Replies

OK you guys, I can agree with this in principle, but when it is something that effects ALL of us, I expect such a thing to be announced.

I felt that I needed to spread that freepmail to certain posters, and Vade felt that it was important enough to be shared with everyone. I agree with his assessment, because THAT Freepmail HAD to be discussed in the open.

It was an announcement of intent and a done deal to decieve, and therefore effected EVERYONE on the agreement thread.

I feel that most Freepmail is for my eyes and for my eyes only, and I keep that in mind, UNTIL something like this comes along to disrupt that thinking. I used my discretion, and I feel that that should be the rule.

A Freepmail is considered private, unless the recipient feels that it is important enough to be shared.

I trust the discretion of the recipient of the freepmail to do with that freepmail that which he feels is most appropriate to the situation.

If it is important enough that recipient feels that it needs to be shared, the recipient can do it one of 2 ways, privately, send it to those he feels have a need to see it, and if he feels it is important enough to share with everyone, he should do so in a public thread.

When a sender sends me an E-mail, that E-mail becomes MINE, to do with as I feel is necassary. I will never discuss an e-mail with anyone else, unless, as this one was, something that SHOULD HAVE been shared to all particapants, so that everyone would understand exactly what happened and why.

Again, at the discretion of the recipient, the Freepmail is theirs to do with as they see fit, once it hits their mailbox.

Again, at the discretion of the recipient, the Freepmail is theirs to do with as they see fit, once it hits their mailbox.

Right. We have a rule and we have a customary expectation. The custom is that gentlemen/ladies keep private correspondence private. The rule is that it's the recipient's call.

The way it tends to work with me is that I'm all for the courtly niceties if you are. If not--if you want to get down and dirty with me--do it in a medium that leaves no evidence, or be willing to get down and dirty in public.

I felt that I needed to spread that freepmail to certain posters, and Vade felt that it was important enough to be shared with everyone. I agree with his assessment, because THAT Freepmail HAD to be discussed in the open.

No it did not. Relying on the posting at the beginning of the thread on the Agreement, I had been under the impression that ALS had nevertheless signed on while refusing to use the troll provision himself. I had not seen his post later on where he made his position perfectly clear. I do not know if you did or not, I am not here to place blame on you or anyone:

no sorry, the agreement I signed on to "did not pass" and I clearly stated I would not support an agreement that sanctioned name calling, as everyone knows.
332 posted on 08/08/2003 7:02 PM PDT by ALS

He indeed had argued long and hard against a provision which would allow insults since he (and I and many others) thought the whole purpose of the agreement was to exactly stop such conduct. He kept to his promise and he announced it publicly. His withdrawal was thus perfectly honorable.

Next he started on the Nazi/Communist attack which he felt he was not bound not to make since he had not agreed to it. Amazingly, the evolutionists who had in part signed on because of the inclusion of that provision, instead of withdrawing from the discussion continued it -until a certain point at which I guess they deemed they were losing the discussion. Then the attacks came upon ALS as before the agreement.

Apparently to win the argument and make ALS look bad, this e-mail was posted. Let's remember one of the reasons I stated why such should not be posted - because it can in no way be verified. Thus if nothing else it breaks something agreed upon which was to substantiate charges against people so they can defend themselves.

Given all that the post looked bad and that's why it was spread around and posted. However, what has not been talked about and why this posting was doubly wrong was the circumstances on which it was sent. There has never been any love lost between you and ALS. I am as certain as that the sun comes out in the morning that the two of you had been goading each other through e-mails for a long time (even though I have not seen any such other than what has been posted here from either side - and do not want to). This e-mail was part of that goading. I know for sure that ALS wanted a proper agreement ending insults and he always insisted this provision was an attempt to break the agreement. The mail was thus to tell you you had lost instead of won, part of the ongoing goading between the two of you. Which brings me back to why e-mails should not be disclosed - being private no defense is possible - which is why it was posted and which is why the posting of private e-mails is inexcusable, should never be done and as far as i understand the agreement it is forbidden under it under the clause that no charges should be made without verification - private e-mail is by its nature unverifiable.

Finally, let me just say this, I decided to post the above for two reasons:
1. think someone's reputation has been unjustly besmirched and I want to do what I can to correct that.
2. I think the above shows quite well why private e-mails should never be posted and their use cannot be excused.

And while all can disagree as to the above being my motive, that is indeed my motive and I post it as an object lesson as to what should not be done rather than to open old wounds.