From: daq@fc.hp.com (Doug Quarnstrom)
Subject: Re: Killefiles ** SPOILER ALERT **
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:58:53 GMT
Organization: SPUGE
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.8 PL6]

From To:cliveg@cix.compulink.co.uk Tue Jan 26 12:58:19 1993
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:58:19 MST
To: cliveg@cix.compulink.co.uk
Subject: Re: Killfiles
Status: RO

> 
> Killfiles are seen by some to be an act of violence against another 
> net.person. My use is as a self protection mechanism:

Actually, I do not mind at all if I am placed in a kill file.
I do not see kill files as wrong, but when someone PUBLICLY
states that they have placed me in a kill file, I consider this
to be rhetorical violence, and my reacion is to wish that I
could cut this person off from all of my posts in the future.
I have respect for my own posts, and I think they contain
humor and valuable observations on various topics, and I
am not keen to give these posts for free to people who
publicly murder me.

Now, your case is a bit different as you seem to have had a reason,
so please allow me to respond to some pertinent points so 
as to clarify my attitude.

> 
> Let me explain:
> 
> judgements about others. *HOWEVER* a trick I learned in 
> alt.sexual.abuse.recovery was to killfile people who consistantly 
> caused me pain -- sometimes because their stories (and subsequent 
> core dumps) were too close to my experiences (and they *HURT*), I 
> know that it'll never stop hurting me, but as I go down the path of 
> healing I develop newer and better ways of dealing with it.

Very well, I understand this, and it is a perfectly reasonable way
of dealing with the problem.  In the future, you may consider
just doing it rather than making a public statement about it.
The public statement carries with it a chastisement regardless of
whether you wish it to or not.  Your reason for killing me is
more than adequate, but publicly stating it indicates an intent
to influence my posting throug passive-agressive means.  If you
have a problem with my style, write to me in e-mail and tell 
me about it.  I am an eminently reasonable guy.

> 
> Doug -- that kind of cynicism is almost exactly like the behaviour 
> one of my abusers used to build a power-base over me, he used it for 
> his own ends and you can all see the results in previous postings.

Very well, this gives you good reason to avoid my posting, but I
want to state publicly that I am not your abuser, nor am I an
abuser in general, and I suspect that any 'smiliarity' in our
cynicism is entirely superficial.

But your reaction to the style IS important, and if my style
causes you pain, by all means IGNORE me.

> It 
> was too close to a memory, you were saying "you respond as you see 
> fit"?, similarly I reserve the right to deal with my own memories in 
> my own way and my own time. 

By all means.  My statement about the rhetorical nature of public
announcement of kill file utilization still stands in the general 
case.  But I do understand why you may need to ignore me.

> At all times I am aware that it is *you* 
> Doug saying these things and when I am stronger I can pull your 
> messages out of the killfile archive and place them back in the 
> thread where they rightfully belong -- but until then I am too weak 
> to really face up to those memories your mannerisms inadvertantly 
> throw up -- it would be the same for any other patron here. I have to 
> deal with memories in a way that will not cause me to have another 
> breakdown.

Do not worry about granting me any integrity.  There is no need
to subject yourself to interaction that is painful to you.

> 
[deletia]

> 
> I'm not looking and don't accept an apology from Doug because *he 
> doesn't have to give me one*. It's not his problem, it's mine -- and 
> I am dealing with it in the best way that I know how. Killfiles are 
> an unfortunate name for my Offline Reader because I have an option 
> set where "killed" messages are spooled off into their own files -- 
> along with the home accounts software, dougs "killed" messages are 
> also backed up so that I can read them when I'm stronger.

It is not your use of the kill file that bugged me.  It was
your public announcement of it.  You could have merely requested there
be no flame war.  You could have contacted me through e-mail.
There was no specific NEED to announce the killing of my posts.
My response was not angry, it was just another ironic observation
based on the assumption that you were merely irritated.  I, of course,
had no real idea of the deeper emotion involved on your part.

But I do agree with you, it is your problem to deal with, not mine.
I make it a point to be fairly polite in this group, and I endeavor
to be sensitive to the deeper problems of which I am aware, but
I have been quite public in my assertion that usenet is not the
best of places for people with deep emotional problems, so while
I can sympathise and empathise to some extent, the ultimate
responsibility for managing your problem is yours, and there is
not much I can do given that I am not willing to subject my
art to the censorship of the anticipated sensitivity of 
of every usenet reader.  It would not be possible to do this
even if I wished to.

> 
> Tanais, sits down and plays with his tail. Nervous and anxious that 
> he's got everything across the way it should be. He doesn't want to 
> be kicked out of the Place for using a killfile. He just wants to 
> "belong".

I think everyone understands you, and you are not going to get kicked
out.  If you wish to ignore me, that is more than fine with me,
I just do not appreciate being subject to the indirect criticism
of a public announcement of kill file status.  I prefer a more direct
confrontation.  

People, kill files and other tools are there for you to use.  There
is no reason for you to waste your time reading anything this is
not interesting to you or things that are overly painful to you.
But the use of these tools does NOT require public announcement.
I think that if you make a public announcement of the intent to
censor someone, that person has every right to respond in whatever
way they see fit.  I consider this sort of public announcement to
be a sort of rhetorical attack, and my response made that clear.

Still, there is no need for Tanais to assume I am angry.  I am not.
Also I fully endorse his need and right to ignore me.  In fact,
it may be good advice in general.

doug

Newsgroups: alt.callahans