--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@> > wrote: > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > > > Yep, I should hope the FFL moderators would enforce the highest levels of > > > civility here. This one guy is manifiestly bad. "When in doubt, kick > > > them out". Tough love. Are the threads of FFL to be thus polluted with > > > his abusive crap? No, unsubscribe him now. We don't need his kind of > > > abusive crap in the threads of FFL. We've got much more important things > > > to talk about here. Git rid of him. He stopped having things to say in > > > any civil way a long while ago. > > > > As much as I really appreciate your kind intention here Doug, I just can't > > reconcile this with the kind of freedom we want here. This is the case > > that proves the principle isn't it? What is the price of freedom and are we > > willing to pay it? Personally I am. > > > > > You are more understanding and principled than I would be, Curtis, when it > comes to freedom vs employment and reputation. While you would hope that > people would not take chat room comments as significant, many people do in > fact not know quite what to believe when they Google someone. And even lies > and misinformation have an effect, altho the nature and character of Ravi's > posts pretty much informs the reader that the content is likely not true. > Apparently Ravi is not at this time concerned about his own reputation in all > of this - that concern is what usually provides some sort of boundary.
Nice of you to speak up Susan. I believe that I might be more likely hurt by some possible gig employer by my outspoken view on God here as for anything Ravi can cook up. Plus I am not dependent on any one boss in my job. I really like that. Some one individual or school might read something and not hire me, but noone controls all my income. So it would suck a little, but not be devastating. I have a good reputation where it matters. The thing I am most associated for life on in Google is for my opinions about the movement, and even though I am proud of those articles, I know they could make me appear weird and scare people off. I admitted that I was in a group like TM for 15 years! Internet reputations are weird like that. But I have to own my personal history and given my artistic life choices, I believe I will be just fine. No troll has that power over me. Of course you wont see me running for public office either! But that was sweet of you to say and given the downsides of any support posts I appreciate it. (Thanks to Raunchy for sticking her neck out too.) I am not advocating another round of Ravi castigation leading to Ravi being contrite for a minute and a half and then returning to his usual MO again as soon as the fuss dies down. He is a cost of freedom. I don't like it, but it is better in my opinion than the alternative. And Rick's hands off policy has been tested many times before and has always come out in the end to represent wisdom. I don't believe Ravi has the power to break that now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ravi has been mounting a campaign to spread malicious lies about me on > > > > this message board. I hope anyone interested in researching me or > > > > checking up on my character will take the time do a search on this > > > > individual's posts here so that you can understand what I am dealing > > > > with. This is not an uncommon phenomenon in this Internet age of > > > > freedom of expression. > > > > > > > > This individual does not know me personally, or have any inside > > > > information about me. > > > > > > > > > >
