Posted by shar on August 1, 2002, at 0:11:48
In reply to Re: Oh but beardy » shar, posted by beardedlady on July 31, 2002, at 20:09:13
> > ....well, the point of this post is to question the usefulness of bringing up the past, and presenting it to people (some, not me, of course, might say 'throwing it in people's faces'). It does not seem to serve any particular purpose.
>
>> Shar:
>
>> It's not a poke; it's a reminder. And I find a great bit of usefulness in it. We often remind other people of what they've promised or said or threatened, especially if they seem to have genuinely forgotten or if they go against their word or gang up on others for doing similar things. And I don't find anything wrong with it..........Well, I assumed you didn't find anything wrong with it, or you wouldn't do it. Did you believe Ron genuinely forgot that he threatened to sue Dr. Bob and it was important to remind him of this? Or did he go against his past word in his current post? Do you want to be sure that he never forgets he once wanted to sue Dr. Bob?
> > What do you get out of doing it? Do you have a purpose in doing it? Do you believe that people have forgotten what they've said before and need reminding? Or, is there a larger point that I just don't grasp? I'm curious because you have done the same thing to me (the 'you previously said' thing), and it just felt like a poke.
>
> And what did you just do? Didn't you remind me of something I said in a previous post?.......No. I said you had brought up the past to me before; I described a behavior, an action you took.
.......I did not take something you'd previously said and indicate that you were saying the opposite now, or a different thing now. I did not say "well, one time you said this, and now you're saying that." I find that type of statement so rarely useful in any meaningful way I typically make a point of avoiding it. I see it as an obstacle to an honest exchange of ideas. Of course, an honest exchange of ideas is not always the goal in a conversation.
>>You'll find it an inescapable and necessary part of dialogue. Almost every bit of writing on this board discusses something someone previously said.
.......I find a difference in writing "when you said that, I felt this" or "when you wrote about that, it reminded me of this experience" versus "one time you said this, but now you're saying a different thing." One more closely approaches dialog than the other.
>>>And I don't need to ask what your purpose is for doing it. I don't think you should need to question mine.
.......I agree, I shouldn't "need" to question your purpose. I may not even have the "right" to do it. I was wondering, however, so I asked.
>>They are exactly the same.
........I am truly shocked that you believe they are exactly the same, that you cannot see a difference.
>> I believe I also said that I didn't think it was fair of you to have called the posters who chose to leave "selfish," and I asked you to look at it with a little more compassion>>You didn't respond to that.
........Ok, let's see if we can put this one to bed. When you said that, I thought 'hmmm, I called people selfish?' I don't usually call people names, period. I looked for, and could not find, a post in which I called people who left selfish, but it did not seem worth arguing over. I found your statement to be inaccurate.
.....What response was there? I didn't agree with your assessment regarding fairness and compassion. I could have said so, we could rehash words and phrases, begin a flurry of posts, do some mind-reading, argue over semantics, other people could weigh in, we could have ambushes and trick questions, there could be much cutting and pasting from past posts, a plethora of pitfalls waiting to embrace all participants...and, frankly, that seemed like a lot more energy than I wanted to expend.
.......The long and short of the thing is, I said what I thought and felt, you said what you thought and felt. You thought I was unfair, and should be more compassionate. I didn’t agree with you. Beyond this sort of “bottom line” approach, there is not a lot to say, in my opinion. It comes down to, in my opinion, a willingness to accept or not accept that a person feels a certain way or believes a certain thing. I bet it would be really hard to sway you from your opinion that I was unfair, no matter what I said. The point is, to me, it is not my job to try to change you or your position or belief.
>> And Ron has never responded when several of us asked him why he continued to threaten Dr. Bob with an investigation of his site by lawyers.
.......why. I guess I wonder what kind of answer there is to that question. Why he did it. Would any explanation, beyond his obviously being upset, be satisfactory? And, when he says something supportive about the site, what does it accomplish to then remind him that a while back he threatened to sue Dr. Bob?>>That's your right and his. But unanswered concerns like that often lead to bad feelings.
.......very unfortunate, that is. I am very at ease with our having our own different perspectives, even if I disagree with yours, or don’t understand your position on an issue or a conclusion you reach. I still accept that you feel that way, and still can be comfortable with you. I was eventually saddened that the difference in our opinions ended up making such a difference in how we would relate to each other.
>>It's sort of like being snubbed by someone at a party and running into that person somewhere else. The face often triggers a bad feeling before the memory of the incident even returns.>> I hope this answers your questions.
.......Well, your response sort of went hither and yon, but, more importantly, whether it answers the questions or not, I accept that this is the answer you want to give.
Shar
> beardy
poster:shar
thread:6895
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020725/msgs/6942.html