Odegaard

["Jim Meninno" <Jim_Meninno@hotmail.com>]

----- Original Message -----  From: <nevans@knox.edu>

> Claudia, if you find someone's messages offensive you don't have to read
> them.

The problem, Noah, is that you have a right ot know what is being said about
you to other people.  To filter someone gives them free reign to say what
they will about you to a group of people who's respect you value.

Here's a reply I wrote to a post of Joe's that I had hoped I wouldn't have
to send.

----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Hironaka <j.hironaka@unesco.org>

>I don't have a particularly thick skin, but I do think it goes with
>the territory to have this sort of diverse (and frankly entertaining)
>banter. Maybe some of my posts are on-topic and interesting but lets say
>others are self-indulgent, too self-referential, too long and repetitive
>or too extreme (e.g. Fortson rules! etc.)

I'm with you here, buddy.  The "quirkyness" of many posters on this list are
one of its main attractions.  And, when we get out of line, or start
thinking too much of ourselves, there's always someone there to bring us
back down to Earth.

>If Greg Ode flamed me royally for a bad post, it wouldn't mean that he
>expects us to regard him as the holy grand arbiter of list BS detection.

What if he didn't stop flaming you?  What if every time you popped up to
post anything he felt the need to reply with put downs.  What if he
continually insulted you in replys to other people, even when you hadn't
posted anything for months?  It is in these endless petty grudges (e.g. with
McMaster, Blazerfan/Claudia, etc.) that Ode goes too far. If someone makes
an ass of themselves, then fine, reply.  Be sarcastic.  Be insulting, if you
must.  But do we need to have ongoing feuds with people?  To be sure there
will be people with whom you frequently disagree.  You just see things
differently.  But that is an entirely different situation than what we are
talking about here.

>I think he actually goes to extremes playing the role of a "crackpot" just
>to make it clear he isn't doing any of this to win over our sympathy and
>support.

I think you're being too generous, perhaps a little naive.

>Those sorts of posts from Celts fans are something you need to balance out
>the over-seriousness of our debates sometimes.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

>Sure, I wish Tom Murphy, Kim Malo, Noah, "Snoopy" and Doctor Moses >more
regularly contributed to the list, since they are all educated fans and love
>the team. Granted these people probably just have better things to do now,
>but if they may have left the Celts list because of the
uncivility/boorishness of
>one or two people including myself, then I would have to rethink my
opinion.

Many people that Greg has targeted have expressed being "uncomfortable"
posting to the list.  A lot of them are probably not missed at all, as I do
acknowledge that he often targets people who are only here to make trouble.
But some are not, and that disturbs me.

I want to be clear in stating that I'm not suggesting censoring Greg, or
anyone else.  But I do think that, if we're going to "police" ourselves,
then it's incumbent on us to speak up from time to time if we think someone
has gone too far.

Jim