I never read mail sent to this site unless it is sent by my provider or somebody
I know, so if you write it, you're just wasting your time.
Some anal retentive individual will probably pipe up right now, and go
"That's a violation of Netiquette!". Well, what if it is? What is
netiquette, aside from the collected whims of those trolls who had so
little to do with their time, that they were able to band together, and
harass or terrorise those who disagreed with them, into leaving? It was
never voted on, in any legitimate democratic forum. Nor was it ever backed
up by any argument, other than, "it's true because we say so, and if you
disobey us, we'll get you" - the argument of a thug. And a pretty whiny
thug, at that, given the sobbing that follows when these "rules" aren't
enforced, and someone has the good sense to defy them.
This "rule" that one has to take e-mail in response to a web page or
post, is a classic example of this. It is billed as a "corrective measure"
for Usenet, and the web. Really? What is it intended to correct, and how
is it intended to do so? The context answers the question. It is intended
to correct the "problem" of some posting things that the majority doesn't
like. Or, proves displeasing to a large clique that likes to think of
itself as the majority regardless of what the actual numbers are. The
"corrective measure" is that those offering dissent will be sent abusive,
or even threatening or obscene e-mail, until they are silenced, simply
because they don't want to deal with it any more. So, when one is asked,
"Why don't you respect this rule?", one has been asked "Why don't you
cooperate in your own harassment?".
How about, because that would be stupidity, not civility? What's
about this crowd is that they'll go on to complain about the offensive
nature, of the person's refusal to allow them to put offensive material in
his mailbox, and then try to defend this by labeling any dissent with
their own positions as being "offensive". It is a true reflection of the
early 90s lynch mob attitude toward free speech - an attitude that has
lingered in a forum that it did so much to mold.
Well, I don't want to deal with it any more, either. I'm tired of
with raving lunatics who start foaming at the mouth if you disagree with
them over the slightest detail - or even if you agree with them, but
haven't phrased your agreement in the way they prefer, making sure to get
their permission to do so in advance before speaking. Whether the socially
inept (and literally) unwashed masses of Usenet like it or not, nobody
owes them the least bit of attention. It is a privilege, not a right, to
have meaningful access to someone else's mailbox, and it is a privilege
that has been abused one time too many, as far as I'm concerned. So, I'm
withdrawing it, as IS my right. Like I said, I don't want to deal with it
any more, and I think that's what some would like. I'm just not going to
let my solution to the problem be dictated to me by some obnoxious
halfwit, just because he'll throw a tantrum if I don't.
Some who read this will be perfectly reasonable individuals, who may
had to deal with a little online abuse themselves. I'll regret their
absence from my screen, but I'm sure they'll understand. As for the
others, get over it. This is how it is, and how it will be. If it bothers
you, you do always have the option of growing up. As some of you would be
pushing 30 right about now, may I recommend that you do so, soon ?
To those who come to this site with open minds, and friendly
I'm sorry that you have to witness this rant, but it's a real issue, and
had to be addressed. To the rest, B'bye. Don't let the virtual door hit
you in the - well, I think you can finish that.