My option is very easy: ignoring someone requires no effort, except
for the suppressing the urge to respond to someone's outrageous
statements. Believe me, it much easier than quitting smoking. After
a day or two you will no longer feel the urge to hit the reply button.
And you will feel empowerment as an individual. This shift happens one
person at a time. No consensus is required. No debate. You have all
had the debate inside your heads anyway.
Think about it.
BTW. This is my one and only post on the subject.
"Kevin M. Kelly" wrote:
>
> John B. Reynolds wrote:
> >If it comes to a vote, I will vote against removing them. I
> >believe that we
> >should resist the natural impulse to define criticism out of existence by
> >declaring it "disruptive".
>
> I agree! If this organization cannot strong withstand criticism then we
> haven't got much of a chance in the "real world."
>
> Who's to decide what's "disruptive"--we are not always in agreement on "the
> fact" or "the point."
>
> Email is a terrible means of developing interpersonal relationships. Anyone
> else ever had to get on the telephone to clarify the apparent hostile tone
> of an email message?
>
> --
> This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
> a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
> For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/
-- Dan SteinbergSYNTHESIS:Law & Technology 35, du Ravin Box 532, RR1 phone: (613) 794-5356 Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398 J0X 1N0 e-mail:dstein@travel-net.com
-- This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz. For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/