--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > ...and I have never > > > > > > been nominated for Usenet Kook of the Year. :-) > > > > > > > > > > By Sherilyn, one of her more desperate moves. > > > > > > > > I wouldn't worry about it that much. You only > > > > got about 40 votes, mainly from your "fans" on > > > > alt.meditation.transcendental and sci.skeptic. > > > > > > Um, I never worried about it at all. But > > > apparently it was a big enough deal for you > > > that you actually had to go count the votes. > > > > Nope. Someone on sci.skeptic kept track. They were > > quite amused by you. > > > > I presume they were all "angry and usually dishonest > > critics of TM," too? :-) > > In general, yeah. Non-angry and usually honest critics > of anything don't indulge in ad hoc web-sites, ad hominem > attacks, etc., on proponents of what they are critical of.
You're trying to pull the same propaganda stunt that Judy runs here. These people didn't come down on Judy because she was a "TMer," ferchris- sakes; they came down on her because she's JUDY. I followed sci.skeptic for a while. They did NOT rag on TMers because they were TMers. They ragged on abusive, arrogant posters because they were abusive and arrogant. That's where Judy fit in. It's all about her personality, and how she wields it. It wouldn't have mattered to those people if she had been a member of a cargo cult from the South Pacific; they'd still have found her tactics repugnant. *That* is what you're trying to obscure by claiming that they reacted to her as they did because she was a "TMer."
