Janet:  I wish I were as eloquent as you.  I agree with all the thoughts you
expressed here. I have a similar sitiation with a relative.  I used to send
her the various humorous things I ran across on the net along with other
pertinent stuff;  she asked me not to send any more jokes - she didn't have
time to read them and didn't appreciate them anyway. ( she has very little
sense of humor ). I told her she has to stop and smell the roses once in a
while and she said she has other ways to "smell the roses".  Oh well, as the
feller said " It takes all kinds"
Keep up the good work
Bob Anibal
----- Original Message -----
From: janet paterson <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 1999 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: NON-PD / ??? / this list


> hi all
>
> At 00:01 1999/08/28 -0400, michel wrote, in part:
> >The Sparkle extension of this program aims for the same goal: to
> >allow free expression for our community.  This charge was assumed
> >by three volunteers who believed that the main list was getting
> >too crowded with extraneous non PD material...
>
> 'free expression' for our community
> has been 'allowed' all along
> i thought
>
> i don't believe that this list can be 'too crowded'
> i believe that the term 'too crowded'
> is a personal judgement call based on limited perceptions
>
> some perceived the list as 'too crowded' at the 500 mark
> i have never perceived the list as such
> i have no pre-conceived notions of how the list 'should' be
>
> i don't believe that non-pd material is 'extraneous'
> i believe that the term 'extraneous'
> is a personal judgement call based on narrow perceptions
>
> some perceive humour as extraneous
> some perceive hobbies as extraneous
> some perceive china patterns as extraneous
> i have never perceived anything
> written in to this list by a genuine listmember as extraneous
> i have no pre-conceived notions of what the subject matter 'should' be
>
> >I agree that 'pigs' were overtaking the main purpose of the list..
>
> i don't agree that pigs were 'overtaking' the main purpose of the list
> i believe that the term 'overtaking'
> is a personal judgement call based on narrow perceptions
>
> i believe that the subject pigs was considered foolish by some members
> i believe that those members are entitled to their opinion
> i do not believe that those members' opinions
> entitle them to censor the list contents
>
> >because our people, i.e. PWP and CG, needed to express their joy
> >as well as their troubles...
>
> my point exactly
> my hope may be your fear
> my joy may be your red flag
> does that entitle me to censor your opinion?
> does that entitle you to censor mine?
>
> <But the worse part of that, is that it repelled many newcomers
> >who wanted to discuss strictly PD matters, and some old timers
> >who could not cope with the inordinate size or number of the E-mail,
> >and felt forced to abandon us...
>
> if you have proof or verification of the stated 'facts'
> please share them
>
> if not, i suggest that your statements are not only false
> but negative and inflammatory and awfulizing and catastrophizing
> viz the emotional baggage of your words
> 'worst' 'repelled' 'inordinate' 'forced' and 'abandon'
>
> in the past 22 days
> there have been 73 list leavers
> and there have been 73 list joiners
>
> i suggest that
> there have been 73 different reasons for leaving
> and 73 different reasons for joining
>
> we are individual humans, not lemmings
>
> we are individuals with complex characters
>
> i cannot separate hilary's
> passion and fight from her humour and her silliness
>
> i cannot separate ken's
> goofiness from his sensitivity and compassion
>
> i cannot separate john's
> 'fantastic' talent from his warmth and his insight
>
> i wouldn't want to if i could
>
> categorizing and pigeon-holing
> speak to me of a desire for 'control' or 'power'
>
> however,
> i have been learning that
> i can control nothing outside of myself
> hard lines, that
> but a core truth which needs to be acknowledged and accepted
> before any genuine growth can take place
>
> i can control nothing outside of myself
> i can control only me
>
> i am responsible for nothing outside of myself
> i am responsible only for me
>
>
> janet
>
> janet paterson
> 52 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
> po box 171, almonte, ontario, canada, K0A 1A0
> a new voice: <http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Village/6263/>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>