Elizabeth
I'm not what you refer to as "in a lather".......however, I do find his post offensive. To portend such knowledge is both arrogant and disgusting. It seems somehow to concern you more that "the gig is up" and that I should bring it into the open here, via connecting the dots. You focus, however, on how I did it, rather than that I did it.
If I am "making a big deal out of nothing. Again." ~ that is also my choice. If you feel that, you had the option to remain out of it. As for how this did or didn't concern you, you are taking it out of context if you suggest it as being anything other than, "I did not publicly post one of your PMs to me." The fact that you have chosen to publicly attack me for doing what I did ~ and not regarding something of yours ~ certainly does leave the door open for others to say whatever they want to you. How you respond to them is your choice.
I have no idea whether I've ever sent you a PM. If I have, it was a long time ago, and is long since forgotten....unless it's remembered by you.
~ Elizabeth
Lizzytysh,
Do you know what is really wearying about trying to carry on a dialogue with you?
It's that you are constantly going back and editing your posts. You get a reply from someone and you hurry back to a previous posting of yours and change your wording, insert sentences, delete phrases. All changes which are occasioned by your opponent's arguments.
I know, I know, you will say: "It interests me the rules you think have been violated here." But it really isn't cricket to go back to a post and throw in fresh insults or tidy up flawed reasoning by deleting it entirely.
It's so...Ministry of Truth.
So, in answer to your new insult on an old post: NO, I do not have an "investment in it". Whatever "it" is.
eeey
Do you know what is really wearying about trying to carry on a dialogue with you?
It's that you are constantly going back and editing your posts. You get a reply from someone and you hurry back to a previous posting of yours and change your wording, insert sentences, delete phrases. All changes which are occasioned by your opponent's arguments.
I know, I know, you will say: "It interests me the rules you think have been violated here." But it really isn't cricket to go back to a post and throw in fresh insults or tidy up flawed reasoning by deleting it entirely.
It's so...Ministry of Truth.
So, in answer to your new insult on an old post: NO, I do not have an "investment in it". Whatever "it" is.
eeey
~ guess what, eeey. Another right, that you are unaware of, is my inalienable one to edit my posts as many times, or in as many fashions, as I desire. The fact that you are remaining here at this late hour to read my response[s] to you, and again respond, has absolutely nothing to do with my editing decisions or timeframes. My thought, regarding your personal investment, was already inherent in what I had already said. I chose to return ~ distinctly apart from any comments from you ~ to make that sentiment explicit. The nature of writing is to attempt ~ to the best of one's ability ~ to say exactly what one means. Whether others understand it is another matter, but when you close on it, within yourself, you hopefully feel you've accomplished that goal of accurately stating your thoughts. In fact, I type fairly quickly and don't edit much at all. Sometimes, however, I click Submit and then realize there is something I want to add or change, but rarely ~ very rarely ~ delete.
I've deleted nothing entirely, or even close. What you have said is not of merit to me, to where I would even consider altering my posts, accordingly....even if I were inclined to discourse in that fashion. The result would be one looong post. I've bypassed that already and by a long shot. You may count if you like. I also have no need in this for altering any "flawed reasoning." Furthermore, in the continuation of any germane discourse, I simply start a new posting [you may notice that there have been more than one from me to you in this thread, since you initiated with yours]. I am merely expressing my position on all of this, as accurately as possible. I have no deadline, nor statute of limitation, prior to shutting down my computer for the night, to do so. My reasoning remains my own. My expression of it does, too. You don't get to hold the stopwatch on me, either.
I truthfully see no attempt, whatsoever, from you to carry on any kind of dialogue, eeey......not by any valid definition I've known. The only thing I've seen is an attempt by you to give directives. If you find this so wearying, my question would be, why don't you go to bed, then?
It's interesting to me that your emphatic "NO" is obviously a knee-jerk reaction, in that you have no idea what "it" is. Since you've already determined that your answer is "NO," I see no reason to clarify for you what "it" was.
As for how you are reading into the reactions of the others [to the tasteless posting by "Heretic"], many Brits are understated in their reactions. [Byron gave a very interesting explanation on this quite awhile ago.] Their not being as outspoken, as I am on this, does not necessarily mean they do not find it offensive, and perhaps even as offensive as I do.
By the way, since being cricket and the Ministry of Truth are of such importance to you, I would suggest there may be some other parties, close at hand, needing some of your tutorials on them. As for me, I don't.
~ Elizabeth
eeey ~
Please note that I have re-entered my previous posting to correct the typo on the spelling of germane. I deleted an "i." Some things simply don't jump out at you until you see them with the new spacing afforded by the final, Submitted format. That's just the nature of the beast.
I am also closing down for the night at approximately 2:22 AM ~ seems like a fine time to me......love those repetitions of numbers.
Meanwhile, I see many productive and healthy years ahead for Leonard, and I wish him well through every moment of them. Though the latter may not be achievable, the former certainly is. My closing thoughts are of him in radiant health and well-being. Goodnite, Leonard, with a kiss on the forehead to you.
~ Elizabeth
Please note that I have re-entered my previous posting to correct the typo on the spelling of germane. I deleted an "i." Some things simply don't jump out at you until you see them with the new spacing afforded by the final, Submitted format. That's just the nature of the beast.
I am also closing down for the night at approximately 2:22 AM ~ seems like a fine time to me......love those repetitions of numbers.
Meanwhile, I see many productive and healthy years ahead for Leonard, and I wish him well through every moment of them. Though the latter may not be achievable, the former certainly is. My closing thoughts are of him in radiant health and well-being. Goodnite, Leonard, with a kiss on the forehead to you.
~ Elizabeth
if i understand correctly this whole issue, lizzytysh posted that PM to prove a point; that it was partisan who posted in the name of Heretic?
if that's the case, and IT WAS partisan, then she had every right to do so.
that would mean partisan was the one who broke the rules in order to play a little game with the rest of us. why shouldn't she (given the nature of personal insults given to her) return with the same (if not less) amount of wickedness?
if that's the case, and IT WAS partisan, then she had every right to do so.
that would mean partisan was the one who broke the rules in order to play a little game with the rest of us. why shouldn't she (given the nature of personal insults given to her) return with the same (if not less) amount of wickedness?
I hope Jarkko can find out who posted as Heretic and name and shame them. I found that post highly offensive.
Once again Partisan is in the frame for a PM he send Lizzie from which it is concluded he is evil enough to post as Heretic.
"You have not even considered for a moment that he might be dying, and this is his way of telling us. Elizabeth your stupidity really does plumb the depths on occasion. If he does die in the near future you will regret your post, i do not envy you that. I have said it before and i will say it again, you really have no clue at all with the English language"
The message he posted to Lizzie is now been taken as prime evidence that he posted as Heretic. I did not read that as a threat against Lizzie or an insult to Leonard. I read that as Partisan feeling quite upset at the thought of Leonard not being well and to say to someone you will regret your post should not be construted as a threat. I took that to mean you will regret your post if anything should happen as the words will come back to haunt you. Not you will regret it because I will make sure you do.
Perhaps I am wrong perhaps Partisan did post as Heretic but I don't think so but if Jarrko can tell us who did I would be very pleased.
Once again Partisan is in the frame for a PM he send Lizzie from which it is concluded he is evil enough to post as Heretic.
"You have not even considered for a moment that he might be dying, and this is his way of telling us. Elizabeth your stupidity really does plumb the depths on occasion. If he does die in the near future you will regret your post, i do not envy you that. I have said it before and i will say it again, you really have no clue at all with the English language"
The message he posted to Lizzie is now been taken as prime evidence that he posted as Heretic. I did not read that as a threat against Lizzie or an insult to Leonard. I read that as Partisan feeling quite upset at the thought of Leonard not being well and to say to someone you will regret your post should not be construted as a threat. I took that to mean you will regret your post if anything should happen as the words will come back to haunt you. Not you will regret it because I will make sure you do.
Perhaps I am wrong perhaps Partisan did post as Heretic but I don't think so but if Jarrko can tell us who did I would be very pleased.
Jurica,
What rules are you talking about? And when did partisan break them.
Your mentor, Lizzytysh, is constantly telling me there are no rules.
So what if he posted as Heretic. Are you going to burn him at the stake?
eeey
P.S. And while you are in the Star Chamber, get a clue about Internet Providers.
What rules are you talking about? And when did partisan break them.
Your mentor, Lizzytysh, is constantly telling me there are no rules.
So what if he posted as Heretic. Are you going to burn him at the stake?
eeey
P.S. And while you are in the Star Chamber, get a clue about Internet Providers.
The operative word in Private Message is PRIVATE. What is the point of sending a PM when you want to say something purely to one person if they are then bandied on the message board.
Someone recently advocated sending a PM to someone if they had something to say about their conduct on the board (posting too much).
Personally I wouldn't bother I think you might as well say what you think on the message board as anything you do send may be used against you in a Court of Law - or a kangeroo court which this forum is turning into.
Someone recently advocated sending a PM to someone if they had something to say about their conduct on the board (posting too much).
Personally I wouldn't bother I think you might as well say what you think on the message board as anything you do send may be used against you in a Court of Law - or a kangeroo court which this forum is turning into.
Paula,
Name them and shame them? Why? That would certainly set a great precedent. Think of all the great witch hunts we could have then.
I do not see what all the fuss is about. partisan has said harsher things to Lizzytysh in public then in the pm he sent her. And Lizzytysh did not bring the pm to the attention of the Moderator. So she should back off. Instead of playing the "poor little me" card. Everyone knows Lizzytysh can dish it out. You most of all.
As for "Heretic's" post. I was NOT offended. Maybe Heretic does know something we don't. And maybe he doesn't. But it wasn't an "evil" post.
eeey
Name them and shame them? Why? That would certainly set a great precedent. Think of all the great witch hunts we could have then.
I do not see what all the fuss is about. partisan has said harsher things to Lizzytysh in public then in the pm he sent her. And Lizzytysh did not bring the pm to the attention of the Moderator. So she should back off. Instead of playing the "poor little me" card. Everyone knows Lizzytysh can dish it out. You most of all.
As for "Heretic's" post. I was NOT offended. Maybe Heretic does know something we don't. And maybe he doesn't. But it wasn't an "evil" post.
eeey