From: davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: alt.config
Subject: Re: now batting: Bill Davidsen! (was Re: No, don't)
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:02:37 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

Note that jik posted this with followup to "poster" so that no one would
ever see any dissenting opinions.


In article <JIK.93Jan22010843@pit-manager.mit.edu>, jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes:
| In article <1993Jan21.171216.4480@crd.ge.com> davidsen@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen) writes:
| 
|      IMHO
| 
| Isn't it amazing what people are willing to say about other people on
| the Usenet?  I wonder how many people really do, as the "A Primer on
| How to Work With the Usenet Community" posting in
| news.announce.newusers says, "Never Forget that the Person on the
| Other Side is Human."  

  How about "Rules for posting to Usenet" as a document to read? I'll
quote a paragraph:

"It is generally considered rude to post private e-mail correspondence
without the permission of the author of that mail.  Furthermore, under
copyright statutes, the author of the e-mail possesses a copyright on
mail that he or she wrote; posting it to the net or mailing it on to
others without permission of the author is likely a violation of that
copyright as well as being rude."


| And it's all a "humble opinion."  Quite frankly, Mr. Davidsen, anyone
| with the least bit of humility wouldn't baselessly insult people with
| in a Usenet newsgroup.  I don't see anything "humble" about your words
| at all.

  Yes, when something is a subjective judgement, I try to make it clear
that I'm not stating a fact. Something others often forget (and I may,
from time to time, as well, but I try).

| After seeing Mr. Davidsen's posting, I became curious about exactly
| why he would have it in for me, so I went searching through my E-mail
| archives to find out.  I found several exchanges of E-mail between him
| and me:
|
|	[ I've deleted almost 200 lines from this... ]

  I really apologise for saying you were unpleasant but technically
competent, that's no longer my opinion and I retract the statement. I
believe that this posting not only affirms my original opinion that you
are unpleasant and arrogant, but I don't believe you are as competent
as I thought, since in a single posting, you:

  1) assumed the moral high ground quoting net postings to the group
     where you control content.
  2) then clearly ignored the guidelines in that and other postings in
     your group:
	- quoting personal mail in a posting (and in minimal context, of
	  course). 
	- with liberal use of "[sic]" to highlight spelling (actually
	  typos, I don't care enough about you to both checking my mail
	  to you).

  I thought I was being magnanimous by saying you did a good job, even
though you have persisted in sending mail to me after I asked you to
stop (how long did it take for you to realize that "Please take me off
your mailing list" is a canned response from my mailer).

  I promise I will never defend your personality, competence, spelling,
politics or morals again!

--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    Keyboard controller has been disabled, press F1 to continue.