NOT wishing to suck Curtis into this, merely in appreciation of him having said it perfectly, I repost his comment below, changing nothing except to highlight the words "mindnumbingly high."
I mean, that's really the issue, isn't it? 16+ years. Up to 50% percent of her posts in any given week, for all that time. Who on this forum really gives a shit about the purported "Barry-Judy Feud" except Judy and her Pips? The rest -- wisely -- had their minds numbed by the whole thing years ago and tuned it all out. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Just for one thing, if one were to read my posts that > > > > comment on Barry's, one would find that a significant > > > > number of them--I'd guess at least 50 percent--are not > > > > simply insults; quite a few are not insulting at all. > > > > Rather, they involve reasoned, noninflammatory analysis > > > > of points that Barry has made. > > > > > > ME: And often in demeaning language that is pretty much > > > guarenteed to continue the ill will. > > > > And there's another example demonstrating that you > > haven't read enough to say. Heck, you didn't even > > read what *I* just said. "Reasoned, noninflammatory > > analysis" is the opposite of "demeaning." > > ME: So you pick 50% as insulting. OK, I am not going > to quibble about the numbers. Whatever the numbers it > appears to be enough to keep it rolling in the same > direction. Would you like me to say that many of your > posts "involve reasoned, noninflammatory analysis of > points that Barry has made"? OK that sounds right. > But whatever the number of ill will posts it seems to > be working. And as prolific as you are here, and as > Barry focused, that 50% number is *mindnumbingly high*.
