 |
 |
janet, While I agree 100 percent with what Camilla posted, & her kind, thoughtful wording - I, on the other hand, do not believe that it should become a personal issue. (is David Boots here???) IMHO, I believe that once someone's feelings have been hurt, then that should be the end of the discussion OR an apology should come out of it from the one who did the hurting of feelings. Gosh, I feel like I'm working with the kids I baby-sit now instead of communicating with other adults, which I know we all are. While I'm on the subject of "apology" Barb M, I hope you are reading this because I accept your apology that I do believe I read in one of posts. (I try to teach "my" kids about both sides of hurt feelings) Bonnie daughter of Jim 77/4 In a message dated 8/29/99 3:45:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [log in to unmask] writes: > Dear Janet / List Elf--- > You wrote: > >if anyone can point out to me > >where my words have appeared harsh > >i would be grateful > > Taking this not as defensive, but as a genuine request on your part, I will > try to explain how I see it. > In my opinion, the following exchange was what Michel heard as "hurtful"-- > > Michel wrote: > <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... > > Janet replied: > ...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' > > My "perception" of this paragraph is that it is a personal attack on Michel > who was stating what was, I believe, an accurate summary of many past posts > to the list. I have to admit I cringed when I read it. I realize you may > not have intended it as an attack, but as vigorous discourse, and haven't > understood how your words may come across to others. Unfortunately, as > you have often pointed out, perceptions can vary---and that is why I AGAIN > suggest that when such disagreements arise they may better be clarified > one-to-one rather than on the whole list---this has become, after all , a > "non-pd" matter . No one is suggesting censorship or throttling your > voice, or trying to control you--- but you ASKED to have this pointed out > to you, so I am granting your request, in the hope that you may be able to > temper your tone when you realize how it can affect others. > > > > > Camilla Flintermann, CG for Peter 81/70/55 > Oxford, Ohio > http://www.newcountry.nu/pd/members/camilla/one.htm > <[log in to unmask]> > > "Ask me about the CARE list for > Caregivers of Parkinsonians ! " >