Reply below (to the comments addressed to me): **
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" > <reavismarek@> wrote: > <snip> > > Judy, there's no way that Rick doesn't hold "fairness, > > honesty, and sincerity" as dearly as you. That is my > > view of him, at least. It perplexes me that you have > > such conviction that he is so shallow and hypocritical > > and you believe that the record abundantly supports that > > view. In my review it doesn't. > > I read over my post, and I was not able to find > anything in it that suggested I believe "the record > abundantly supports" that view. Could you point out > to me where you found such a suggestion? > > Nor, in fact, is it my view. > > I have seen several *instances* of unfairness from > Rick; and in this post I was referring exclusively > to the most recent such. > > In my book, that doesn't make him "so shallow and > hypocritical" as a human bean, only that he has some > blind spots and is capable of making some bad mistakes, > including this one. > > I would note that it's not terribly surprising > that the people Rick supports, or at least refrains > from sanctioning, would find him to be commendably > fair. > > Do you read the traffic here on a regular basis, > by the way? > > And just out of curiosity, after reading my post, > do you see how a reasonable person might have > found Rick's post offensive? Or are you convinced > it's just rampant paranoia on my part? **snip to end** Yes, I read the traffic here on a regular basis, and more so since the institution of the new posting restrictions which, in my opinion, have happily eliminated the compulsive posting habits of contributors like yourself. And, no, I don't find your views regarding the "offensive" nature of Rick's comments as reasonable. Quite the contrary. However, I am in no position to diagnose or speculate as to why you persist in that attitude.
