[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: to Lynn re Jocelyn Elders

Jun 29, 1997 12:47 PM
by Wildefire

In a message dated 97-06-28 19:49:43 EDT, you write:

> I didn't in the least want to imply that you didn't like Jocelyn Elders. I
>  thought you did. So I don't think in the least I need to apologize. Nobody
>  has apologized to me yet for dragging CWL through the mud repeatedly.

Oh, CRAP, Liesel!!!!

How in the heck can we carry on a conversation if you don't READ what I
wrote!!! When I said I would like an apology, it was about your misquoting
me!!!!!!!!!! (As for your first two sentences, I reread them ten times and
still don't understand what you're saying there. You thought I did what?
Disliked her? If I disliked her, then why did you say that you didn't mean to
imply that I disliked her when you actually said that I disliked her? This
doesn't make any sense. Is there a typo or an omitted word?)

This is WHAT I said about being misquoted:

> But the *real* reason why I posted that message was that you added an
>  editorial comment about Dr. Elders to a line containing my own remarks
>  without indicating that it was *your* opinion. *That* was what I was truly
>  objecting to in my first paragraph, not that you said she was great. It
>  in effect, putting words in my mouth that I hadn't said--misquoting me.
>  Anyone who joined the list after I made the original post who read your
>  message would erroneously have believed that I was the one who made the
>  remarks that *you* added. Do you see what I'm getting at? People on the
>  Internet often get upset when remarks aren't attributed properly or are
>  misquoted.

Then a few sentences down, I said the following about apologies:

>  disagreeing with you, for example, at this moment but that doesn't mean at
>  all that I dislike you.  (Though I *do* wish you'd apologize for
>  me so I won't continue feeling so annoyed at you for misquoting me.)

Now, what is so unclear about what I said here in parentheses about why I
wished you'd apologize????? If you don't care about sloppily misquoting
people, then refuse to apologize to them when they call you out on it, forget
it!! I'm not even talking now about issues, philosophies, Elders, CWL, or
politics, but plain old basic courtesy which you've apparently never
learned!! Actually, it's a bigger issue because it is not right, IMHO, to
treat another person's words so carelessly.

If you can't bother to carefully read what I wrote to you (or is the real
problem that you chose to ignore what I actually said and purposely confused
the whole issue?), there is no need to continue this conversation. I'm
getting just a bit sick of this tactic of pretending to not understand what
was said, twisting the meaning of things, etc. as a last refuge taken when
one is otherwise unable to address the real issues. In this case, it was your
tying my statement about an apology to like or dislike of Jocelyn Elders in
an obvious attempt to avoid having to own up to misquoting me--what it really
was about. This tactic is getting *old* because I've seen it here more than
once in the last few weeks. But, unlike folks who unsubscribe in disgust at
one thing or another, I'll just stay here and be a pain about these kinds of


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application