From: marcy@sqwest.wimsey.bc.ca (Marcy Thompson)
Subject: Re: A few more authors *FLAMES???????*
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:01:49 GMT


In Owen Veenstra writes:

>>>>      Unfortunately, it seems that a few people out there are obsessed with
>>>>  a *very* select number of authors (Koontz/King...), so I figure that I'll 
>>>>  liven things up with a few names I consider worth reading.

Laurel responds:

>>>I've said it before, but I'll say it again: you are not under obligation to
>>>answer (or read for that matter) any messages on things you don't like to
>>>discuss...

Later, in response to being told she overreacted, Laurel adds:

>Maybe he did not say that King and Koontz should not be discussed, but if
>someone says there are a select few people who are "obsessed" with the authors
>(which he did), I resent that because there is no way I am not being referred
>to here as obsessed. 

Well, I personally think you are over-reacting in a big way. I have left
Owen Veenstra's original posting in this response, because I want to challenge
you to point out where he says that Laurel A Povazan is obsessed with King
and Koontz.

Anyone who reads this group for more than one day, say, has seen you post
about lots of other authors, including some rather obscure ones. On the
other hand, there *are* some alt.horror personalities who never post about
anything other than King and Koontz. Don't you think it's remotely possible
that he could have been referring to posters who post about King and Koontz
*only*? 

>Alex Forrest in "Fatal Attraction" was
>obsessed. I am not. Maybe I got too defensive when I wrote that message but do
>you see my point?

I'd say you got so incredibly defensive that you went ballistic. He didn't
say you were obsessed with King and Koontz, he didn't say it was bad to be
obsessed with King and Koontz, and he didn't say that those who are obsessed
with those two writers should never post. He simply said that some posters
seem obsessed with those two writers, but he's not, and here are some other
authors he'd like to discuss.

You responded by telling him that people who want to post about King and 
Koontz should be allowed to do so, and then you informed him in an entirely 
condescending manner that he didn't have to read what he didn't want to read, 
and as a finale to this extremely defensive response to something that 
cannot even remotely be read as a personal attack on you, you flung the 
concept of free speech in his face, as though he had attempted to 
abbrogate yours.

When people called you on your over-reaction, you insisted that you were
justified in being so defensive, because he called you "obsessed". 

Please. Try to get a grip on yourself. No one called you obsessed. No one
told you to stop responding to people's postings about King and Koontz.
No one even said they didn't want to read said postings. 

As far as seeing your point, no, I don't. To the best of my ability to
figure out what your point *is*, I think you are saying that because he
called you obsessed you have a responsibility to over-react. And I
don't agree.

Marcy


-- 

Marcy Thompson		
  SoftQuad (West)			
    marcy@sq.com