My Two Knuts (long) (In Which Eileen Steps In)

[lucky_kari]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" 
> 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.

Just as my original comments were regarding the fact that your manner 
was completely inappropriate for a list posting. 

Iggy wrote: (re my quote)
>This is a prime example of an edit oriented misquote.

Well, no, since the extended post is *worse*. I just took one example 
of your character assasination, and then pointed out what your 
disclaimer was. Below we get more of it, including charming lines 
such as "I know of what you speak."

Iggy wrote:
> 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.

You're not getting the point, are you? There is no place for general 
comments. This is not a theoretical discussion about meglomaniacs or 
con artists. The point is that even when you include a disclaimer 
that none of this is related to Cindy, it is. You are destroying her 
character, even if you don't mean to. 

What would you think if I were to write a whole post about despicable 
people and then end it up with "None of this, of course, applies to 
Iggy, of whom I don't know anything." The disclaimer would not ring 
true. 

Iggy:
>The interesting effect
> of this attempt to clarify the situation is to cause you to believe 
>the opposite of what is intended.

Of course I don't believe you intended this. How does intention 
matter? No, I don't believe you intended to stumble into the middle 
of no-man land and set off Armageddon. But nevertheless, you have. 
And common sense should have told you that what you were posting was 
*wrong*. 

Iggy:
> I must also confess an amazement at someone who makes accusations 
of libel
> and character assassination so lightly.  

Lightly? 

*laughs*

You don't know me do you? Rest assured that I do not make such 
accusations lightly. My response to you is completely unprecedented 
in HPFGU history. 

Eileen