Quote Originally Posted by ggiese View Post
Newfie - I think baka hit the nail on the head.

Most of the "players" in this latest dust up have not been here to understand the context of the argument. Kinda like walking into a husband and wife screaming at each other and saying it's a bunch of noise and not in the least bit useful. Sure - at the moment is stinks - but it should (theoretically) lead to resolution (one way or the other). Hard for someone to judge who's right or wrong because there is no context - you have no history behind the current dispute. Siding with one or the other is really not the appropriate thing to do. Believe me - I've been there and done that. One of the most dangerous things you can do is to step in the middle of that...

Most of the current people upset by these events were not here when CC came to this board. Many were not here in previous disputes. Quite a few were not here for the genesis of the current dispute. Personal relationships between "disputees" and some of the people expressing frustrations with the current malaise did develop AFTER the dispute started - which would logically color (or colour, for you Canadians in the audience) your judgment. Honestly think about it - it really may not be in your means to understand what's going on. So, logically, opinions that you express will most likely ruffle one side or the other.


BTW - despite your best efforts to deny it - this is about as close as you can get to a full blown democracy. With all the craziness usually associated with being able to say pretty much what you want. There are limits - as in yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. What CC is saying is challenging, no doubt - but it does not rise to the level of "fire". Learn to accept there are differing viewpoints, and learn to argue with a mind that is not clouded by personal feelings.

In other words - develop a thick skin...

I think you gat it wrong here, George...

Most of the "current" people have either been offended personally or have hade their sensibilities offended in one way or another by Bill. It has nothing to do with what happened before they got here, but what they have seen after they got here. To change your analogy a bit, it's more like walking in on a husband and wife fighting and having the husband slug you because you don't agree with his side of the argument. In one breath you say it will lead to a resolution, in the next you say that we shouldn't comment because we don't know what went on over a year ago. It doesn't make sense.

And a full blown democracy would probably mean majority rule. I think most people here would like to see the fighting that has apparantly gone on for a long time come to an end. That would mean that people who have a disagreement should resolve it or just let it die. But this won't happen as long as there are people here who want to fight forever.

I understand friendship and I respect standing by a friend, but don't you ever get tired of defending this guy? Why not let him stand on his own? He hates me because I am friends with Sid, but friend or no friend, I let Sid defend himself. It seems that you are in the unenviable position of having to come in and sweep up the messes that Bill makes.

And as for developing a thick skin, maybe you ought to have a little chat with Bill about that.