|
In Reply to: Re: But lately it seems... posted by Joseph on September 08, 2003 at 17:24:23:
I didn't mean it as a provocation. It was an observation, from my perspective, and a sincere question on my part, if you agreed, without the official "gen coord" position attached. We don't have the benefit of vocal cues and body language in this medium.
I just tried, obviously unsuccessfully, to voice in an uninflammatory manner, the way it seems to me. You had said the reason you brought this up at all was because your name was mentioned. Then you said you brought it up because you wanted to set the record straight. Then you just said right now you'd speak up whenever you felt misprepresented.
So in response to that I was asking if you didn't notice that you have been more than just replying to your name being brought up, or facts being misrepresented; and if you noticed you were initiating and re-initiating the subject constantly, not allowing anyone to diverge from the theme of how you were right about Sam 1 year ago, and how you were wronged by "this board" already then and even now and want to make a case for it.
If you disagree with that observation you disagree. I was asking because it seems that way to me. I'm not even trying to talk about the subject anymore, as much as I am trying to talk about whether or not you agree you are doing a lot to keep it alive.
Thing is, I've seen that theme from you in quite a few posts now. I've also seen "opponents" trying to present "another side" of the argument agreeing with you about some things - nobody seems to be obstinately disagreeing 100%, and yet you are still sore.
I realize Sam did a lot to upset you, and a lot of things were played out on this board, but it seems you are also trying to make a case for how "we" are all supporters of Sam here, agreeing with him 100% no matter what and dscagreeing with you 100% no matter what. I'm just saying that as far as I observe, there definitely is some amount of conflict and disagreement (and something to argue about?), but not on the scale you make it out to be (I acutally think we mostly agree, whether voiced or not), and that it doesn't seem to warrant the constant attention over the same points.
If you disagree, you disagree, I'm not trying to shut you up if you feel you have an issue to keep alive. I just don't see the conflict in interests as much as you seem to.
Lots of people here don't agree with Sam.
As individuals, the staff on this site don't agree with him. Even those who have tried to speak for "the other side" of the argument have said they don't agree with everything he says/does. So I just don't see why you should bring exFamily.org and "this board" into it as much as you do. That's just my observation.
I don't know if perhaps the answer may be in your love for conflict?
"I can keep going until I leave for Vegas in October if that's what you guys want to do. I've been arguing with folks on message boards for twenty years. I never get tired of it."
Maybe you'll consider that another provocation, but it's just not my thing to keep conflict alive, when the fundamental parts of the issue are settled, or no new points are made, just to go on and on about it.
I don't know if this is a communication problem. Perhaps you don't feel anything has been settled, for lack of exFamily.org representatives jumping in and agreeing with you?
Sincerely
WC
