Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2006, at 7:50:19
In reply to Lou's request for clarification from Dr. Hsiung, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2006, at 7:26:20
> DR. Hsiung,
> I am requesting that you clarify what you mean in your reply to me;
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/715974.html
> [...Sorry, but I don't think I have anything else to add at this time...] to my request for clarification in the post;
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/713673.html
> In post 713673, I had requested that you clarify your statement to me;[...the question for me hasn't been whether they're discriminatory, but whether it's {more helpful} to focus on the past or on the present...].
> Your statement arrises out of my concern that there are posts here that one can read presently that have statements IMO that have been used for centuries by those that want to arrouse antisemitic feelings in a community as in historical state-sponsored antisemitism.
> It is my deep conviction that it could be good for the community as a whole for the administration here to take affirmative action now and notate those statements as being uncivil here to show that the forum repudiates all forms of antisemitism. For if one match can start a forest fire, could not one statement that has the potential IMO to arrouse antisemitic feelings, that is left unsanctioned here, have the potential for some others to think that the match has kindled a fire and that the fire is still burning?
> Using this as an introduction to this, it is your reply to me that I am asking clarification for so that I could have a better understanding of what you mean by it. At this time, I am unsure as to what you mean by the nature of the grammatical structure of your reply to me.
> The next post by me will address my concerns for you to clarify as to the grammatical structure and what you mean in your reply;
> [...Sorry, but I don't think I have anything else to add at this time...]
> Lou PilderDr. Hsiung,
Now let us look at the grammatical structure of your statement;
[..Sorry, But I don't think I have anything else to addd at this time...].
The grammatical structure of your reply could have more than one interpretation depending on what you mean by parts of your statement.
In,{Sorry}, this word has many connotations that can be made certain if you could clarify which connotation you intend for the word to mean. I am unsure as to which one you are intending here.
One connotation of {sorry} is that of (regret). If your intentions are to use the word {sorry} as a regret, then could you clarify why you regret and then why you could not reply to my requets for clarification so that in that case there could be no regret since my requests would then be accommodated?
Another connotation to {sorry}, could be {pity}. If your intention is to pity me, could you clarify if the {pity} is because you think that I have a {rightfull} request and you will not clarify my request as to , let's say, how it could be >more helpful< to the Jewish community to leave the statements that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings unnotated as being uncivil?
Another connotation to {sorry}, could be >ridicule<. If this is your intent in your use of the word, could you take into consideration my feelings?
Another connotation to {sorry}, is {scorn}. If this is your intention of the use of the word, could you take into consideration that there is the potential IMO to feel it that way?
Another connotation to {sorry} could be {contemplating}. If that is your intention to use the word that way, then could you end your contemplation in a >reasonable< amount of time and address my requests for clarification?
My next post will address some other aspects of the grammatical structure of your reply to me,[...Sorry, but I don't think..add at this time...]
Lou Pilder
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:716428
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061202/msgs/716429.html