Posted by mair on November 27, 2002, at 7:49:25
In reply to Re: Dr Bob, Gabbi is not Alphamale » Jonathan, posted by NikkiT2 on November 27, 2002, at 6:03:51
I don't quite understand your thinking here Bob. Mr. Scott was apparently blocked not for his unconscionable offer to direct us all to pictures of Gabbi, but rather for his subsequent insults. Why wasn't the first post, (which some thought should have been deleted) worthy of stronger and more immediate action?
Because you refused to delete this post (or censure Mr. Scott for this specific post), and then went on to block Gabbi, I can only infer that you didn't see Mr. Scott's post as so bad because you accepted as true his assertion that Gabbi and alphamale were the same person. You have, on countless times, censured people for expressing legitimate gripes in an uncivil way. This should be no different. Even if Mr Scott was right, his offer to "expose" Gabbi was wholly inappropriate. Also, if Gabbi and alphamale are the same person, maybe the block is called for. But if they are not (as Gabbi insists), then the block was inexcusably harmful, coming as it did on the heels of Gabbi becoming very much the "accused" all for the sin of trying to step in and lend some civility to the discussion between alphamale and Mr. Scott. I think you need to weigh this before you choose to believe the unproven assertions of any poster. "If you cannot be certain that you are right, don't act as if you are right" might be a good rule to follow in similar circumstances.
Others here have raised very legitimate issues of safety and you have very visibly rallied to the defense of those who have felt "unsafe" even when those feelings were in response to threads that did not involve them personally. Here the threat to Gabbi's safety was all too direct and exceedingly personal and frankly threatening. Why is she entitled to less protection?
Mair
poster:mair
thread:8314
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020918/msgs/8345.html