It was a passionate, well written letter. But in the end, it's really a matter between Emily and Share, isn't it?*
* yea, yea, all the usual caveats of the a public forum etc. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Robin Carlsen" <maskedzebra@...> wrote: > > I think Steve has dealt with the substance of Emily's analysis and his commentary here goes down much deeper into reality--and into himself--than does Emily's post. This to me makes the case for Steve: that what Emily went through to write her letter to Share entailed hardly anything that touched her compared to where Steve went in himself to write this. I feel I am eating humble pie now. You have just proven my philosophy, Steve. And I already feel the shame for Emily. Authfriend, she doesn't know what she is talking about. This post represents something so beautiful to be reading this Sunday night. Thank you, Steve. I am going to reread this on my death bed. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1" lurkernomore20002000@ wrote: > > > > > > This also strikes me as quite odd. To feel that I would need to > > indicate, by name, those people who are apparantly in agreement with a > > position I might have. As Xeno, said, as though this "makes the case" > > for my position? > > > > All it indicates, is that someone is so invested in a position, that > > they must try to indicate public support for that position. > > > > It ignores the fact that there is probably an equal or greater number of > > people who feel differently, but just aren't obsessed with trying to > > assert the "rightness" of their opinon. > > > > But, in this case, Judy feels that it bolsters her position and thereby > > allows her to claim yet another internet forum victory. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> > > wrote: > > > > > And how about Ann, raunchy, Emily, Alex, and Ravi? That's > > > seven people who are apparently too different from you for > > > you and them to understand each other--about half of the > > > regulars who have had exchanges with you or have defended > > > you. And that half haven't had any arguments with you to > > > begin with, so there's no way to tell whether they would > > > be able to understand you if they did. > > > > > > snip > > > > > Note again that it isn't just Share and me whose "views" > > > diverge and whose "thinking styles are simply not compatible." > > > It's Share versus Robin and Ann and raunchy and Emily and > > > Alex and Ravi and me. Fatuous nonsense, Xeno. > > > > > >
