[lit-ideas] META: Apology from C. Bruce expected by J. L. Speranza
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:53:40 EDT
Sue Trevor is right in reminding us of the guidelines. I suggest too that
people who don't contribute often do try and do. The feeling you get once
you are in the middle of an argument is different to share, althought I
would _never_ call it 'compulsive'. I defer those judgements to the
clinicians,
if needed -- and, as minimal ethics suggest -- upon first-hand observation
of the 'patient'.
I wish other listmembers would express half the ardour for ONE
philosophical thesis that I do. Of course I can be called names by P. A.
Stone, et al
(about people providing unvolunteered info) but that's what comes with
passion for what you do.
Last week, while S. Trevor cared to mention only MY source as that of
'burying her inbox', there was quite a chain of posts from all different
posters. I would also point to the 'we' of S. Trevor, "gives us some rest"
etc.
as Kantian in nature. "give _me_ some rest" somehow sounds less Kantian? :)
But most importantly, I do feel like C. Bruce did insult me a couple of
times over the last couple of posts. It's not etiquette to hide under a
pseudonym. The least thing C. Bruce could do is still sign his posts, "C.
Bruce,
Kiel, Germany" as the list guidelines require.
The apology I expect from him has to do with his insulting me for having
ignored a post by him that he NEVER sent. It was later, in 'resending' it
patronisingly, "This is the easiest way -- cbruce@de. -- with the oops that
it originated -- that he did. He didn't feel the need to recheck whether the
post had been sent. He NEVER replied to my "Did Trogge quote from
Strawson?" because he had not. Instead, we get more bad press from him towards
my
persona meant to be funny, "God and little fishes," etc.
So, under the circumstances -- the way I have been treated onlist -- you
would expect that my 3-posts-a-day have to be concerned with arguments I
consider 'secondary'.
But an apology and minimal respect for the dignity of others seems a
minimum. While S. Trevor has not filtered me (which I appreciate) but feels the
need to use the 'give us some rest" -- C. Bruce has also justified his
exceeding the 3-posts-a-day because he says he feels that he can get
criticised
in his absence and that his is over-sensitive. So are some of us here other
than him.
Teemu has not answered my query as to the mechanical, "3-posts-a-day"
procedure. Since he is into computers, he may find it easy.
Cheers,
J. L. Speranza
Buenos Aires, Argentina
**************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
Steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221323036x1201367247/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
yExcfooterNO62)
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
