Re: that NY Times article

From: Judy Seigel <jseigel_at_panix.com>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2006 04:11:13 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <Pine.NEB.4.63.0605020342480.19911@panix1.panix.com>

>
>> But what you seem to have failed to grasp is that the community includes
>> Dave Rose .... and other people who don't agree with you
about
>> politics, and room and respect must be offered and restraint must be
>> exercised so that people of all political stances can feel comfortable
>> belonging here and discussing photography.

It's beyond me how anyone who has followed this list for more than 30
seconds could think Dave Rose was put off for his politics or for not
"agreeing" with whomever... It was exactly his failure to allow room, or
respect, or restraint. He was put off because he would come out of his
silence like a rabid attack dog when ANYONE, from Susan Huber to Sandy
King -- I don't include myself because after all I deserve it - made an
offhand comment that hurt his feelings (which was stunningly easy to
do)..This wasn't just kill the messenger, it was kill anyone who passed
the messenger on his/her way to the laundromat and grind them into dust in
terms so extreme, so vitriolic, they were frightening just to read on the
monitor.

But I seriously doubt it was his "politics" at issue...It was a rage that
certain topics tapped. I mean he was beyond fury with Sandy for correcting
a statistic... I'd said Mr C's approval rating was 28% & Sandy said, very
matter-of-factly -- no emotion either way -- it's 18%.

Which drove Dave beyond the bend... A great performance, of course... but
hardly "respectful" of a colleague, of the list, of fact, or for that
matter of himself (let alone *politics*).

J.
Received on 05/02/06-02:11:51 AM Z

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 06/23/06-10:10:52 AM Z CST