From: Michael Healy (mjhealy@kcnet.com)
Date: 02/26/03-02:18:50 PM Z
Dave (and others...!), I hope you didn't take my gum posting in the wrong
way. I was trying to sound theatrical and to mock my reluctance to try
something new; but when I reread it, it does sound like a person could
decide that I was attacking you or the gum process. What I meant to do was
to depict my change of mind in an exaggerated tone. What I did NOT mean to
do was to insult you or give rise to a flame war over personalities or
processes.
For some reason I have always passed gum over as a minor process. Why?
Because some of its examples remind me of the Impressionists? To be honest,
I can't even say why. And this "reason" forms the basis of a LOT of
ideology, doesn't it, in and out of alt-processes?!
So when I read your email, I thought to myself, Darn it, Dave, okay. I will
look into this after all. And I also thought, what an embarrassing position
to
get myself into, trying a thing after making such a stink against it. Kind
of like going home as an adult and eating canned peas in front of the
parents after all. In my post, I kind of exaggerated my own
"kicking/screaming" part of this "conversion" process for effect. After all,
a suit of clothes DOES fit funny if you've shooed it away as many times as I
have in my mind. It would make a fitting twist, too, considering my earlier
stance, if I WERE won over to calling it king.
Rereading my post, though, I think I should have used less theatrical
wording. What I meant to poke fun at were my own attitude toward change and
the difficulty of overcoming internal resistance. That's what I was poking
fun at, Dave, NOT you.
Mike Healy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 03/04/03-09:19:10 AM Z CST