Judy asked if there was an echo in here. I guess she hasn't noticed how many 
times she's posted about refutation, etc.





On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:02 PM, Richard J. Williams 
<pundits...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
  
This your your style I guess. 

On 11/27/2013 6:03 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:

  
>This is all trolling, stuff Richard made up. If anyone here takes Richard 
>seriously enough to want a detailed refutation, let me know. 
> 
>
>
>---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <punditster@...> wrote:
>
>
>I've been an respondent on the internet since 1999, so it's not like I'm a 
>newbie or something. And it's been my observation that Judy has a really big 
>ego, maybe bigger even than Barry, and that's saying a lot! There are facts 
>and there are opinions - facts can be argued, but an opinion stands no matter 
>what, and that's everyone's right to express - you may not agree, but there 
>should be no excuse for slandering your debating opponents.
>
>It's like when some people call others 'nazis' all the
                  time - it soon loses its force, and in the end doesn't
                  do justice to the real nazi victims.
>
>At first I thought Judy was being very astute when she
                  called Barry a liar over and over again; then she
                  started going after me with the same tactic. For
                  awhile I thought there was something wrong with me and
                  that maybe I did lack integrity. But now, after Judy
                  called Buck a liar for no reason  at all, I've come to
                  the conclusion that Judy is simply a well-poisoner. 
>
>That's her style I guess.
>
>Hey, I'm all for truthfulness and personal integrity,
                  but I'm just not sure dialoging with anonymous
                  informants in an online chat-room is the place to
                  prove it - this is supposed to fun, not a trial by a
                  one-person judge and jury. 
>
>But, it has reached a level now that she's calling
                  almost everyone a liar, a troll, and/or a poser. 
>
>At this point, she's just a very unpleasant person to
                  deal with and not very informative either. And,
                  there's no relief when anyone starts up a dialog with
                  her - it's incessant and endless. Barry is a case in
                  point - from what I can tell, Judy carries a grudge
                  for a very, very long time. Go figure.
>
>P.S. You may have noticed that Judy does NOT respond
                  very elegantly to constructive criticism. If anyone
                  can point to an untruth I've posted, please let me
                  know and point my error - be specific, so we can
                  resolve any misunderstandings. Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>On 11/27/2013 10:33 AM, Share Long wrote:
>>
>  
>>I think Truth is something huge, that cannot really be completely conveyed in 
>>words alone. Unless the speaker or writer is communicating from a very 
>>settled and integrated level of consciousness. OTOH, unless someone has a 
>>nefarious intention, I think most people try to communicate truthfully. But 
>>each of us is limited by our connection to Truth. The most trustworthy 
>>people, imho, are those who recognize this and intend to become more and more 
>>truthful.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:21 AM, Richard J. Williams <punditster@...> 
>>wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>Maybe, but I almost always suspect someone of not being totally honest when 
>>they post as an anonymous informant. I used to post under various handles 
>>until I got outed, and so I decided when I retired, I would just use my real 
>>name. I've got nothing to hide and nobody can fire me from my job since I'm 
>>self-employed now. But using a handle is no biggie to me  because I 
>>understand why some people need to keep their privacy.
>>
>>But, I did get a little
                                          paranoid reading Bill's post
                                          where he claimed Ravi had
                                          stalked or threatened, to what
                                          - expose Bill and his wife.
                                          What's up with that? 
>>
>>That's when things get REALLY
                                          nasty around here - I wouldn't
                                          blame Rick if he shut down the
                                          whole discussion group, if
                                          that's what going to happen
                                          here on a regular basis! It is
                                          always troubling to see
                                          someone get banned from the
                                          group. Where I used to work,
                                          you had to really screw up big
                                          time to get fired - like
                                          smoking pot in the parking lot
                                          or something like that. Hardly
                                          anyone gets banned on FFL -
                                          Kirk got banned for cursing
                                          too. Go figure.
>>
>>And, I don't care if people
                                          post mean things about me
                                          sometimes - it could always
                                          just be a joke of some kind -
                                          like when Barry2 posted that
                                          my real name was Walter White.
                                          LoL!
>>
>>
>>On 11/27/2013 8:49 AM, anartaxius@... wrote:
>>
>>  
>>>10 Ways Liars Use Words To Obscure the Truth
>>>>
>>>http://liespotting.com/liespotting-basics/words/
>>>We are not face-to-face on FFL, it's all words, words, words. There are 
>>>those here who make a big deal of their integrity. Perhaps that is a suspect 
>>>trait.
>>>>

Reply via email to