Re: channels and responsibility

[anthonyr]

Anthony J. Rzepela wrote:
> 
> 2. Let him stay, make him
>    go, I don't give a shit.
...
>    I really don't think the experience I had in August '96
>    and the current to-do are analagous. 


The two situations are analagous in that you were unsubbed unfairly
because you were provoked into a testy exchange with the list-owner, and
that same idea (unsubbing) has come up again. You say that you don't
give a shit whether he's unsubbed -- isn't that the same attitude that
got you unsubbed? And if you don't give a shit, one way or the other,
don't you know that neither does Ed? Cheesh, you two have more in common
than you'd care to admit. I see lots of similarities.

>    As I've said to several people privately, I have more
>    kooks filtered out of my inbox via procmail from babel-list
>    than any other list/source of email tension. 


So you never get to see your own email posted?

But seriously, you claim not to bear some responsibility for what's
happening, yet you still feel the need to call him "the little freak"
publicly, and you think that's okay? I mean, why did you say that, if
not to provoke and flame the fire? You are provocative to Ed in the same
way that Caryn was to you (actually more so). The problem was that she
was list-owner, and used her power self-servingly. But be honest. If you
were list-owner of babel-list, wouldn't you have unsubbed Ed? I think
you would have. Your Procmail filter is the equivalent of that.

>    STILL, it seems difficult for the topics to steer towards
>    PS and away from the little freak.