[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: My Two Knuts (long) (In Which Eileen Steps In)

[Iggy McSnurd]

.
>
> > Iggy here:
> >
> > First off I'll say that you take personal affront to anything I  have
said,
> > and feel the need to express it like this, I would recommend next  time
> > sending me a direct mail so that the rest of this list doesn't need  to
be
> > involved in your personal feelings towards me.

> Eileen:
> No, it doesn't cut both ways. If you can get personal (without even
> having any reason to do so), I can call you on it.

Iggy here:

I didn't have a problem with you taking personal affront, or even stating
that to me.  I even told you that I felt it was perfectly appropriate to
state your view on this to the list... so long as it was done respectfully.

The comments by me on thiis were not regarding the fact that you said
anything, it was rather in the manner you said it that I felt was
inappropriate for a list posting.


> Eileen:
> Well, luckily this is an email list. To take one obnoxious example.
>
> "It's the creedo of any good con artist. "Earn their trust, show them
> you're their friend, and fleece them behind their back."
>
> followed by "I'm not saying that Cindy was this type since, as I said
> earlier, I don't know her well enough to fraw a reliable
> conclusion... but you asked a question, and I answered it from my own
> experience."

Iggy here:

This is a prime example of an edit oriented misquote.

Here is the entire paragraph you got the first part from (and it was in
regard to a question that was posed to the list, not to a specific person):

As someone who has been betrayed and stabbed in the back by many a friend, I
know of what I speak.  The best way to gain influence is not through force,
but through endearing yourself to others.  Starting with one person at a
time, you can work your way up to small groups, then larger ones.  It's the
creedo of any good con artist.  "Earn their trust, show them you're their
friend, and fleece them behind their back."  (To this day, the one thing
someone can say to me that will put me on full alert is something to the
effect of "You know, I know exactly how you think and feel, because we've
led almost identical lives."  9 times out of 10, this meant that they were
conning me and going totry to make friends with me and then screw me over
somehow.)


The comment you said followed did not immediately, or even closely follow
the "con artist" commentary.  It was placed at the end of the entire letter,
where the paragraph above was at the beginning, and was added to make sure
that people understood that my comments were as a general answer to the
question posed, and not aimed at Cindy.

The closest commentary to the line you plucked out about Cindy was the
statement that people who endear themselves to others can have a surprising
impact on them... and I pointed out that I had experienced it first hand.


> Eileen:
> Well, that doesn't cut it. We have a phrase for that type of
> character assasination.
>
> "But Brutus is an honourable man. So are we all, honourable men."
>
> It is not *allowable* to assassinate someone's character, with no
> knowledge of the events, and then say that you're not *really* saying
> it, just sort of somehow implying it without knowing what's going on,
> but of course you could be wrong blah blah blah.
>
> The end effect is the same. It's still character assasination, and
> you should be ashamed of yourself.

Iggy here:

I feel no shame for an act I have not comotted.  And I have never denied
anything I've said.  I simply clarified that some of my answers were general
responses and not directed at Cindy in particular.  The interesting effect
of this attempt to clarify the situation is to cause you to believe the
opposite of what is intended.

I again will state that, if anyone out there supports their view, they can
feel free to state it civilly on this list.  If they can't be civil, then
please send the replies directly to me.


Susan:
>>by the way when you say "us" please be sure to exclude those of "us"
>>that do not feel the same way you do.

>Eileen:
> Of course, you're not included in "us!" *Us* are the people who have
> suffered one and a half years of this. Who have lost friends, shed
> our tears, worked hard to mend differences without any results.
> Believe me, I don't think any of *us* would miss Iggy's libellous
> remarks about con-men and televangelists.
>
> If you're ok with character assasination on Iggy's part, I would
> indeed suggest you leave the list.
>

Iggy here:

With all due respect, it is not your duty to tell people that they need to
leave this list.  Unless you are one of the admin, it is not your place to
dictate the acceptable membership of this community.

I must also confess an amazement at someone who makes accusations of libel
and character assassination so lightly.  I have made every effort to remain
civil, and clarify any potential misunderstandings.  I have never ignored a
post that presents an accusation to me, nor have I attacked anyone or
committed libel at any time.  I have also made every effort to quote people
clearly and appropriately, which is one reason I archive not only everything
I send out, but everything I ever receive... so that I can reference it
properly.


Iggy McSnurd