From: Alex Ramonsky (alex@ramonsky.com)
Date: Thu Sep 19 2002 - 12:27:49 MDT
>
>
An open letter to Lee, from Alex Ramonsky
Lee;
I have no political stance or opinions whatsoever. (That was a
qualifier). I am not writing to criticise you, or in your defense. I
don't know you.
I sometimes find your method of discussion impossible to follow
logically. This may be because I'm not smart enough, or it might be
because you're not coherent enough.
I have sometimes suspected that you were deliberately winding people up,
because you thought they had a lower EQ (emotional intelligence
quotient) than you do. However, I am often accused of doing this myself,
when I had no such intention at all, so I may be misunderstanding you there.
You do seem to have good, rational, emotional control, and sometimes
when you have that skill, other people seem excessively emotional and it
is very tempting to mock them. Only you know the truth about whether you
have done this.
_Any_ use of personal abuse or personal derogatory comments or claims
without proof (such as 'so-and-so is naive and stupid because they don't
agree with me') is abhorrent to me and has no place in a rational
argument. Only you can know if you have stooped to this.
Pidgeonholing or stereotyping an individual because they have an
opposing point of view (such as 'oh well, so-and-so would feel happier
if we were all nazis') is also abhorrent to me and has no place in a
rational argument. Only you can know if you have dome this.
Deliberately trying to confuse a person by jumping from subject to
subject or changing the subject completely or making arbitrary
connections where none actually exist because other people are too
confused or emotional to notice is mean and has no place in a rational
argument. Only you can know if you have done this.
Assuming someone is less intelligent than you because they are less able
to control their emotions or are particularly sensitive to emotive
issues is not interaction; it causes action / reaction and its only
results are mistrust and unhappiness. Only you know if you do this.
In short, _none of us_ can be inside of your head and know your
thoughts. We are completely dependent on your goodwill and honesty to
give us a clear picture of what you are like and what your intentions are.
Only _you_ know the truth about yourself. I think it is completely wrong
for anyone to judge your intentions without the information inside your
mind. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to convince
people where you're at and what your intentions are, using only text and
the occasional emoticon.I am extraordinarily bad at that skill myself so
I would be very hesitant to lay blame. But some things are to me
unacceptable and I have listed them in this email. How about confirming
or denying them for everyone?
I personally do not manage to follow your discussions very well, so I
don't have a clear idea of what you're like yet. This might be because I
rarely read threads about politics, having no interest in them whatsoever.
Last comment: how about, everybody you seem to have annoyed, explaining
_in very simple terms_ what exactly they are annoyed about (actual
examples, please, as in they must quote you, then say 'I find this
unacceptable because...' At least then you would have a basis to work
from in explaining yourself.
Good luck everybody
Ramonsky
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:10 MST