Posted by Lou Pilder on November 14, 2006, at 6:24:50
In reply to Re: Lou's response to zazenducky's post » Lou Pilder, posted by verne on November 14, 2006, at 5:19:08
Friends,
It is written here,[...I just think that you should talk about me instead...]
There has been a request from the innitiator of this thread for others to start a new thread if they would want to post what could in some way lead others to go to a path that is what the poster did not intend.
Was not the original post a {thank you}to DR. Hsiung for posting >to me< a reply that he had nothing to add now to what I had requested of him? The poster thanked Dr. Hsiung for that and wrote ,[...makes things clearer...].
My request to DR. Hsiung was to that I am uncertain, and it is unclear to me at this time, as to if his rules and policy:
A.Allow me to send a proposed post in advance to him or not for approval without a condition to me to have someone else see it firsr, I guess by email.
I think that to have an additional condition to me than others here is subjecting me to a different standard than others because the FAQ writes that one can always send something to Dr. Hsiung or a deputy to see if it is OK, and I am asking Dr. Hsiung if he has rescinded his request to me and that if I can send the proposed post to him without that additional condition to me. At this time, I am uncertain as to if he has rescinded his request to me or.
B. Another aspect of Dr. Hsiung's new rules made here is that it is unclear to me if I can or can not have someone use the {report this post feature} >in my behalf< so that the 3 rule to me could be circumvented by me having someone else ask about those poster's posts that I can not ask about {in my behalf}.
DR. Hsiung's reply to me has been something like,[...nothing at this time to add...]and that is what the poster thanked him for writing.
So I guess that one path that is intended here is for others to also thank DR. Hsiung for writing that to me. But that path could have a fork in the road, could it not? And one could continue on the thank you to DR. Hsiung path, and one could take the path that Dr.Hsiung's reply to me did not make things clearer to me.
C. Another aspect of the discussion is that people can read in the present all that is in the pages here. There are posts here that IMO have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings and/or foster defamation toward me by the nature IMO that those posts are not said to be uncivil by the administartion and are allowed to stand. I am asking that a notation be made to those posts that they are uncivil. One question here from me has been as to what harm that could do to anyone here if the administration did accomodate my request to them to do that.
D. Other requests for clarification to Dr. Hsiung about his policy and rules that I am uncertain about.
There has been a request that the thread stay on a path intended. I think that the path is about what is {clearer} or not as a result of Dr. Hsiung's reply to me, and if you would want to contribute to either thanking DR. Hsiung for what he wrote as a reply to me, or to contribute to what is clear or not, or something else that could arrise out of the discussion here, I think that that is the path that is brought up in this thread.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:702458
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20061018/msgs/703352.html