On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:12, Nenah Sylver wrote:
>
>
> Garnet,
> I am really fed up with this shit. Ozone itself is not toxic.
Interesting use of vocabulary Nenah. Particularly in light of your many
essays.
Ozone is indeed toxic as you yourself have stated. See below.
> It has
> traditional
- Original Message -
From: "Garnet"
To: "Silver List"
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 11:47 PM
Subject: Re: CS>argument does help, was Re: CS> garnet needs therapy
> Joy,
>
> You have grossly misread my posts. I use precise language and refe
At 07:07 AM 26/11/04, Sol wrote:
Even if sometimes things get a bit acrimonious, it is of absolute
importance to get both sides. And I am glad the back and forth went on
for more than one round, too, as that brought out a lot more info.
I am actually capable of reading both sides, following
Joy,
You have grossly misread my posts. I use precise language and references
but I am just as intuitive, alternative and open as anyone. Guess you
just perceived what you feared and did not open your mind to other
meanings of my words. A common flaw in the internet medium because you
can not re
I can agree with much of Joy's and Sol's comments, but I say we now
need to let things be. Folks are who they are and until they make
themselves more trouble than help to the list, we will just try to get
along.
It's wise to note that personal attacks not only are discouraged by
list rules, bu
I agree that putting the information out there, each person's
opinions/information/ideas, yes this is important and valuable.
However, what I don't need or want is the kind of oneuponeship that
Garnet seems to need to do on this issue. It may be a hot button issue
for her, or perhaps she jus
I absolutely disagree. The argument (used in the philosophical sense)
back and forth between Garnet and Nenah has been very productive for me
personally. I have learned a lot that I didn't know about Ozone from it.
Without this kind of back and forth, no matter how uncomfortable it
makes people
7 matches
Mail list logo
