chiars for the reply R.
I wasn't explaining anything; it was for this reason specifically that
I chose the wording "I THINK...."
nice to let things rest on a neutral note.
KS
On 14/10/06, Robin Hamilton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: "kasper salonen" <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > "your behaviour" should be "his (Roger's) behaviour", of course. the
> > names Robin/Roger are too similar to each other.
>
> Yo. Not to speak of The Problem of Confusing the Two Rogers. <g>
>
> > but where the hell is all this bad blood coming from??? what the fuck
> > happened to civil fucking conversation? (that's meant as irony kids)
>
> I've been wondering that myself. Part of the problem is that there are at
> least three things at issue, all coming together here.
>
> The most obvious problem is tone in emails, about which I'm sure we're all
> well aware.
>
> At the other extreme are the instances of clear violation of list etiquette,
> of which one could make a catalogue. Hm ...
>
> In the middle is what I'd consider generalised irritation. Which was what
> lay behind my getting at you in my last post. I do, at the best of times,
> get irritated by people, however well-meaning, attributing motives to others
> and going on to elucidate these hypothetical motives and emotions. Whether
> or not Roger Day's words went beyond the permissable verbal dress code of
> poetryetc (and I personally didn't feel they did, but then that may be a
> matter of tone), I felt it was patronising on your part to presume to
> "explain" them. Roger knows what he was feeling when he posted, but neither
> you nor I do.
>
> Whatever.
>
> > I think I'll just try to step out of this situation before it gets out of
> > hand.
>
> Me too, which is partly why I've changed the header. I've already said my
> last word on the other thread, and this will be my last on this.
>
> >> name keeps cropping up here as a kind of fearful whisper, FLAME WAR.
>
> Mind you, when it comes to flame wars, this is a tiny blaze compared with
> for instance what happened in the Last Days of subsubpoetics. Now *that is
> what I'd call a flame war! <g>
>
> R. [Hamilton]
>
> (who is off to see if he can find the notes he once made for a study
> entitled "Internet Discussion Groups Considered in Terms of Primate
> Territoriality".)
>
|