General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

"Reading things into posts"

Started by tobyjones · · Last activity · 1 post · 348 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
14 March 2004
Last activity
14 March 2004
Original author
tobyjones
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
348
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Viral infection isolated for quarantine below.

    While loudly crying "antisemitic statement" elsewhere, you
    carefully


    reseed

    Quoted message said:

    the noxious dogma in a more sophisticated form. That you
    phrase it as an apparent hypothetical serves only to
    further disguise the malice contained therein.


    ===============
    What malice? I care little what happened over 2000 years
    ago, or who did
    it. Don't be like Jan and start reading things into
    people's posts that are NOT there.
    --
    Kim Please note, I don't wish to get involved in any
    personal conflicts between the posters here. I'm simply
    looking for answers.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I have explained elsewhere what I meant. I was speaking of a
    particular dogma, which I consider to be inherently
    malicious. Teachings are given to unsuspecting students or
    seekers, teachings which appear innocent but which contain
    the seeds of prejudice, and which I believe were placed
    there with intention to seed prejudice and division.

    _That said_, I agree, at times we can and do read things
    into the posts of others which are not there. I have had it
    done in response to my posts, and sometimes it takes more
    time and energy to sort it out than it's worth, so I
    sometimes tend to live with an ongoing misrepresentation or
    misunderstanding for a while. It is better to try and sort
    it out, if that happens, but - not always possible to do so
    simply and clearly.

    I think I over-reacted and did think there was the
    possibility of prejudice or something like that in your
    post, the first time I read it and immediately replied.
    I also think that I realised the error within a very
    short time after that, but failed to go back and see
    what I had written in that response. In retrospect, I
    should have done so.

    I'm glad you took time to allow for sorting it out.

    toby joe

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.