» Site Navigation |
|
» Online Users: 683 |
0 members and 683 guests |
No Members online |
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM. |
|
![Closed Thread](http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/images/buttons/threadclosed.gif) |
|
04-09-2003, 05:23 PM
|
#1666
|
Retired
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,193
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by barely_legal
You're missing the point again. Don't send pms to someone you don't know and are currently engaged in a flame war with unless you expect them to be made public. The word "private" in "private message" isn't a contract.
|
I'm not missing the point. I learned that lesson a couple days ago.
However, that doesn't make forwarding PMs any less shitty especially when they have nothing to do with the people they're being forwarded to. In this case, I was trying to address something I saw as a personal issue between me and paigow, and she decided to involve other people. To me, that's shitty.
In my mind, if someone takes up an issue they have with me in private, I wouldn't make that coversation public, even if I thought the person was off his or her rocker. Not because I am bound not to take it public, but because, in actuality, the person is showing a bit of discretion by addressing things in private and I appreciate that level of discretion. I mean, maybe there was a miscommunication and the person just wanted an explanation. Should other people be involved in that case?
Now, if the person is doing nothing more than flinging insults, then there should be no expectation of privacy, but that's not what happened here. While my tone may have been a bit confrontational, all that happened was that Paigow said something that made me wonder and I asked her about it in private. That made me a psycho, I guess, and justified sending around the "crazy" PMs she got from me.
In the end, I acknowledge this whole thing was all my fault. I should have known that paigow is incapable of using discretion when addressing personal matters.
edited: I see you posted something I agree with, namely, that if the PM is purely an insult, you run the risk of being exposed as a spineless jerk, but that isn't what happened with me and paigow.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:27 PM
|
#1667
|
Southern charmer
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: At the Great Altar of Passive Entertainment
Posts: 7,033
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
He's running a conflicts check to see if he can pitch to represent someone other than Penske here.
|
Nah. (Though you should see my pitch materials!)
Truth be told, I have mixed feelings about my representation of Penske. Sure, there was the glare of the spotlight. There were the courthouse press conferences in Seattle, NYC, LA, SF, Houston, Minneapolis, Tokyo and Beijing. There was that opportunity to smack down that prima donna David Boies. (God, that felt good). There were the girls, the booze, the drugs, the cavorting in mounds of mismatched footwear. Boy, the stories I could tell.
But though fame is sweet, it is also fleeting. And god knows, it don't pay the bills (PenskeBucks(tm) are not considered legal tender outside of the 4th Avenue Starbucks, it appears).
So I've decided not to expand this little loss leader, and instead keep the bulk on my practice on something more practical and lucrative, like insurance coverage.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:29 PM
|
#1668
|
usually superfluous
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: the comfy chair
Posts: 434
|
Hockey predictions
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
I give you the following hockey predictions:
The Flyers will not be able to consistently protect Mister Bean in the playoffs, and they will not generate enough offense to get past the Leafs. Owen Nolan scores more than Slave at a drunken FB get-together, and Belfour stops Amonte and Roenick.
|
I'm not sure who Mister Bean is, but I'm sure once the Flyers figure out who he is Hitchcock will come up with a way to protect him. Flyers in 5. In my heart I think they will sweep, but I don;t want to be too much of a homer. They are too deep and the Leafs are too banged up.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:37 PM
|
#1669
|
Guest
|
Dealbreakers
Quote:
Originally posted by Sparklehorse
I thought you were going to post the one about the woman who didn't smile in her pictures because she didn't have teeth.
|
What, you don't like gum-jobs?
j(feeling very wicked this afternoon)l :devil:
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:39 PM
|
#1670
|
Consigliere
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pelosi Land!
Posts: 9,477
|
Hockey predictions
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
So, I ended up getting a *sweet* deal on tickets for the Rangers playoff game at MSG, and .....
|
That is just fucking low.
not(amused)7yS
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:43 PM
|
#1671
|
Consigliere
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pelosi Land!
Posts: 9,477
|
Hockey predictions
Quote:
soup sandwich
...I don't want to be too much of a homer...
|
Look pal, we don't care one iota about your sexual orientation.
Hockey fandom is a "big tent"
not7y(everyone is Canadian)S
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:49 PM
|
#1672
|
Guest
|
A variation on my favorite stupidity defense
the classic "I was kidding" comeback. "It as an attempted dig at x". I didnt mean it literally.
Quit while youi are not THAT far behind. No pun.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mister_Ruysbroeck
Um, barely, I never said the PMs were forwarded to you. I never mentioned your name at all. It was an attempted dig at paigow, and nothing more.
|
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:53 PM
|
#1673
|
Guest
|
Hockey predictions
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
So, I ended up getting a *sweet* deal on tickets for the Rangers playoff game at MSG, and ..... uh, what's that you say?
Seriously, I give you the following hockey predictions:[list=1]Colorado wins the West. Patrick Waaaaaaaaah will avenge that game seven loss last year.
The Senators will make it past the Isles.
The Flyers will not be able to consistently protect Mister Bean in the playoffs, and they will not generate enough offense to get past the Leafs. Owen Nolan scores more than Slave at a drunken FB get-together, and Belfour stops Amonte and Roenick.
More after the first games are played.[/list=1]
Not (hit someone!) Bob
|
Apropos of nothing, but Not Bob, your avatar looke like how I imagine you to look. Sort of Wink Martindale meets the second Darrin from Bewitched meets Fred MacMurray
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:57 PM
|
#1674
|
Guest
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by barely_legal
I agree with you somewhat, and I wouldn't forward a pm that I received from someone who wanted to communicate something personal to me in private (which is why I haven't posted the PM Thurgreed sent me about his fears that he might be gay b/c he really really loves Clay). But if someone were to PM me out of the blue to insult me (I'm not saying that's what MR did -- I have no idea what the pms were about b/c I wasn't on the aforementioned vaulted forward list) I would not feel like it was a betrayal to share them with other people.
So everybody in this community be warned -- I've done it already today and I will do it again! Insult me in private at your own peril!
|
MR PMed me to ask me a bizarrely paranoid question. When I told him it was a bizarrely paranoid question, he insluted me. I am not a forwarder by nature as I hate when people do that shit to me. But if any of you ever ask me a bizarrely paranoid questino and then proceed to insult me on PM for pointing out that your question is bizarrely paraniod, I reserve the right to forward the PM.
I hope that this does not violate any internet etquette.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:58 PM
|
#1675
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: State of Chaos
Posts: 8,197
|
A variation on my favorite stupidity defense
Quote:
Originally posted by paigowprincess
the classic "I was kidding" comeback. "It as an attempted dig at x". I didnt mean it literally.
Quit while youi are not THAT far behind. No pun.
|
Oh come on now. If I could handle your heat and were willing to flame you, I might say that this is your favorite stupidity defense because you also like to use it yourself.
Oh, right, I know, it was intended to be self-deprecating.
Hang around on these Boards long enough and anything that you say will be packaged as the "classic [ineffective response]".
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 05:59 PM
|
#1676
|
Guest
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by Mister_Ruysbroeck
I'm not missing the point. I learned that lesson a couple days ago.
However, that doesn't make forwarding PMs any less shitty especially when they have nothing to do with the people they're being forwarded to. In this case, I was trying to address something I saw as a personal issue between me and paigow, and she decided to involve other people. To me, that's shitty.
In my mind, if someone takes up an issue they have with me in private, I wouldn't make that coversation public, even if I thought the person was off his or her rocker. Not because I am bound not to take it public, but because, in actuality, the person is showing a bit of discretion by addressing things in private and I appreciate that level of discretion. I mean, maybe there was a miscommunication and the person just wanted an explanation. Should other people be involved in that case?
Now, if the person is doing nothing more than flinging insults, then there should be no expectation of privacy, but that's not what happened here. While my tone may have been a bit confrontational, all that happened was that Paigow said something that made me wonder and I asked her about it in private. That made me a psycho, I guess, and justified sending around the "crazy" PMs she got from me.
In the end, I acknowledge this whole thing was all my fault. I should have known that paigow is incapable of using discretion when addressing personal matters.
edited: I see you posted something I agree with, namely, that if the PM is purely an insult, you run the risk of being exposed as a spineless jerk, but that isn't what happened with me and paigow.
|
MR, you have finally flipped your wig. You have fallen into my little trap and do not know whether I have forwarded the PMs or not and will never know bc I like to toy with your little brain.
Andif you continue to mischaracterize your psycho PMs, I may have to make my policy retrospective and post the PMS here to boot. You are welcome to post my responses by the way. I dont think I said anything I was ashamed of. But then, I would never PM someone to say something totally mortifying to me. THats just stupid.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 06:02 PM
|
#1677
|
Rageaholic
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: On the margins.
Posts: 3,507
|
Hockey predictions
Quote:
Originally posted by paigowprincess
Apropos of nothing, but Not Bob, your avatar looke like how I imagine you to look. Sort of Wink Martindale meets the second Darrin from Bewitched meets Fred MacMurray
|
Are you implying that Wink Martindale and Fred MacMurray were also gays? NTTAWWT
spookyfish
__________________
Some people say I need anger management. I say fuck them.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 06:03 PM
|
#1678
|
[intentionally omitted]
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 18,597
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by paigowprincess
When I told him it was a bizarrely paranoid question, he insluted me.
|
You did this by yourself long ago.
TM
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 06:05 PM
|
#1679
|
Guest
|
A variation on my favorite stupidity defense
Quote:
Originally posted by robustpuppy
Oh come on now. If I could handle your heat and were willing to flame you, I might say that this is your favorite stupidity defense because you also like to use it yourself.
Oh, right, I know, it was intended to be self-deprecating.
Hang around on these Boards long enough and anything that you say will be packaged as the "classic [ineffective response]".
|
Dont get touchy bc you used it yourself a few days ago.
|
|
|
04-09-2003, 06:06 PM
|
#1680
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: State of Chaos
Posts: 8,197
|
MBA inspired question:
Quote:
Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
You did this by yourself long ago.
TM
|
TM, I can just picture your reaction when you read that line. Did you rub your hands together in glee?
|
|
|
![Closed Thread](http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/images/buttons/threadclosed.gif) |
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|