Quoting Kathy Forer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > It was "dear Echo," not "Dear Echo." To connote a beloved acolyte, not > to address you.
This does not make sense - in what context was it necessary to connote a beloved acolyte? The statement was: "She really had you fooled, dear Echo." The subject was K, so "She" references him. You were addressing your comments in response to mine - thus "you" means me. I would say "dear Echo" therefore refers to me. Why would you want to connote a beloved acolyte in reference to me? joseph & donna www.electrichands.com joseph franklyn mcelroy corporate performance artist www.corporatepa.com go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm call me 646 279 2309 SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 09:54 AM, joseph (yes=no & yes<>no) > wrote: > > >> Are you saying no one can be "beaten" unless they are insecure? > >> What do you mean by beaten, who was beaten? You, joseph & donna, or > >> karei? Or, are there two different subjects, the one accused of NOT > >> having deep seated insecurities and the other already beaten? > > > > No - I was just pointing out that the "Dear xxx" strategy is only > > successful > > against opponents with insecurity, as it depends upon them succombing > > in the > > face of disdain. I haven't treated you with disdain, why are you > > treating me > > with such? Not that I am asking for kind treatment, I am more than > > capable > > of "defending" myself, however I would prefer it otherwise.
