Biloxi, Roger: please don't import arguments from another mailing list
to this one. May I remind everybody of the list rule against personal
abuse.

I would suggest again, Biloxi, that you sit back and see how a list
operates before you flood it with provocative posts. Fyi, overposting
can be seen as a form of trolling. Any flame wars that threaten here
will be dealt with by me or Randolph summarily, and actions taken can
include unsubscribing.

A

On 10/14/06, biloxi andersen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 10/14/06, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > B, I think you need to chill out a bit. Roger _was_ rude, quite crass
> > actually, but I doubt you're made of glass. don't take personally what
> > some exasperated guy says on some mailing list; & ignoring everything
> > said guy says is a bad move. suppose he apologises? (not likely)
> >
> > I think the reason Roger is responding with such wry hostility is that
> > the manner you've used to discuss, or assert, your views on literary
> > theory is rather too high-flung; 'bookish' (just on the off chance you
> > don't know) means 'tiresomely academic, technical or theoretical'.
> > that's my definition anyway. I should know, I was taught all through
> > my education to be bookish; I've only started to grow out of it in
> > recent years. making sweeping generalisations & condemnations about
> > art/artists/'readers'/&c. isn't really productive of discussion. all
> > I've done, in the reply I've just sent you, is bring to light my
> > disagreement with some of these sweeping generalisations. maybe that
> > _is_ discussion.. but I have to admit it's a bit dry. :) interesting!
> > but dry. I mean, I enjoy it quite frankly, most of the way.
> >
> > don't take this stuff personally, or too seriously. we're just
> > talking! this is just blather. if we learn from one another, so much
> > the better; but don't make an innocent little mailing list (which I've
> > found rather too bookish more than once) a crusade for Truth, or
> > something. :)
> >
>
> Hi. Kasper. Thanks for your kind words and intention. I still assert
> that I do not tolerate uninveted rudeness towards me. He had no
> excuse. He was under no obligation to endure the reading of a thing I
> wrote. I do not want to be buddies with any such people, and I do not
> care for him to learn anything from me nor do I want to learn a thing
> from someone who couldn't observe basic politeness. I'm not out on a
> crusade, hence I'm cutting off such trouble.
>
> p.s. I read your other post in which you expressed your disagreement
> with some things I said. I'm not sure if you were just expressing it
> or wanted me to reply on those points you mentioned (if I do I do not
> think it'll be tonight, and I have no problem with such
> disagreements).
>
> Regards.
>


-- 
Editor, Masthead:  http://www.masthead.net.au
Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
Home page: http://www.alisoncroggon.com