Posted by Lou Pilder on July 3, 2014, at 7:06:28
In reply to To clarify » Lou Pilder, posted by Dinah on July 2, 2014, at 16:02:49
> I blocked myself in the hope that you would consider me suitably punished and leave me alone. Instead you did the opposite. Had you left me alone, I'd have honored my block.
>
> In case there is any doubt, I was not admitting to fostering anti-semetism. I was referring to your "anxieties" and your interpretations of my actions, posted over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. I have a long history of support of the Jewish faith and Jewish people. The idea of promoting anti-semetism is so abhorrent to me that it makes me physically ill to see the accusations, or rather the "anxieties" about me posted over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
>
> In my mind, accusing someone of something so heinous as fostering anti semetism is defamation of character. Of course, in Dr. Bob's mind, it isn't. And he runs Babble.
>
> I have admitted to having been uncivil to you, even though my intent was to argue with Dr. Bob, not to try to hurt you. I regret any hurt I might have caused you.
>
> That's *all* I regret and all I admit to.
>
> Clearly my attempt to appease you failed. You will continue to post your "anxieties" towards me over and over and over and over and over again. And now you will even, again, post (gee, I wonder what the euphemism is in this case) your threats of legal action, no doubt over and over and over and over and over and over again.
>
> And there is nothing on earth I can do to stop it. I can't appease you, I can't convince Bob. I am totally without power to end this. I just have to bend over and take it. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.D,
You wrote,[...accusing someone of fostering anti-Semitism is defamation of character...].
I am unsure as to what you want readers to believe by you posting that. If you could post answers to the following, then I could respond to you accordingly.
A. Do you have a post, if any, that constitutes accusing you of fostering anti-Semitism that you can post a link to here?
B. Do you know, how does whatever is in that post, if there is one, accuse you of fostering anti-Semitism?
C. Do you think that if you could have posted a sanction if you wanted to when you were a deputy to statements that could lead readers to think that Jews are being put down, or that a Jew that reads the statement could feel that their faith is being put down, would you consider that because you did not post a sanction and that the anti-Semitic statement(s) were then allowed to be seen as supportive and that they will be good for this community as a whole because unsanctioned statements mean that a rule has not been broken, that anti-Semitism could be fostered here because you did not post a sanction those type of statements that put down Jews?
D. Do you think that the community is improved when anti-Semitic statements are left to be seen as civil here because there is not a link from you or another deputy or Mr. Hsiung to the statement where it I posted originally as to that it is not in accordance with a rule here and is not conducive to the civic harmony and welfare of this community?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1067704
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1067839.html