Bunny Trails

[Bootstrap]

Boot, you have asked me not to respond to your posts, which I have been honoring. Two times, in private discussions, I have pointed out that it seems inconsistent for you to ask me not to respond to your posts, only for you to continue responding to mine. Since it appears that this is not going to change, I feel sort of forced to respond publicly so that the rest of the forum knows, why, other than this post (which is not a response to the actual post), I have not been responding to yours.

How long ago was that, Gary? And I think I have said that you should feel free to respond to me since then. If not, you certainly should. I don't think it's sustainable to have a forum where some people are not allowed to respond to others.

[temporal1]

Boot, you have asked me not to respond to your posts, which I have been honoring. Two times, in private discussions, I have pointed out that it seems inconsistent for you to ask me not to respond to your posts, only for you to continue responding to mine. Since it appears that this is not going to change, I feel sort of forced to respond publicly so that the rest of the forum knows, why, other than this post (which is not a response to the actual post), I have not been responding to yours.

How long ago was that, Gary? And I think I have said that you should feel free to respond to me since then. If not, you certainly should. I don't think it's sustainable to have a forum where some people are not allowed to respond to others.

(i think) there is a distinction between “not being allowed” by rule, and simply voluntarily honoring a personal request, as Gary chose to, and, years ago, as i chose to. something to think about?

that’s all i have to say on it. sorry to interrupt.

[GaryK]

Boot, you have asked me not to respond to your posts, which I have been honoring. Two times, in private discussions, I have pointed out that it seems inconsistent for you to ask me not to respond to your posts, only for you to continue responding to mine. Since it appears that this is not going to change, I feel sort of forced to respond publicly so that the rest of the forum knows, why, other than this post (which is not a response to the actual post), I have not been responding to yours.

How long ago was that, Gary? And I think I have said that you should feel free to respond to me since then. If not, you certainly should. I don't think it's sustainable to have a forum where some people are not allowed to respond to others.

I don't recall that you said I should feel free to respond since then and I was simply honoring your request.

[Bootstrap]

I don't recall that you said I should feel free to respond since then and I was simply honoring your request.

Please do feel free to respond. Or not, as you choose. And in general, I have no problem with you responding to my posts, and i learn usefui things from some of the things you say.

[Josh]

I don't recall that you said I should feel free to respond since then and I was simply honoring your request.

Please do feel free to respond. Or not, as you choose. And in general, I have no problem with you responding to my posts, and i learn usefui things from some of the things you say.

Boot,

Just a thought here. Perhaps it would be good to seek to reconcile with Gary (maybe via email or a phone call), and then report back here with the level of comfort in both of you discoursing here. I am fine with any level: maybe the two of you will feel it’s best not to respond on here at all, maybe will feel it’s fine to, etc.

Gary’s brother used to be my pastor and I feel I learned a lot from him including handling conflict, even when the other person was very much in the wrong. And Gary’s reputation is excellent. He has done a lot of work to build an inclusive congregation that seeks to include instead of avoid people from all social classes, and where they try to reach out to the business with a much needed and appreciated business, and avoid exploitative business models. I feel he may have a great deal to offer you.

[Bootstrap]

Just a thought here. Perhaps it would be good to seek to reconcile with Gary (maybe via email or a phone call), and then report back here with the level of comfort in both of you discoursing here. I am fine with any level: maybe the two of you will feel it’s best not to respond on here at all, maybe will feel it’s fine to, etc.

I would welcome that. I suspect phone or Zoom might be better than email. I would also be happy to have a mediator if that would be helpful.

Gary’s brother used to be my pastor and I feel I learned a lot from him including handling conflict, even when the other person was very much in the wrong. And Gary’s reputation is excellent. He has done a lot of work to build an inclusive congregation that seeks to include instead of avoid people from all social classes, and where they try to reach out to the business with a much needed and appreciated business, and avoid exploitative business models. I feel he may have a great deal to offer you.

I'm very open to that.

[temporal1]

GaryK is one of the forum’s treasures, every one of his few posts are of depth, and worthy of considered thoughtfulness. For all.
Gary and others make this forum worth the time required to sift through the noise.

i race to read anything he posts to anyone. he and others here.

this is my recommendation to those who become frustrated with the noise:
as in a library, identify “authors” you respect, seek out their work, ignore the rest. easier said than done.

sorry to say, the internet has a way of presenting the useless on par with the worthy; in the past, it was easy to ignore tabloids, etc., the internet puts tabloids in everyone’s faces 24/7. worse, the internet has tempted all news sources and consumers to acquire tabloid mentality!

it’s tiring. this forum reflects it. noise dominates by quantity, not quality. i’m an offender.

lots to learn about using the internet. we remain in primitive stages. i hope.

[GaryK]

Just a thought here. Perhaps it would be good to seek to reconcile with Gary (maybe via email or a phone call), and then report back here with the level of comfort in both of you discoursing here. I am fine with any level: maybe the two of you will feel it’s best not to respond on here at all, maybe will feel it’s fine to, etc.

I would welcome that. I suspect phone or Zoom might be better than email. I would also be happy to have a mediator if that would be helpful.

Gary’s brother used to be my pastor and I feel I learned a lot from him including handling conflict, even when the other person was very much in the wrong. And Gary’s reputation is excellent. He has done a lot of work to build an inclusive congregation that seeks to include instead of avoid people from all social classes, and where they try to reach out to the business with a much needed and appreciated business, and avoid exploitative business models. I feel he may have a great deal to offer you.

I'm very open to that.

The accusation was made publicly that I frequently question the motive of all kinds of news sources. Either the accusation is true or it's not. I don't think the accusation is true, but I could be wrong. If it is true, I want to know about it and own up to it. If you still think the accusation is true, could I kindly ask you to provide an example? Is that asking too much? If you don't want to do that, I'm just going to drop it and since you have now given me the green light to respond to your posts I will probably interact with you again on a limited basis.

[Robert]

And the tactic of attacking the messenger instead of the message has, again, been played.

Is this from the one who has banned certain common news sources?

It is because the messenger is so biased and giving so much false information intentionally and repeatedly. I am not attacking anyone one, I am addressing the intentional misinformation of certain news outlets.

[JimFoxvog]

And the tactic of attacking the messenger instead of the message has, again, been played.

Is this from the one who has banned certain common news sources?

It is because the messenger is so biased and giving so much false information intentionally and repeatedly. I am not attacking anyone one, I am addressing the intentional misinformation of certain news outlets.

And Tucker Carlson and Fox News aren't prime examples of news outlets with intentional misinformation?