SC - All Members

[Michael F. Gunter]

While the need for simple common courtesy is important if we are going
to get along, I feel we also need to observe some kind of self-imposed
limit on hair-trigger responses of an even remotely controversial
nature.  On those occasions when I feel the urge to respond to a post
with something that seems obvious to me, it's becoming more and more
common for a flood of nearly identical responses to land in my mailbox,
even though the response is directed at some specific person on the
list. This is one reason why folks have been hearing a bit less from me
than they had been in previous weeks, which might conceivably be
regarded as a blessing in disguise ;  ).

I think if we could hold off for a few minutes before responding, and
ask ourselves if A) the response is a necessary one, and B) it's likely
the same response will be repeated by several others, we might save
bandwidth, stress, and the occasional hard feelings.

Another point I'd like to make is that if someone posts a reference or
recipe for a food that appears to be non-"period", it isn't always
strictly necessary to point it out. If you are genuinely making an
inquiry into an issue you feel your own research may have neglected, as
I think, for instance, Tibor did, that is one thing. On the other hand,
if your immediate response is an angry, "'Taint period, McGee!", you
probably need to consider the fact that people usually don't
deliberately post the wrong information on purpose, and that if they do
post something that disagrees with your own [extensive] research, it's
either because they haven't done said [extensive] research, or they
don't care, neither one of which is a crime.

You have now regained control of your television set...

Adamantius
- -- Soapboxes R Us -- No rant too big or too small, etc.