Print

Print


She sent me the harassing email stupid and I merely replied in the manner
I took her email to be. Its morons like you that keep this crap going for
days on in.
Why would you want to ban "Boyd" is this a female thing against men, are
you a lesbian or something and can't see a guy speaking out about
something, what is it with you and from the University of Arizona - sure
has change since I lived in Arizona and it is people like you at the UoA
that persuaded me to go to ASU instead.
You know the posting of a private email is about as low as pond-scum and
your defending such behavior puts you in the same pond. If someone should
be banned from this list it is Moley for the intentional attempt to
create a hostile environment on this list. Get real.
Yes you can look it it up and check for yourself.
:-) Jack

Kali Tal wrote:

> I am quite surprised that the listowner of LRNASST has not yet taken
> action and banned Boyd and Bordeaux.  Up until the last few days I've
> found LRNASST to be a useful source of information. As a listowner
> myself, I know that it takes only a few unpleasant and unprofessional
> constant posters to ruin the atmosphere on even a productive list.
> Despite the delete key and mail filters, such posters have the
> ability to degrade the tone of the general conversation as even
> usually constructive and intelligent people are drawn into the
> flamewar they create.  On usenet I learned to call these people
> trolls, since they are trolling for a heated response.
>
> Normally it is discourteous to forward personal email to a listserv,
> but netiquette does not require that harassing or abusive email be
> kept private.  "Outing" those who use email to abuse or harass others
> is a form of self-defense, particularly for women on professional
> lists, who are most often the targets of private abusive email.
> Exposing a professional colleague who engages in such reprehensible
> behavior is a legitimate tactic.  It is doubly abusive to send nasty
> backchannel email to a colleague and then harangue that same
> colleague when she lets the community know that this is how she is
> being treated.
>
> I do not happen to agree that profanity should be banned from
> LRNASST, but I do think that disagreement ought to be expressed in
> civil fashion and that the dislike of others for profanity can be
> addressed in a fashion that does not require spewing curses at them.
> And there is a huge difference between using profanity in a
> description and using profanity as an attack (the difference between
> "this situation is really fucked up," and "fuck you!").  Ad hominem
> attacks, whether or not they are profane, are simply not acceptable
> in professional speech, and are not productive in personal or
> collegial relationships.
>
> I do hope the listowner will step in and raise LRNASST to its
> previous state of useful and collegial exchange.
>
> Sincerely,
> Kali Tal
> Arizona International College
> The University of Arizona