Re: steeee-rike one / amendment

["Hawkins, Darwin" <Darwin.Hawkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree that private messages should be keep private. We all assume the risk
of receiving private correspondence since our e-mail address is there for
everyone to see, as it should be. Some of it has been very good that I have
received. I have found the best way to respond to attacks is to totally
ignore it. I don't give the attacker the satisfaction of a response. "Sticks
and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me!" It's his or
her problem, not mine. If we have this attitude and don't go on the
defensive every time we think someone is messing with the chip on our
shoulder (we all have one or two), the world would be a much better place.
Some people just like to argue for the sake of arguing, but not being very
good at debate, they fall back on attacking the other debater.

I disagree that if I feel I have been attacked, then I have been attacked.
That assumes that I will always interpret the words in the way intended, and
all of you know that there are misunderstandings and the same statement can
mean one thing to one person and another to another. It also assumes that we
are always of sound mind, but I won't go there!

> ----------
> From:         judith richards[SMTP:judithr@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent:         Friday, August 06, 1999 10:15 AM
> Subject:      Re: steeee-rike one / amendment
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: janet paterson <janet313@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: PARKINSN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <PARKINSN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Friday, August 06, 1999 10:16 AM
> Subject: Re: steeee-rike one / amendment
>
>
> >At 10:02 1999/08/06 -0400, i wrote:
> >>hi all
> >>
> >>one of our members received this
> >>uninvited and unsolicited message from another member:
>
>     It seems to me that if the person who received this anonymous
> message wanted it posted to the list, s/he would have posted it to the
> list.
>     Keeping a boiling pot bubbling does not necessarily make good soup.
> Judith
> --
> Judith Richards, London, Ontario, Canada
> judithr@xxxxxxxx
>                           ^^^^
>                            \ /
>                          \  |  /   Today's Research
>                          \\ | //         ...Tomorrow's Cure
>                           \ | /
>                            \|/
>                           `````
> >>
> >>--- Anonymous Sender <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> It is a shame when old people like yourself pick on
> >>> the younger follk.
> >>> Your words speak of a bitter, cold, heart.
> >>> I only hope you shutt up soon so my PD-digests
> >>> aren't filled with more of your posts.
> >>>
> >>> (No first namee) (No last name)
> >>
> >>
> >>janet
> >
> >
> >the above sender is not a member of this list
> >i wonder which PD-digests are meant?
> >
> >janet
> >
> >janet paterson
> >52 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
> >snail-mail: PO Box 171  Almonte  Ontario  K0A 1A0  Canada
> >website: a new voice <>
> >e-mail: <janet313@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>