[OPE-L:7237] RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: fundamentalism

From: Nicola Taylor (n.taylor@student.murdoch.edu.au)
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 02:47:52 EDT

Hi Rakesh,

>I don't see how pointing to my putative bad behavior in any way 
answers the question of whether the moderator has offended. 

It doesn't.  These are two *separate* issues.  On the question of
whether or not Jerry has offended, I prefer not to comment online.
Allin's recent statement on behalf of the AC is the right approach, imo.
The other question - your behaviour - over which *you* have control, is
really *your* business not mine.  I simply note what concerns me, in the
hope that, as human beings who are also Marxists, we can enjoy each
other's company/ideas in future (btw, I *do* usually enjoy yours).

>That I may have flamed someone  does not mean that someone else  hasn't
>also flamed someone. Sharing the blame with someone does not obviate
>own blameworthiness.

True, but you can't blame *your* bad behaviour on anyone else.

>At any rate, I meant to say that disagreement between Jerry and Nicky 
>over x (moderation) cannot be plausibly attributed to their not being 
>good friends while disagreement between Jerry and me over x  could be 
>understood to have been motivated by  strong (if not nasty) 
>disagreements over y (the capitalist character of plantation 
>slavery).  In other words, I was attempting to free myself of a 
>charge of hidden motives, not to flame my good friend Nicky.

Well, I hope I made it clear that I object to the way you used *my* name
to link two issues.  My support for Jerry's right to have an opinion on
the content and relevance of someone's work is clearly NOT related to
the question of whether or not he is right to distribute a private
email.  Yet you implied that I supported the latter via my support for
the former - and, moreover, you challenged my integrity without any
reasonable cause for doing so.  On the other hand, I definitely DON'T
impute 'nasty' motives or 'hidden' motives to you.  I don't impute
anything to you.  I merely commented on what seems to me a completely
inappropriate way of expressing your (legitimate) concerns.  I hope you
will at least consider the AC's request and take these concerns off-line
now, in the interests of all.  

>[By the way, one of the interesting things about that previous debate 
>over y was the non intervention by Michael P who after all argues 

Great, lets get back to debate.
best, Nicky

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:07 EDT