rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (11/15/84)
I feel no compunctions about reposting this. It is not from private mail, but rather from a public posting in net.news by one Charlie Wingate. Perhaps it will shed some light on his true feelings towards members of other religions, and on the real thrusts behind his statements and articles. > It's not at all clear that distribution works. (It's also damn hard to > tell when it isn't working; I suppose some Jew-baiting in net.religion.jewish > would be an easy way to find out!) [CHARLIE WINGATE] For those who wish to see the entire article, it may be found in newsgroup net.news (Article <umcp-cs.1006>), and those using vnews or some other tool that implements a *p*arent command will find that such a command will print the article in question for your perusal while you are reading this article. (I, for one, back up my statements with documentaion rather than saying "I already answered that!") -- Now I've lost my train of thought. I'll have to catch the bus of thought. Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr
bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) (11/16/84)
In article <pyuxd.269> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >I feel no compunctions about reposting this. It is not from private mail, >but rather from a public posting in net.news by one Charlie Wingate. Perhaps >it will shed some light on his true feelings towards members of other >religions, and on the real thrusts behind his statements and articles. I see Rich is contributing to the betterment of mankind again. I agree that Charley's choice of wording and example was in bad taste (to say the least) but I'm not sure he doesn't have the right to apologize before being branded as an anti-semite. Many of us keep a firm hand on our pulse each day to try to overcome the various forms of racism and sexism instilled in us as members of this society. Occasionally we slip. Sometimes we slip badly. A little tolerance is in order. If an individual continually uses offensive or derogatory language, that is another matter. If they defend that language, that is another matter still. Fanning the flames of prejudice at the drop of a hat, however, does nobody any good. -- Byron C. Howes ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (11/17/84)
In article <269@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >I feel no compunctions about reposting this. It is not from private mail, >but rather from a public posting in net.news by one Charlie Wingate. Perhaps >it will shed some light on his true feelings towards members of other >religions, and on the real thrusts behind his statements and articles. > >> It's not at all clear that distribution works. (It's also damn hard to >> tell when it isn't working; I suppose some Jew-baiting in net.religion.jewish >> would be an easy way to find out!) [CHARLIE WINGATE] > >For those who wish to see the entire article, it may be found in newsgroup >net.news (Article <umcp-cs.1006>), and those using vnews or some other tool >that implements a *p*arent command will find that such a command will print >the article in question for your perusal while you are reading this article. >(I, for one, back up my statements with documentaion rather than saying "I >already answered that!") >-- >Now I've lost my train of thought. I'll have to catch the bus of thought. > Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr Since the form of Rich's announcement implies that my net.news posting shows me to be hopelessly anti-semetic (as do the newsgroups he selected), I am going to explain why I made such a statement, so that those who are not familiar with Rich Rosen will not be led to the wrong conclusion. Those who subscribe to net.test may have noticed an article there in which I was trying to determine if there were some failures in the distribution feature. These articles met with resounding silence. I then put up the aformentioned articles in net.news in hopes of finding a wider audience. The comment about jew-baiting was intended to point up the fact that I would have been able to get responses by posting something sensitive and inflammatory in a group where I would be sure to find lots of readers who would object. Rich's article implies that I picked net.religion.jewish because I have some particular grudge or something against jews. Those who actually know me know this is not the case. That group came to mind as the natural result of two months of argument with Yirmiyahu and Rich (who has an apparently jewish surname, I notice); I could just as well have chosen to suggest pro-rape articles in net.women. Some people obviously cannot recognize a joke when they see one. Some people recognize the joke but would have it taken for something else to further their own causes. Those who have gone to the trouble to follow the argument between Rich and I over the last month will be aware that Rich would rather put his beliefs concerning my thoughts into my mouth, rather than argue against what I have actually said. Those who didn't: well, I can hardly blame you. Judging from what I have read, Rich is either utterly ignorant of my beliefs, or is engaging in a campaign of distortion which I for one find rather unethical. I would prefer to believe the former; I can be convinced of the latter. I have no intentions of posting to net.religion.jewish past this article. I have found the hebrew content higher than what I can deal with, and as a christian I don't find the dicussions particularly interesting. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe Where true charity and love are found, god himself is there.
mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (11/19/84)
My final words: Judging from the reaction, my remark was obviously a bad idea. I obviously should have attached 15 :-)s to it; it was meant as a jest, and I did not ever have any intention to post such inflamatory articles to net.religion.jewish. I am sorry if it offended anyone. It's quite obvious to me that attempts at humor have no place on the net except where explicitly labelled. Charley Wingate
tynor@gitpyr.UUCP (Steve Tynor) (11/22/84)
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charley Wingate: > > Some people obviously cannot recognize a joke when they see one. Some people > recognize the joke but would have it taken for something else to further > their own causes. Those who have gone to the trouble to follow the argument It is customary to indicate jokes that are not readily obvious (as is this one...) with a ":-)" (symbolic for 'tounge in cheek') It's sometimes very difficult to tell when someone is serious and when he/she is being sarcastic. When I'm standing face to face with someone, It's sometimes easy to tell (a facial expression, tone of voice, etc.) but when reading a net.message, we have only the text of the "joke". Don't trust your net.audience to be able to read your mind. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Eschew Obfuscation. Steve Tynor Georgia Instutute of Technology ...{akgua, allegra, amd, harpo, hplabs, ihnp4, masscomp, ut-ngp, rlgvax, sb1, uf-cgrl, unmvax, ut-sally} !gatech!gitpyr!tynor