From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan R. Hagan)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps
Subject: Re: DOOL: In Defense of Carly
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:57:19 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

EFS6MEF@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU writes:

><lots of stuff deleted>                                                 at.

>Susan, I do not like the scene.  But that's just my opinion about
>a soap opera.  You do like it and that's also your opinion.  That's

No, I didn't like the scene.  

>fine.  This list is supposed to be about soap discussions.  I, however
>must object to being labelled a conservative, a prud and (I think)
>a religious zealot.  I am none of those things.  You don't know me,
>so I think it unfair that you judge me.  I would hazard this is also
>why your post has engendered such a response.  You attacked the posters,
>not so much our views about a soap, but our values and beliefs.  I'd

I didn't not mean to *attack* the posters and label them as anything.
I *was* and am still referring to the views expressed here.  I'm 
sorry if the words I chose to use made my intentions unclear.

I honestly wanted to hold a rational discussion on this subject.
I still do.  It seems that I have made a couple of "off-the-cuff" remarks
which people took as insults.  They were not meant that way.  
I will be very careful, from now on, to point out my opinions of the
viewpoints rather than speculating on the type of person who might
have such a viewpoint.

In all honesty, it is my impression that the great majority of my remarks
were focused on the views expressed by this group and on the personalities
of the posters.  It is also my impression that some, do not separate
an attack on an opinion from an attack on a person.

>venture to say you think we do the same thing with Carly.  But Carly
>is fictional.  And the comments on Crystal started when she publically

Yes, Carly is fictional, but Crystall is not.  I think she is a boring 
actress.

>proclaimed herself proud of a scene many of us found stupid at best
>and reprehensible and degrading at its worst, weeks ago.

Yes, and it was my opinion that some of those comments were extreme and
unwarranted, so I said so.  

>I don't think it's a witch hunt (I doubt Carly would float), but
>she's an unpopular character we have to watch 5 days a week.  We either
>turn off the show, which is an option many people have taken, or we
>use the ff button and vent to the list.  Maybe you'd be more comfortable
>if we labelled negative postings.  Then you could just delete them and
>and not have to read them.  Just an idea.

I have no problem with negative postings.  However when I see a negative
posting which is based on, what I consider to be a gross misinterpretation,
I have to say so and ask questions.

Perhaps you would like to be able say whatever you like about whomever you
like without being questioned?  But if that were true you would be posting
here.

Just because I challenge your opinion, doesn't mean that I am attacking
you.  Knowing what people think, isn't always enough. Sometimes its
important to know why.  If the reason doesn't make sense, then its important
to ask questions until it does.


-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps