lurkernomore20002000 wrote:
> Bronte:
> snipped:
> but their insistence on not getting personal in the
>
>> meetings keep the discussion headed in a productive direction
>>
> instead of getting bogged down in petty animosities.
>
>> Auth:
>>
> Do you have a reference for this? Was a transcript
>
>> made of the meetings?
>>
>
> Bronte, FWIW, and I know this whole discussion has gotten somewhat
> tired, but often in this stage of the discussion with Judy, things get
> a little peculiar. Just when you think you might be at an ending
> point, it keeps on going. Something like this can go on for 25-30
> posts. (hence 35/wk posting limit) Judy is just not going to concede
> ground, and she can parce a dialogue endlessly. That is why I have
> found it in my best interests to generally let her have the last word,
> or not engage her, or not get engaged by her. And as so often been
> mentioned, BE SELECTIVE in which posts and posters you read.
>
> lurk
Most of these kinds of discussion get tired pretty fast. In fact I
don't read most of them. Since I use email instead of the web to use
the group these are the kinds of posts that scroll off the right of the
pane. It's just one for thing for the obsessive compulsives to obsess
over. But it will end soon as most will have blown their 35 post limit
on the topic. :)
