Anny,
It's hard to tell sometimes whether you're speaking
about Chris or Joe--except at the very end of your
post, when you suggest that the long-held freedom to
comment on _anyone's_ post should be eliminated. I
feel shocked by the suggestion and hope it won't be
put in force.
Candice
--- Anny Ballardini <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am just reading something like 17 messages one
> after the other on the same
> but different topics. I am sending this message to
> support Joseph's
> position. The initial story Chris sent in had little
> to do with anything. I
> have been reading Chris' mails for years by now, and
> this is the very first
> time he expressed himself in this way.
> What I do not like are some subtle/ironical
> insinuations that followed. I
> think that once an observation like the one Joseph
> did is sent, there should
> be no further comment.
>
>
>
> On 2/28/07, Joseph Duemer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > I don't see any policemen around here.
> >
> > jd
> >
> > On 2/28/07, Peter Cudmore
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I understood (which is always moot) the Buffalo
> deal concerned what was
> > > posted, rather than who posted; people like Alan
> Sondheim, Harry
> > whatsit?
> > > withdrew rather than being banned.
> > >
> > > I guess one's attitude to these things depends
> on whether, on seeing a
> > > police officer, one thinks: 'how reassuring', or
> 'omigod, what have I
> > > done?'
> > > I tend to the latter, despite being mostly
> innocent.
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Joseph Duemer
> > Professor of Humanities
> > Clarkson University
> > [sharpsand.net]
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html
|