Hey Leroy Brown! Others disregard

Sorry to the regulars, but I assume that this email I recieved was a result of a post that I made in this NG, and since the coward sender sent from a free remote email address, I wanted to be sure the bastard sees my reply. "Wassup you immature mother ***er. What are you like 12 years old or so. Did your daddy *** you? Eat my poisonous shit monkey ass rammer." My reply: "What're you hiding from, coward? Why not send from a REAL address? It's easy for a pale, weak *** like yourself to be bold behind a keyboard in his mommy's house. I'm old enough to kick your *** ass if you have balls enough to show your face. *** you. Webb Spilman (my real name, what's yours, coward?)"

Gee, thanks for sharing, Webb. Kurt Steinbock

Quoted text (18 lines)

>Sorry to the regulars, but I assume that this email I recieved was a result >of a post that I made in this NG, and since the coward sender sent from a >free remote email address, I wanted to be sure the bastard sees my reply. >"Wassup you immature mother ***er. What are you like 12 years old or so. >Did your daddy *** you? Eat my poisonous shit monkey ass rammer." >My reply: >"What're you hiding from, coward? Why not send from a REAL address? It's >easy for a pale, weak *** like yourself to be bold behind a keyboard in >his mommy's house. I'm old enough to kick your *** ass if you have balls >enough to show your face. *** you. >Webb Spilman (my real name, what's yours, coward?)"

Kind of inappropriate here but I appreciate your sentiments even if you did lower yourself. JM

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Sorry to the regulars, but I assume that this email I recieved was a result > of a post that I made in this NG, and since the coward sender sent from a > free remote email address, I wanted to be sure the bastard sees my reply. > "Wassup you immature mother ***er. What are you like 12 years old or so. > Did your daddy *** you? Eat my poisonous shit monkey ass rammer." > My reply: > "What're you hiding from, coward? Why not send from a REAL address? It's > easy for a pale, weak *** like yourself to be bold behind a keyboard in > his mommy's house. I'm old enough to kick your *** ass if you have balls > enough to show your face. *** you. > Webb Spilman (my real name, what's yours, coward?)"

The message was clearly marked "others disregard." WS

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Gee, thanks for sharing, Webb. >Kurt Steinbock >>Sorry to the regulars, but I assume that this email I recieved was a

result

Quoted text (17 lines)

>>of a post that I made in this NG, and since the coward sender sent from a >>free remote email address, I wanted to be sure the bastard sees my reply. >>"Wassup you immature mother ***er. What are you like 12 years old or so. >>Did your daddy *** you? Eat my poisonous shit monkey ass rammer." >>My reply: >>"What're you hiding from, coward? Why not send from a REAL address? It's >>easy for a pale, weak *** like yourself to be bold behind a keyboard in >>his mommy's house. I'm old enough to kick your *** ass if you have balls >>enough to show your face. *** you. >>Webb Spilman (my real name, what's yours, coward?)"

I agree, I have since received two messages including my home address (obviously gleaned from a "who,where" search,...what a genius) and a threat to "come and get me." I have disregarded those as I should have the first. WS I appreciate your sentiments even if you did

OOOOH!!! Fight in the schoolyard! Fight in the schoolyard!!

Quoted text (18 lines)

>Sorry to the regulars, but I assume that this email I recieved was a result >of a post that I made in this NG, and since the coward sender sent from a >free remote email address, I wanted to be sure the bastard sees my reply. >"Wassup you immature mother ***er. What are you like 12 years old or so. >Did your daddy *** you? Eat my poisonous shit monkey ass rammer." >My reply: >"What're you hiding from, coward? Why not send from a REAL address? It's >easy for a pale, weak *** like yourself to be bold behind a keyboard in >his mommy's house. I'm old enough to kick your *** ass if you have balls >enough to show your face. *** you. >Webb Spilman (my real name, what's yours, coward?)"

Well, yes, it was marked "others disregard." But if you came across a message to "Leroy Brown -- others disregard," wouldn't you be a little curious?! >The message was clearly marked "others disregard." >WS >>Gee, thanks for sharing, Webb.

Guess it should have been marked "Others disregard - contains material unfit for children or any other form of civilized life and is devoid of any semblance of intelligence or maturity." Jack Rambo www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

." But if you came across a Yeah, but I wouldn't complain about it.

I have to point out that the most disgusting profanity was in the material QUOTED, which was sent to my home. I wish you people would get as outraged about such an invasion as you do about poor judgement speaking freely in a public forum. WS >Guess it should have been marked "Others disregard - contains material unfit >for children or any other form of civilized life and is devoid of any >semblance of intelligence or maturity."

You've sure done your research. Define ***. WS

Ok, I have used poor judgement in my choice of words. But I am just a little curious about something. Why did the polite original post get no/zip/zero/zilch responses trying to be helpful, but when there was something to be righteously outraged about, here comes the flood. Says something about human nature. Are we more eager to attack (and to look for reasons to attack) than to assist our fellow man? Also positively reinforces someone who might be posting only to "stir something up." Gives such a person incentive to use the most foul of language. Lesson learned: Post politely- be ignored Post rudely- have a big time! The only thing I ever wanted was to be able to use my $80 throttle. My apologies to all those whom I have offended and I will make every effort to excersise proper restraint in the future. But be forwarned, there will be others. Webb Spilman

>Guess it should have been marked "Others disregard - contains material unfit >for children or any other form of civilized life and is devoid of any >semblance of intelligence or maturity." >Jack Rambo >www.RaceLive.com/GPaL I like that. Can I save it and use it? SS

> The message was clearly marked "others disregard." > WS In case you hadn't noticed, this is a _public_ forum. Posting anything here is the equivalent of standing out on the street and yelling at the top of your lungs. Your newsgroup posting history reveals that you have no problem with public obscenity. Don't be surprised when some people don't like it. John

[This is getting off-topic but anyway] >You've sure done your research. Yeah, well you know, Dejanews is pretty hi-tech stuff ;-) OK. By *** I mean (loosely) language which is likely, or indeed intended to cause offense to those who read it. In those terms I don't think it's unreasonable to consider some of your (and others') language ***. <Rhetoric> Would you stand in front of several hundred strangers and talk that way over a microphone? Internet anonymity can be very liberating can't it? </Rhetoric> John

Or another test... Consider that you're having your final interview for a new job that you're really hopeful of securing. Ask yourself if you would use the language you're considering in that situation. If the answer is no, it's likely that you suspect that the interviewer might find it offensive. Use the same test whenever you're in public or interacting with people whose taste may not mirror yours. Better yet, elevate your own standard of speech by applying such a test all the time! I've never understood why so many people choose to maintain two separate standards of speech. And I've never tolerated people who were so self-centered as to conduct themselves in a manner that is oblivious to the feelings of others. Thanks, John, for saying that which needs to be said by more people more often! Well put! Jack Rambo www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

Mr. Rambo and Mr. Williams, I guess that you are both correct according the the definition that I am most familiar with: "I don't know how to define, but I know it when I see it." That was said by some learned Supreme Court justice. So I guess if you find it offensive and ***, it is. I will again point out, however, that the most generally *** statement (a reference to an insestuous *** act) in my post was PASTED from an E-mail that was sent to my home, and cannot be construed to represent my preferred level of discourse. Perhaps poor judgement on my part, as was my reply to this coward, but I tend to "give as good [or bad] as I get." You will both notice that your non-profane and (somewhat) respectful posts received non-profane and (somewhat) respectful replys from me. Now, quoting Mr. Rambo: "I've never understood why so many I don't mean to be petty or abusive here, but little of the world is based on the limits of any one person's understanding. I heard many of these "lower standard" words for the first time from my father, who has worked hard all his life in a stressful environment where such language is commonplace. Perhaps others had some different influence in life who was a calmer person (I'm not implying any less hard-working), perhaps more outwardly religious. "I've never I suppose rage can in some cases be a function of ego-centricity. But I'm more concerned with the implications of a "refusal to tolerate" behavior that is not illegal. If one hears someone use a curseword in public do you merely shun that person, or do you feel it is your right to physically *** that person? Or perhaps the middle ground, as you have done here, speak up and say you would prefer not to hear such talk in your presence. Can I decide that there are a few words that I don't like to hear, and start insisting that everyone comply with my wishes? That really would be self-centered. Enough of trying to dig myself out of this hole, you are both 100% correct on the fundamental issue: It is better all-around policy to conduct yourself in a calm, rational, and polite manner all the time. Whether for moral/religious reasons (more likely to go to Heaven), or for Machiavellian reasons (more likely to get what you want). I just don't like do be told what I can and cannot say, barring threats and slander. Now I think I'll go look at some ***ography... W Spilman PS: Quoting Mr. Williams: "Internet anonymity can be very liberating can't it?" Perhaps I cannot be proud of the way I have conducted myself in this forum, but I am proud of the fact that I have sent NO correspondence on the internet anonyomously. That is my real name. Mr Rambo?

Mr. Spilman... E-mail...< The fact that someone else originated the material hardly granted you carte blanche to run with it! Again, try the test that I described. Would you walk into that important interview and start repeating the stuff this other guy wrote? Of course not. calmer person (I'm not implying any less hard-working), perhaps more outwardly religious.< Perhaps we had influences that taught us to respect the rights of others. In this case, the right of others not to be bombarded with material that many find objectionable in this most public of forums. Religion has absolutely nothing to do with it. It's merely common courtesy and decency. feel it is your right to physically *** that person?< From where is this coming? Perhaps you're confusing me with my namesake. Yes, contrary to your suggestion, the real name is Rambo and, though I'm called Jack, it's even John Rambo, in fact. My lack of tolerance takes the form of, for example, being completely unreluctant to ask a loud, vulgar party at a nice restaurant to tone it down a bit if I, my wife, or anyone else finds it objectionable. for Machiavellian reasons (more likely to get what you want).< Moral, religious, Machiavellian? Could it just possibly be something as simple as showing respect for your fellow man? I think so. Jack Rambo www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

Darned good post Jack. Thanks. I truely wish more poeple here would apply those standards to their posts here. My killfile would be much, much smaller and I would enjoy this newsgroup much, much more, as I once did. I don't enjoy it here very much any more and that saddens me greatly.

Quoted text (20 lines)

> Or another test... > Consider that you're having your final interview for a new job that you're > really hopeful of securing. Ask yourself if you would use the language > you're considering in that situation. If the answer is no, it's likely that > you suspect that the interviewer might find it offensive. > Use the same test whenever you're in public or interacting with people whose > taste may not mirror yours. Better yet, elevate your own standard of speech > by applying such a test all the time! I've never understood why so many > people choose to maintain two separate standards of speech. And I've never > tolerated people who were so self-centered as to conduct themselves in a > manner that is oblivious to the feelings of others. > Thanks, John, for saying that which needs to be said by more people more > often! Well put! > Jack Rambo > www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

[Fair comments snipped] By anonymity I guess I mostly meant the tendency for email to dilute the self-consciousness we feel in face to face conversation. Most people find it much easier to speak their mind if they are somehow obscured from the listener. The example of a confession booth in a church springs to mind. Or talk-back on the radio. I agree that bogus or anonymous email addresses (not to be confused with valid, traceable aliases) are pretty lame, though some might consider their use essential. Happily, I think this thread is drawing to a close. :-) John