Re: Replies To Bird The Hick Post

["Greg Odegaard" <gmodegaa@longvred.rmc.com>]

Well not to be stickler to the details, but since you asked how your posts
have been a personal attack, without evidence or foundation, here you go. 
These are actual copies from your posts over the last couple of days.  

As you can probably imagine, I agreed more or less with Dennis's take on
the matter.  I along with many probably waited by the computer for your
predictable response to take offense with another post that didn't agree
100% with your obviously correct point of view.

So with no further ado, for your ranting enjoyment, your own words;

"I still say his criticism is totally unfounded and mostly bitter, for a
reason I
don't understand."

"Man, what the heck is your problem?"

"I would love to see how you would like standing up under the level
of criticism you put on him."

"I really wonder what is causing this irritation for you.  This is truly
irrational, absurd, and cheap criticism.  It sounds personal.  Did he beat
you up or something?"

At least we know who can dish it out, but can't take it.

Later,
Greg
----------
> From: Matt Healy <mhealy@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu>
> To: celtics@igtc.COM
> Subject: Re: Replies To Bird The Hick Post
> Date: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 1:42 PM
> 
> >Hey give the guy a break.  These are his opinions and while I disagree
with
> >some of his post I agree with some.  The point is I saw nothing in his
post
> >that should have resulted in the attacks by M. Healy and a few others. 
Just
> >because you don't agree with him does not give you the right to a
> >verabl(typed) assault on him.  Rebut all you like but don't do it in a
mean
> >spirited or personal manner.
> 
> Please re-read my post, or else post the part that you claim is a
personal
> attack on the author.  I think you'll actually find it is well thought
out
> criticism of the authors attacks on Bird, not a personal attack on the
> author at all.  I have no problem with criticism of me or anyone else,
but
> I don't think it is fair if it is unwarranted and unsubstantiated.  The
> author says "Larry is nothing but a hick", "hasn't learned how to get
along
> in the world off the basketball court", "is living off his past laurels",
> "is arrogant", and "living in the past".  When I disagree with the post,
> now *I'M* the one making personal attacks?  I never said he didn't have a
> right to his opinion, only that I thought it was unfounded.  Now I am the
> one being called mean-spirited.  If you (or anyone else) thinks that his
> post was accurate, thats fine.  But lets have some reasons why Bird has a
> responsibility to praise the Fleet Center, the rebuilding of the Celtics,
> or the all-star game, among other claims that I found unfair, and so
> criticized.
> 
> I take offense at your accusation that I made a personal attack on
someone
> on this list, when you do not show the example of what you are talking
> about, because it is not true.
> 
> Matt
>