 |
 |
Harlan: As the originator of the Parkinsaw, MI weekly Cronicles, I may be responsible for originating the pig issue. I created the imaginary organization called Sty-King, with president Chubby Lebarre, to ameliorate the lowly public image of the common pig. From that point, readers grabbed that common thread and created still another alternate world where pigs fly and use blowguns to shoot down invading razorbacks. Parkinsaw. MI was created as an imaginary community of parkinsonians living together trying to cope with their disease. It was my intention to make a contribution to the lives of people with Parkinson's disease by hopefully making them laugh, chuckle and keep smiling so as not to allow PD to rob them of their God-given smile. I used pigs, palmetto bugs, wolverines, tasmanian devils, and a host of human characters like Old Rasmussen who has contracted with a deep-freeze company with a slogan "We keep you cold so you won't grow old", because he was tired of suffering the trials of his disease while waiting for a cure. Now, here's where I need your help in understanding your position: Is it your proposal that all regularly posted items of a humorous nature be relegated to a separate list, while reserving the current list for more serious technical and medical matters directly pertaining to the mechanics of Parkinson's disease, in spite of the concept that humor and laughter are inseperable from the coping process? Or, are you saying that humor from the nether world of the porker saga should belong off list, but other non-porcine humorous submissions are welcome? In other words are you saying that all humor should be on a Parkinson's Humor list, which the members of our current list should access if they want a daily chuckle, and our current list be reserved for non-humorous posts? You state that in your view 99% of our members don't give a snout about pigs. Are you using "pigs" as a catch-all for any humor posting, when you say that people are looking for serious answers to questions, and we give them pigs? Could one answer to a serious question be to lighten up and look at the lighter side of the disease as a coping mechanism? Lastly, if you accept the premise that in fact humorous postings may be beneficial to many sufferers of Parkinson's, irrespective of the nature or species which provide the humor, and we carefully identify our postings as NON-PD, doesn't the good derived from the humor trump the relatively minor inconvenience of hitting the delete key when you see the words: "Michigan Wolverines Repell an Attack on Porky Porkinson"? Although I certainly have a dog er, pig, in this discussion, I assure you that I delete or file the 200 or so messages I receive every day as pat of my daily routine. I know you've heard these words before, but for those people who are looking for serious answers to their serious questions, and reading the Parkinsaw Chronicles would be akin to getting hit in the eye with a sharp stick, then couldn't they merely not read it? Eventually, the author(s) of the non-PD postings will get the message that no one is laughing. John Bjork Parkinsaw, MI (An imaginary community of Parkinsonians living together in Michigan's Upper Peninsula) www.mikeauldridge/parknson.htm Harlan Williams, Jr. wrote: > Carole: > > I am not supporting David and I am not supporting you! I have taken the > middle road and called for a new list, a Parkinson's Humor list. I was not > out to attack you, merely to state the obvious. Less than 1% of the people > on the list actively partake in the Pigs humor. This is not an attack on > you, merely an observation that perhaps there should be a second list or an > off-list method of communicating between those who want to subscribe to pig > humor and those who don't. After all, perhaps as many as 99% of the list > members couldn't give a damn about the pigs. These people are looking for > answers to serious questions, and instead of answers, we give them pigs. > This simply does not seem right to me. > > As to David's post directly to you, he should have the balls to post such > messages to the entire list. I totally agree with you here. > > Harlan