 |
 |
hi ivan and all this is a very preliminary and reactionary reply to your post i will be replying at more length later but one aspect jumped out at me: At 04:15 99/01/11 -0500, you wrote, in part: >...And then I get hate mail for the second day >in a row from a male on our List.... >This morning, I got on the List as usual. A letter from someone >(I won't say his name) who wrote me an angry private post... >He said I have to remember that this List has 1600 people, >and it is not my list!... >Just yesterday, a letter from another male had said >that I must stop pushing the "GAY" issue... >I hope both men get over that hating feeling... further to my arguments pro-public messages and anti-private messages i feel very strongly that any private messages like these need to be shared with the whole list the senders need to realize that their sad little invectives have none of the intended effect of pain on the recipient [what a laugh - as if they could!] and that their own pain will be exposed to the entire list in order to help them get over it how childish and immature and sad that some of our siblings feel the need to treat another sibling this way if someone has something to say to me they can say it in front of my cyber-family if i am angry i will share it with you all if i am morose i will share it with you all if i am elated i will share it with you all as far as i am concerned that's what you all are there for some of us might need to go back to kindergarten to re-learn what sharing means ... but that's only my opinion; i could be wrong your cyber-sis janet ps hate-mail is a crime why do you feel the need to protect the identity of the perpetrator? janet paterson - 51 now /41 dx /37 onset - almonte/ontario/canada <http://www.newcountry.nu/pd/members/janet/index.htm> [log in to unmask]