[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

(off topic) Mailbox garbage

   It seems that some feel they can send private e-mail garbage to whoever
they want, and make grandiose assumptions and accusations completly devoid
of fact
and never have it see the light of day. It doesn't work here. All of this was
unsolicited, not to mention baseless.
   Anyhow if somebody has a problem with me they can either air it or I will.
The below is an example of the levels of behavior that some try.

   The way to stop this thread is to keep the clutter out of my box.  


>Return-Path: chadk19@domain.elided
>From: "Chad Klingbeil" <chadk19@domain.elided>
>To: "talltom" <talltom@domain.elided>
>Subject: Re: more crap...
>Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 08:05:15 -0500
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>
>Hey, if you want to post this in public and waste even more space on the
>digest, be my guest...  But I would still have to wonder what your agenda
>was, and why you become so defensive when someone disagrees with your
>opinion...
>
>For my part, I'm simply offended when anyone misrepresents my statements
>and opinions to others, because it is an irresponsible act that reflects
>negatively on that person's integrity...
>
>Wondering
>
>----------
>From: talltom <talltom@domain.elided>
>To: Chad Klingbeil <chadk19@domain.elided>
>Subject: Re: more crap...
>Date: Monday, September 16, 1996 3:02 AM
>
>At 01:58 AM 9/16/96 -0500, you wrote:
>>You are full of crap.  I'm just catching up on old digests after a trip
>>this weekend, and see your comment to another poster referring to "the
>>lawyer who admits to being unsafe at 80, [who] want[s] to make rules for
>>everybody else."  You lose all credibility when you lie about things. 
>What
>>I said was that driving 80 in a 55 zone can be unsafe for reasons that I
>>specified.  I also admit to occasionally driving 80 in a 55 zone.  And I
>>NEVER tried to make ANY rules for ANYONE else, especially not someone like
>>you, who obviously knows it all.
>>
>>In my original post, my only remark about your comment was to challenge
>>your assertion that police should not have discretion, because then they
>>should stop EVERYONE who exceeds the speed limit by even one mph.  You
>>disagree, and your reasons are well documents.  Fine.  Now, try, if it is
>>within your power, to lay off the insults and mischaracterizations.  By
>>responding so strongly, you give the impression that you have something to
>>hide, or perhaps an unstated agenda.
>>
>>BTW, this message is also not going to the digest.
>>
>>Chad Klingbeil  (not ashamed to use my full name)
>>
>I'm not ashamed to post my comments in public, and any further recieved
>from
>you will be also. I'd suggest your conclusions lept to here be bottled up,
>because they won't stand the light of public exposure.   
>
>