dagblog - Comments for "What Is The Norm on WMD?"

Shana tova, Bruce

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 04:27:25 +0000

Shana tova, Bruce

Lulu, I have a very huge

Bruce Levine — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:43:46 +0000

In reply to Bruce, I was trying to make

Lulu,

I have a very huge bark, but I honestly would never wish you any ill will. It's not anyone's fault but my own. You and I are just looking at the same picture and seeing totally different things. Good luck, and maybe listen to the podcast I link to--although it's long.

It's not about eating crow--we both feel badly. I am sorry and hope you can forgive me for those times that I could have listened to you a little better. And I say that without deviating from the other stuff I have written in the past, and perhaps someday. . .

Peace.

Thank you Michael. I hope

Bruce Levine — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:31:06 +0000

In reply to There's nothing to forgive.

Thank you Michael. I hope you understand that I feel this is the right thing for me to do--for heaven's sake someone might read my stuff out there in the real world, and whoa! :)

In any event, I have a 13-pound brisket to contend with. Sweet things in the coming year my friend.

Bruce, I was trying to make

A Guy Called LULU — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:28:49 +0000

In reply to Michael, I was suspended for

Bruce, I was trying to make a point which I still believe is relevant. I took almost the exact same tack with Wolraich on the same subject and he didn't appreciate the way I persued it either. Looking back as well as paying close attention to all of the following conversation I gotta conclude that I handled it in poor taste. I apologize.

I do not want to see you leave and I suppose it is at least partly for selfish reasons. Your anger is with me and I don't want to feel responsible for driving off a Dagblogger who is highly respected by so many. I hope you can believe that that includes me even if my own anger on occasions has caused me to be far less than polite and to enter conversations that include you with a bit of a chip on my shoulder. I am not trying to slide from responsibility saying that, just trying to say to what extent I see it as my fault. I can promise to monitor my own speech but I cannot agree to avoid certain subjects. Hope you reconsider. This fucking crow tastes pretty bad.

Bless you Ramona.

Bruce Levine — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:20:03 +0000

In reply to Me too.

Bless you Ramona.

Me too.

Ramona — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:15:16 +0000

In reply to There's nothing to forgive.

Me too.

There's nothing to forgive.

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:07:09 +0000

In reply to I take back that phrase. It

There's nothing to forgive. You didn't hurt my feelings. I would just prefer that you not leave dagblog.

I take back that phrase. It

Bruce Levine — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:54:32 +0000

In reply to Bruce, you just wrote me that

I take back that phrase. It was not what I meant to convey. I apologize for that Michael and I hope you forgive me and understand--as I think I've written--that I'm not blaming you for my decision.

You're right, I could have complained last week, and I didn't.

Bruce, you just wrote me that

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:43:59 +0000

In reply to Michael, I was suspended for

Bruce, you just wrote me that you were leaving dagblog because we--the moderators--did not appropriately respect your views.

I can't speak for the other moderators, but since I did not see the Syria discussion you refer to, and since you did not alert us that you were personally attacked, I cannot see how that demonstrates any lack of respect.

As for the hate speech, we are not bending over backward, we simply disagree with you. That is not disrespect either.

So I ask again, how have we disrespected your views?

Michael, I was suspended for

Bruce Levine — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:30:02 +0000

In reply to But I don't think that my

Michael,

I was suspended for inappropriate conduct, and I deserved it. And we corresponded and I asked if you felt that I could post freely without harassment by two posters, only one of whom remains now apparently. You told me, rightfully so, that you couldn't promise me anything.

I came back, I tried posting about things that would avoid this topic.

And then last week, I posted that I felt strongly about the need to respond IF chemical weapons were used, and I proceeded to be harassed by a poster about my alleged "urge to kill" to the point where I felt it not worth discussing the issue.

I object to that kind of unchecked abuse coupled with things that are posted that you and everyone else around here--to me--are bending over backwards to deny what I see as hate speech.

I'm not sure what you could do, and I'm not blaming you for anything. We are at impasse Michael. It happens, and it also happens that maybe it's me, but for the life of me I don't understand how people who have an iota of understanding of prejudice cannot recognize the prejudice in the postings -- the few postings--- I've complained about--as well as the current one which I didn't complain about but was using it as an example..

The combination of those postings and being abused IMO and your understandable inability to play hall monitor, is what doesn't work.