From: keREM0VEvin_c75@yahMUNGEoo.com.bogus   
      
   On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 22:56:52 +0100, Helen Hall   
    wrote:   
   >I don't think Tina meant to imply disagreement with your viewpoint and I   
   >don't disagree with it either, but the thread was showing signs of   
   >rising heat and therefore was not appropriate where it was.   
      
   I really don't care to argue my viewpoint, and for a very basic   
   reason:  Some people are hunters, others aren't, and east is east and   
   west is west and never the twain shall meet. If someone thinks hunting   
   is barbaric, then so be it. That didn't ruffle my fur.   
      
   Rather, it was the manner in which it was done which set me on edge.   
   In particular the term "idiocy" and a fiat declaration in a   
   non-moderated newsgroup. I would not have been offended if this had   
   been made as a suggestion rather than a command, and if a neutral term   
   had been used. For example:   
      
   "Guys: I think this argument on morality is one of the things we all   
   agreed should be discussed in rec.arts.sf.misc."   
      
   In particularly, spelling out the group name rather than use rasm   
   would have done wonders to clarify what was going on. Since I skim the   
   topics, I did not notice that it had been agreed to create (I assume   
   the newsgroup was created for this purpose) rasm for hot button   
   topics.   
      
   - Kevin J. Cheek   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)