Re: New Pete diary

["Scott Schrade" <schrade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> What kind of nonsense is that?  If no one said it, why would they feel that
> way now?

No one said they would be upset if Pete apologized but I was just curious if
anyone out there felt uncomfortable over the fact that he did.  I'm only asking
this question today, in light of Pete's apology.  I don't recall this facet of the 
argument/discussion being previously kicked around.

> Who?  I'm giving you the chance to say, not me, not Jon, not Jim in Co.  So,
> who?  Who was a smug, self-serving fuckhead?  Who were "all" of those
> people?  Who, who...Who, who?

Excluding my rude, over-the-top labeling, any of youse people who argued
*against* the need for Pete to apologize would be the smug, self-serving
fuckheads.  Excluding the rude labeling, of course.  Again. 

> I feel like it was a very thoughtful, but unnecessary gesture.  I appreciate
> it, but I didn't expect it. 

So you "appreciate" Pete's "very thoughtful" gesture, but I & others were 
erroneous in hoping for it?  What exactly then was the problem with us de-
siring to "appreciate" a "very thoughtful" apology from Pete?  Why were we
looked upon as being selfish for having this hope when it sounds like it's
making *you* feel pretty good, too?

> Is that so hard to understand?

It helps when you actually tell me how you feel.  Thank you.

> Just because he apologized, doesn't mean he owed it to us.  

So, Pete just tossed that apology out there as an afterthought?  If he didn't
"owe" it to us (i.e. feel he needed to actually say it), then why did he include
it?  

Keets's Cosmic Balance must've been off kilter.  The apology was indeed
"owed" to some of us fans.  Whether it was owed to *you* or not doesn't
matter.  It was owed to me.  And I got it.

> Can't you grasp the concept that I for one, didn't have a problem with the 
> idea that Pete would apologize, just the idea that he would be judged for 
> not doing so.

Does your butt hurt from sitting on that fence?   ;-)  Yet you yourself were
judging him in your belief that he *didn't* need to apologize.  You formulated
your own mindset where you could be content with a Pete who could disass-
ociate himself from any feeling of sorrow.  I wasn't able to do that.  And, yes,
that would've been included in the long list of actions & words I use to judge 
the man, as today's apology will be used in the same manner.   

> Pete heard you!  Oh, give me a break.  

Hey!  Where were you when I was being accused of writing things that would
make Pete afraid to go out on the road?!  I could've used your help then!  

OK, Pete didn't hear me.  How about I put it in a more credible manner:  God
heard my prayers. 

> This member of the "Pete owes me nothing" camp thinks you've got an ego 
> the size of Akron

You know what else I got?  An apology from Pete!  ;-p  Na, na, na-na, na!
Apparently, Pete wasn't of your "no-need-for-an-apology" mindset.  Ha!  Too
bad.  Better luck guessing next time.

BTW, Akron's only a mid-sized city so my ego has plenty of room to grow.
And Pete's apology today brings the term "land acquisition" to mind.  ;-)


- SCHRADE in Akron