 sj |
||
|
||
BS: GUESTS
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Liz the Squeak Date: 09 Jul 01 - 07:15 PM Guest, as one of those insulted by you (although as I do have a fat arse, it is only telling the truth) I feel I have a right to confront you. I don't care if you post as a guest or not. I don't care if I know you, or not. What I do care about is that you have posted the same insult to more than 6 threads in 5 minutes AS WELL as starting up a whole new thread. Why did you feel this was necessary? Wasn't a new thread enough? Now you appear to be saying that I'm an attention grabber. That's true. I do like to put my 5p's worth in, and be heard. But if no one is listening to me, I don't keep shouting across the board. I also know when not to post, like Noreen, I pause sometimes and then delete what I was going to say. Sometimes I hit the wrong button and it goes out. I would hope I'm not vicious, but you seem to think I am. Give me an example and I will endeavour to explain/apologise. It may just be that what others see as wit and intelligence, you are seeing as sarcasm and a threat. Notice I do not stoop to personal insults, and the slight misunderstanding with one poster was explained. LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: TishA Date: 09 Jul 01 - 07:31 PM Music anyone? Chip A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Jon Freeman Date: 09 Jul 01 - 07:41 PM Liz, when I went to bed last night (or early morning - I think I went to bed about 5am our time or midnight Mudcat time) the only post I had noticed was the one I referred to above timed at 9:38pm on 8th July Mudcat time. I didn't see any other posts on this subject until the next day (after I surfaced again). I notice that the "name removed" thread started was on 9th July at 5:25am Mudcat time. I assume the other comments in the other threads were also posted around that time. I still feel pretty sure all we are seeing here is a "Guest" annoyed at his/her first comment dissapearing who, in protest, has made sure that everyone would get to read it - Pretty childish and best forgotten about IMO. Oh and BTW, I must have seen your arse at Llanstock along with many other Mudcat arses. Maybe I'm weird but I came away with memories of a great time and a nice bunch of people rather than arses. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Grab Date: 09 Jul 01 - 07:56 PM I don't agree with removing rights for guests; they should be granted the same rights as everyone else. What you're not guaranteed (and what everyone else isn't guaranteed either) is rights to have ppl take you seriously, or rights to have everyone agree with you, or rights to non-retaliation when posting an offensive remark. What I do agree with is limited (VERY limited!) censorship. Remove posts if (a) they're so blatantly offensive that they're intolerable, or (b) they're spam. Remove threads if they were started solely (a) to insult someone, or (b) to spam. Judgement of the above to be granted to a few individuals who have proved themselves by their actions to be intelligent and broadminded. So, limits on this. Probably the "insult LtS" should have been ditched, since that was its sole purpose. Anyone who posts 2 pages of rant on a thread saying how someone is the reincarnation of Hitler and should be shot in the street - delete that. Up to that point, discussions or flamewars about politics, NI, gun law, veggies vs carnivores, etc, etc are just fine. Not that I've got rights to any say in this - after all, it's Max's site, and regardless of what our nicknames say, we're _all_ guests here... ;-) Graham. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:10 PM Sorry Liz, I did not realize Guest had insulted you if I did I would not have been nice to him in my above message. Guest-If you insulted Liz, then as far as I am concerned you can get lost. Ps,Liz Im not bothered what size your arse is Im more intersted in what people say than what they look like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Jack the Sailor Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:13 PM This is for some of the more bitter "GUESTS" The only reason I got a permanent handle was that I could bid in auctions and otherwise offer support. I have few weeks of contributions here where I changed guest handles every post. I disagreed with someone in a discussion one time, someone called me a coward and I identified myself. Please allow me to point out that I would also have identified myself had he asked nicely. Even if you do have a handle here, your real identity is still basically unknown. The only advantage having a name here confers is that others can get to know YOU. If you don't want that, that is your choice. But don't complain about clicques when you aren't prepared to fully participate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Jon Freeman Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:14 PM I agree with you grab and you are pretty much describing the current situation which I think, overall works pretty well and makes for interesting discussion that I believe would be pretty near impossible in a moderated/heavily censored forum. There is one point I would like to make though: There are a small number of people, like myself who have been granted the ability to edit/delete messages in this forum but who's role is to try to fix the tech stuff, delete duplicates, and try to assist in the general maintainence, maybe harvest lyrics (I don't - not knowlegable enough - I'd only get in the way!) of the forum who play no part in censorship. Personally I quite like it that way - I'm spared the hard descisions! Jon |
|
Subject: Don't Respond to Spam or Flames From: Joe Offer Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:22 PM The policy is that we DO delete Spam, and we DO delete messages that are threatening. Pene and I are the only volunteers who are allowed to delete messages for other than technical reasons. Max and his employees also will occasionally delete an offensive message. However, we usually feel obligated to refrain from deleting the responses posted by Mudcatters who respond to Spam and flaming. Once a Mudcatter has responded to Spam or flaming, it becomes difficult to justify deleting the original message. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:28 PM McGrath of Harlow, I'm mostly into American folk and trad from Celtic countries. Number of good private mail lists for that sort of music, no "you arse, dumbass, etc. type flaming posting, and high levels of tolerance of use of *articulate* provocative language, opinions, etc. There are forums now for Irish, Scots and Cape Breton music, tho I don't have addresses to hand (that posting from multiple computers thing). Not a he. Having given some thought accusation/taunt "why don't you put a name in From line"? And my answer provoking even more people "because I do" I gave it some more thought. Most honest answer: I don't know. No one ever made an issue of it before. Second answer, upon ruminating further: I'm no spring chicken. Been signing my name at the bottom of the page of letters, etc for decades. Old habits are hard to break? Level of cynicism, mistrust, contempt for "strangers" who post anon. could be the reason why you attract just those types of folks to this forum. Maybe self-reflection about posting behavior, instead of instant condemnations of others on the quick trigger reply buttons, is in order for some. But have had much more than I usually tolerate :) here as far as this sort of thing goes. Too many catter crusaders are now confusing me with all others, attacks against my posts showing up in non-related threads, etc. I don't go along with that sort of thing. Hope my postings have given some insight. Good idea to put some thread like this in teh perma thread file. But my guess is, the people who need to read most, won't Enough now, g'night and fare thee all well.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:41 PM Gulp. And then she forgets to add "All" at the bottom of her post. Too much for me, obviously. Forgive please, the above one is mine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST Date: 09 Jul 01 - 08:46 PM And now, pretty jarred by message of site admin. Meant only as a suggestion. If site owner (Max? Joe Offer?) isn't willing to tolerate anonymous guest postings, shouldn't you tell newcomers that in faq? I dunno, this deleting of controversial posts and coming down on guests seems much too heavy handed for me. I guess I am in the wrong forum. All |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: SeanM Date: 09 Jul 01 - 09:44 PM *sigh* You go Joe. My apologies for biting on this persistent troll's garbage. People... (and in this I mean rational humans) Look at the past history of the 'cat. Every few months, the same sad, pathetic individual shows up... starts carping about how there's an "inner clique", and depending on the phase of the moon (or whatever) bitches about how either there's no music or that we treat guests poorly. Normally, the 'guest' joins up under another name during this, so that they can feed the flames on the rare occasion that noone else will, by having a many sided discussion that really only features themselves. Eventually, through either repentance (highly unlikely, given the recidivism) or boredom, GUEST posts tail off. The 'alter ego' member identities usually tail off as well, followed by a short surge of ugliness from those identities. Then, the GUEST swears that he's sorry and promises he's going away and staying gone. Then a few months later, it all starts again. Same GUEST, different names, same bullshit. In the real world, this kind of behavior would likely land a restraining order. In the 'net world, it merely repeats over and over and over and over again. *sigh* M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST Date: 09 Jul 01 - 10:02 PM Sean M, Not wishing to inflame, but am curios. Are you privvy to poster's IP's? And, who at this site is privy to poster's IPs, has authority to censor (deleting is censoring, IMO)? Am wondering how it is so many are certain of who is posting when, to which threads, etc under GUEST. Tried that "click on name" thing for GUEST, and it took a LONG time to load, hundreds, thousands? each month. Now really am too tired! G'night again! All |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Ebbie Date: 09 Jul 01 - 11:22 PM Angie, Typo: 'e' x 2. LOL Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: SeanM Date: 10 Jul 01 - 02:29 AM Dear repetitious and neverending GUEST; No, I don't have your IP. No, I don't want it. I base my observations on watching the very similar cycle that has been occurring regularly over the last year or two, that you are currently running through again using the same phraseology, the same tactics, and the same tired insults. Thankfully, you're at least picking new targets, as I'm quite sure that Kat, 'spaw and the other members are tired of your crap by now. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Angie Date: 10 Jul 01 - 06:00 AM Firstly, an apology. Sorry. Secondly, there is some confusion over names that I feel necessary to explain now. I am Mal G. My good lady wife is Angie. We have been posting under each others names on occasion. This is totally my problem/mistake. I think I've sorted it though. Again, sorry. John in Hull, 'twas I that asked the Publius Enigma, to Angie. She was on the pc at the time and simply posed a simple question. Had she or we been aware of the deep seated resentment to follow, then yes maybe a quick change over to Pink Floyd.com (or whatever)would have been a wiser move. It was an innocent faux pas of Madcattery netiquette, perhaps. I apologise to your good self , Bill D and others whose toes seem to have been bestamped. No offence or malice intended. Sorry. Matt_R, especially, did however reply with a most helpful and it must be said, generous post, thanks again. If I have dragged you down by association Matt, then I'm sorry. Ebbie, ta. Only the first one was intentional. D'oh! Love and peace to you all even those fuelled with loathing and anarchy, for surely these need it most, Mal. "keep talking" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 10 Jul 01 - 06:21 AM Now there we had three posts in a row, all GUEST. The third one had "All" at the bottom, the first two didn't. Were they all by the saame person? Were two of them by one person and the thir from another? Or were all three from different people. Is one of these the same person the one who's been running round making a nuisance of themselves with remarks about peoples arses?
I don't really care - but it does illustrate why unadorned GUESTing is so irritating. (And the reason why it's customary to sign our names at the top instead of at the bottomm on the internet is because it's more convenient for the reader. That should be good enough.)
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GeorgeH Date: 10 Jul 01 - 06:37 AM Let's get one thing straight . . I judge every post here on its own merits. If a GUEST posts which I condsider to be reasonably (which has nothing to do with whether or not I agree with what's been said) then the fact that it's from a GUEST remains pretty well invisible to me . . . If there's a message that strike me as unreasonable and it's from a named user whom I recognise then I'm very likely to stop and think "Could it be that I'm reading this differently to how it's intended?" My guess is that most other members operate in a rather similar way . . Also - thanks for the reminder, Joe will try harder in future. And thanks for treating us as grown-ups and leaving us to sort out, amongst ourselves, what's acceptable in this wonderful club, rather than setting out rules. Sorry if we disappoint at times . . G. Cheers! George |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Amos Date: 10 Jul 01 - 10:01 AM The flexibility and freedoms allowed by the existence of the open "Guest" handle are part of the workings of this unusual community; and although it can be an avenue for abuse by some, I think we can survive that okay with the constant use of intelligent discrimination as to when someone is trolling or worse, and when not. It is very clear to me that any charges of cliquiness on the Mudcat are projections. Anyone with wit and a lot of time on his hands could climb in here and become an old-timer in a matter of weeks just by posting enough intelligent, informed, or humorous stuff (or all three!) in the right places. Any playground has its whiners, its wannabe bullies, its critics who do not do, and its shy onlookers who are full of wondrous observations but are too nervous to speak, as well as the loudmouths. I think I learned that in fourth grade, Mrs Brererton, if memory serves! :>)>p>A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST,Russ Date: 10 Jul 01 - 05:23 PM Joe Offer, Thanks for the honesty. I really like Mudcat. I will continue to visit, lurk, read, and make the occasional post in spite of the flaming that GUESTs periodically get here. As I have said in a number of other threads of this sort, I have a number of what I consider to be excellent reasons for posting as GUEST. Near the top of the list is privacy which precludes my sharing the others. This is a great forum and I will continue to participate as a GUEST until the door is slammed in my face. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 10 Jul 01 - 06:14 PM Mal G-No need to apologise to me mate, I like Pink Floyd as well. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Noreen Date: 10 Jul 01 - 06:41 PM And as has no doubt been said before to you, Russ, there is no problem with someone participating as you do, with a consistent name and a co-operative attitude. I see no earthly reason why the door should be "slammed in your face". Noreen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST,Eclipse Date: 10 Jul 01 - 07:10 PM Please don't get rid of your guest function. Some of us use it with respect. Thanks. Eclipse |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Charlie Baum Date: 11 Jul 01 - 12:38 AM The topic of this thread sets me in mind of the classic Anna Russell routine. She presents a society lady giving the introduction at a musicale:
Ladies and gentlemen and others.... [giggle]
--Charlie Baum |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Amos Date: 11 Jul 01 - 12:54 AM Dear Guests: Welcome to the Mudcat. Here there be chatter, song, laughter, love, bumps, bruises, comfort and compassion, temper and distemper, the guileless and the beguiling, the armed and disarming. Here you can wander through every form of weather the human heart can generate, but I think most of it of the benevolent sort. But, just to be fair, you will find here too those who Wille Bee Vyctimes, whose treasure store is made of barbs and slings. You will find souls herein for whom every accusation is a sad confession. For others, every confession is a thinly-disguised accusation. But above all, because this is a place for lovers of music, you will find here the spectrum of life doing what it alone can do at all -- living. We are a sassy, uppity, thoughtful, shy, brazen huffery-puffery, calm and retiring lot, and have of us have the blood of gators and the other half were raised by wild icebergs. But, by gum, we are so alive it hurts!!! And we love it that way. And we hope that you are the sort who will as well. Welcome one and all. Regards, A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Sourdough Date: 11 Jul 01 - 02:33 AM Amos: Hear! Hear! Soudough |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: wysiwyg Date: 11 Jul 01 - 03:40 AM Move that over to the FAQ, somebuddy, it's pricelss. I think I will quote it, and often. Did he leave out sexy? We are a sexy lot. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: mousethief Date: 11 Jul 01 - 03:53 AM icebergs? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Noreen Date: 11 Jul 01 - 04:24 AM Thatis truly wonderful, Amos. Thank you. ♥ Noreen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Dave the Gnome Date: 11 Jul 01 - 04:46 AM A 'guest' is usualy someone who is invited. Someone who attends your party uninvited is a gatecrasher and usualy unwelcome. Could we not have a mechanism where people do at least have to let the forum owners know who they are? The email address with confirmation seems to be the best idea. The email address and real identity could still be kept sectret from the public and I do understand the reasons some people would like to keep their identity away from the prying eyes of all and sundry. So, anyone can read the forum but to post they would need to join and confirm their identity somehow. The email address would still be hidden. Their handle could be one of their own choosing or 'Guest'. In the event of nasty, personal and vindictive posts their guest priviledge is revoked. We would need to ensure such guests do sign in with a password - but that is two way protection and ensures no-one posts as someone else as well. I cannot see anyone objecting to that unless they want to make such postings. Or am I being over simplistic? Cheers Dave the Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: SeanM Date: 11 Jul 01 - 05:28 AM DtG; As you can probably tell from varying reactions (mine as well as others), this is a problem that's been occuring for a while. It's been a regular cycle, in fact, kinda like the times that they recommend not swimming at local beaches because a winter storm busted a sewer line. Your solution has been advanced before, along with similar ideas (members only, IP posting in any 'guest' message, etc.), but they've all been pretty much ruled out. As much as I detest the way this particular 'GUEST' keeps re-abusing the loophole, I also unfortunately am in the position of wanting to defend the system that allows said annoyance to keep recurring. The logic is (more or less) that a casual 'seeker of information' will very likely stop at the first signs of either having to provide personal information, or whenever something requires them to make a choice about something personal. For most people, this isn't an issue - they either don't really care about their 'personal data', or trust the website (as most of the members here do) not to misuse the pittance of information collected. However, for those who DON'T trust the website (or don't wish to be identified for whatever legitimate reasons), putting a 'step' in as suggested would drive them off - and that would be a shame, as one thing the 'cat is good at is providing needed information about the music (and an astounding array of other topics). It'd be a shame to lose those requests - I don't know about the rest of the 'catters, but some days those requests are about all that brings me back (lately is a fine example). The ability to share what I've learned with someone else, and hopefully to impart some of my enthusiasm in the process. Of course, in addition to the above, there's also the matter of the programming involved, the added workload to keep the databases up and running and current, etc. etc. etc. Who knows, though? One day, our pestilential "GUEST" may finally push one wrong button too many and bring this about. Another incident (I think it was a different 'GUEST', but there's no real way of knowing for certain) brought about the creation of the 'GUEST' label to begin with, due to a diseased individual thinking it was GREAT fun to sign other members' names to various trollery. I'd be flip and say something like "Can't we all just get along?", but we're humans, and occasionally you get a damaged mind in with the normal folks. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Jon Freeman Date: 11 Jul 01 - 06:06 AM Dave, as far as I'm aware, Max does log the IP address of every post so he has a means of finding out who has posted what if he feels there is a need. The way I see it, the beauty of the Guest system is that it allows a "passer by" to create or contribute to a thread. The fact of the matter is that we do get many useful posts from Guests and I fear that much of this would be lost if they had to register with the site in any way. I'm afraid I don't hold with the rest of the Guest arguement. Quite frankly if a person likes this site and wants to contribute on a regular basis, I believe they should join. Perhaps there are issues concerning identity that need addressing but the information held in the membership database is not availible to everyone. There is a user option to make certain information availible to other members (which I don't know how to use) but that is a user choice. Other than that, the information is only avialable to Max and people trusted by Max to use that information in order to provide help here and it is not used for any other purpose. Ultimately though, those who have been here a while and choose not to register, intentionally or otherwise are making one clear statement: "I do not trust Max". I can't help but wonder what these people are doing visiting his site. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 01 - 08:57 AM Dear "ALL". I am aware that there are moderated forums out there. I never suggested that the Mudcat be moderated, and am left puzzled as to why you would have drawn that from what I posted, considering that it contained: "I feel that censorship is not the way to go, but I am also feeling trepidatious at the fact that nasty folk can remain so anonymous". Moreso, what I am suggesting is that the ability to remain anonymous allows cowards to say and do anything they wish, to include posting something as childish and unworthy of this environment as "So and so has a big fat arse". It is amazing how civil people become once you take away their ability to hide. Conversely, it is amazing the depths to which some will sink when they know they can keep their identity (and hence, their reputation) out of it. In a nutshell, I am suggesting that in my perfect world, folk would be able to say anything they wish and not be banished for having made unpopular or controversial commentary, but that they would have to put their *own* reputations on the line for having done so.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: UB Ed Date: 11 Jul 01 - 09:15 AM Well, its not a matter of moderated versus unmoderated forums. And civility should be observed whether you are identified or not. IMHO, its a matter of whether you were brought up well. I'm certain Miss Manners would advise that it is never polite to mention the size of someones posterior as casual conversation. Guests are fine and members are fine. What is not fine is mean-spirited posts from either. Sure you can lose your temper; generally after such an episode an apology is involved. But if you have an interest in civility, you follow the rules (ie, didn't your folks teach you any manners? Oh, I thought they were saying bananers and didn't want any). If a guest or member is rude, please respond politely (or not at all). We don't need any more rules.
"You take the high road Ed |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: SDShad Date: 11 Jul 01 - 09:28 AM Alex: yes, icebergs. But sexy icebergs. Hey, check out the tip on that one.... Shad |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST,former member, seldom here Date: 11 Jul 01 - 09:36 AM its all crap anyway you should ban GUEST posting completely thereby ending the debate and allowing you to jerk each other off without interference its unrestricted breeding rights that cause this sort of thing, y'know |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Angie Date: 12 Jul 01 - 07:34 PM Spot on Dave You're right Sean, it's "nice to be nice" On the subject of 'so and so has a ...', I never saw the origin of this argument but I get the gist. With a title like that I'm surprised and quite disappointed that anyone at all even bothered to visit it. Even though *ashamedly*, I did too! Mal
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Amos Date: 12 Jul 01 - 08:39 PM ts unrestricted breeding rights that cause this sort of thing, y'know
Dear former member: Sounds like you made a wise call, sorry though I am to hear it. "Breeding rights" is a fantasy concocted by those not quite in touch with the real dynamics of existence. I expect you might have a business plan for counting people's breaths and taxing them on their CO2 emissions in your file system somewhere. Draw up some interesting plans for verifying the correct philosophy as a pre-requisite to reproduction, why doncha!! Oh, and let's see a matrix of permitted vocabularies to be allocated to defined classes of people based, say, on their DNA profile or IQ test!! And as for those who eat poorly, why, we have ways of making you optimise. There is a name for this kind of subhuman fucking horse-patooty. It is called fascism. It is authoritarian, anti-social, viperous and venomous vapouring, an overflow from the sewage-burdened mind of the Meathead Elite Clique. I spit. Warmest regards, Amos |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Jul 01 - 10:00 PM Well put Amos..........You may speak for me anytime! Unless of course you'd prefer to jerk each other off! LMAO!!! Former member now in the "Land of the Paranoidial Doomed"......if you run into "All" be sure to say "Hi" from all of us! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Angie Date: 14 Jul 01 - 03:42 AM Yes but Amos, how do you really feel? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Bill D Date: 14 Jul 01 - 01:48 PM *giggling too hard to type anything more* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Jul 01 - 02:45 PM I'd have to say I concur with Amos and Spaw. To put it in the politest of terms... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall) Date: 14 Jul 01 - 11:51 PM I've posted my feelings on this the last time this came around (or the time before or the time before that...) Multiple Personality For those who use their anonymity here in order to attack without fear of rebuke, there is an organization in the 3D world that might interest you. They're predominately found in the southern US but can be found throughout the States. They, too, value their anonymity while attacking others, and in fact they value it so highly that they wear white hoods and sheets to preserve it. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall) Date: 15 Jul 01 - 12:03 AM OK, as soon as I submitted that, I regretted it. Please don't take that as an endorsement af the KKK. Furthermore, it's in poor taste on my part to compare some annoying punk here with the terror people have been subjected to due to the ignorance of others. I'm sorry. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: Amos Date: 15 Jul 01 - 12:08 AM Understood, Rich.... and I think in fact there are SOME similarities. Creating hidden and destructive effects without responsibility is ever the ambition of the terrified. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: GUEST,Fed up Date: 15 Jul 01 - 01:13 AM And don't forget Deep Throat, who brought down a corrupt US presidency. For every "evil" masked identity people cite, there are plenty of very positive examples to counter the argument with--disagreeing to disagree is always a better route than flaming those who disagree with your view. All |
|
Subject: RE: BS: GUESTS From: mousethief Date: 15 Jul 01 - 01:21 AM That's a good thing to keep in mind, Guest Fed Up. Alex |