Make all the distinctions that you want Judy. It does not in any way change the fact that being blatently rude, making personal attacks and insults, hurling profanities against another is against the FFL guidelines.
You may argue a code of ethics outside of FFL which are differnt than the guidelines. That is your right. Go forth and prosper. Hope it works out for you. However, in FFL, such behavior is against the guidelines. In my view, when guidelines are violated, they should be enforced. And enforced consistently and across the board. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > <snip> > > > > > When you called me a liar and a fuckhead, you were provoked > > > > > by me to do so, and, as you have thoroughly rubbed my nose > into > > > > > the fact, I asked for it. However, I do think that Barry > would > > > > > be wise to black list you, and you him. > > > > > > > > If Judy or anyone calls you a liar or fuckhead, they should > > > > be banned for a week. Thats gratuatious flaming and is against > > > > the guidelines. > > > > > > It sure ain't gratuitous when it's in response to a > > > post headed, "Time to vote -- Who's a bigger liar > > > and fuckhead? John or Edg?" > > > > > > Try to keep up, eh? > > > > I disagree. Both are gratuitous. > > Oh, please. If somebody asks for something and > you provide it, you haven't provided it > *gratuitously*. > > > My view: yours above is a often > > repeated logical or perhaps social error. > > No, you're just using a gratuitously broad > definition of "gratuitous." > > In my book, if someone is > > rude to me, it does not make my being rude ok. > > Edg wasn't being rude to me, I was being rude to > him, but not *gratuitously*, because the rudeness > consisted of a frank, direct answer to his question > using the words he had used to phrase it. > > I didn't say anything either way about its being > "OK." I'm just pointing out that it wasn't > *gratuitous*. > > If you're walking down the street and somebody > shoves a dollar into your hand, that's gratuitous. > If you're a beggar with a tin cup asking me to give > you a dollar and I do, that isn't gratuitous. > > > You appear to live by a different ethos. > > That's a gratuitous assumption. > > <snip> > > If you have not read the guidelines, perhaps its time you kept up. > > And so is this. >
