doojable

Pond - you're way off-base regarding Bumpy. He wasn't an apologist. He mostly was a fly in the ointment (to be kind.) He didn't defend twi. He didn't defend anyone really. He taunted and teased and interjected obfuscations.

A.A. Milne is correct. Just wondering, which part of the last clue gave it away?

One day when the sun had come back over the Forest, bringing with it the scent of May, and all the streams of the Forest were tinkling happily to find themselves their own pretty shape again, and the little pools lay dreaming of the life they had seen and the big things they had done, and in the warmth and quiet of the Forest the cuckoo was trying over his voice carefully and listening to see if he liked it, and wood-pigeons were complaining gently to themselves in their lazy comfortable way that it was the other fellow's fault, but it didn't matter very much; In my next clue I'll most like give it away - this book is hard to quote from because nearly every paragraph has the name of a character in it.

This is a forum open to public view that is privately owned and operated. As if it would be possible to control what someone believes...

That's good - because it would be impossible seeing how he was neither good nor a doctor.

Nanny nanny boo boo...

I was just trying explain that the concept of holding a public discussion board to the standards of a criminal trial doesn't hold water. I most likely didn't make my point well. I apologize.

I believe both of these suggestions were made.

What? Huh?

And it's not "personal" to run a victim through the ringer for posting her story? It's VERY personal to her. It's her personal account for crying out loud! Consider that there is a right time and place for everything - and perhaps - just perhaps - your opinion of what she said needs to be put on hold. Geez!

I'd almost like to see WD write out a possible (and fictional) post that would meet his standards while also revealing some very very sensitive information. I've heard (but do not have first hand knowledge) that the reason some rape victims don't take a case all the way through the trial is because they know they will be cross-examined and made to look like they are the criminal and not the victim. That is one reason why it is necessary for attorneys to "prepare a witness." They need to help the woman be prepared for the opposing counsel's attempts to impeach her testimony. So they run through a mock cross-examination so she knows what could and would be thrown at her. Once again, this is not a courtroom. There is not a system set in place to prepare a person who wants - or even needs - to give a firsthand account of any abuse. I'm amazed that it even has come to this.

Say Mstar - I have always loved Zappa. Thanks for posting that. I also liked the way visuals were added to the music - somehow it became more than just a performance... Perfomance art? Thanks for posting that.

Deleted - just because.

I'm just thinking on the keyboard here... When I was in (granted it was 20 years ago) the in-fighting was extreme. People were always in each other's business and discussing who was possessed or who was a leader at heart... blah blah blah... Is it that different now? Are they walking in lockstep all the time? Or is the "harmony" just a thin veneer covering up a seething torrent of unrest?

I hear you JSN. Sounds almost like the super-caffeinated Forum would need to be like the Soap Opera Forum and the Politics and 'Tacks forum - hidden. - But I wouldn't want the stories of abuse to be hidden. I'd rather see the more "lively" threads hidden. Hope this all makes sense.

I was just remembering... There's a thread in the CES forum about JS. When it was found out that his son was injured in Iraq someone asked for a moratorium on posting. That happened - no questions asked. Meanwhile, a prayer thread was started. That's what I mean about being respectful. There are no rules in place for that sort of thing and it would be impossible to write rules for every single thing that should be common sense to an adult with compassion.

Is this what you were wanting? Georges Seurat- Sunday Afternoon on the Island of the Grande Jatte Link

There was that sickening little saying I heard in TWI: "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission." It became a game. I know that in essence starting a sub-category for those that want to cross-examine and undermine victims' stories is a rule of sorts, it also limits those posters who are guilty of such. It's hard enough to get up the nerve to post a story of abuse, much less have to think about what thread to post it on. And to have to think about starting a brand new topic in a sub-forum specifically for that - I dunno... seems more like having to whisper a secret all over again. The attacks are the problem- put the limitations on the problem, not the victims.

This quote sums up for me the wisdom behind allowing the "apologists" to stay. We may not like the "other possibility" but sanity does stand in sharp contrast to Waybrain.

I dunno - this whole - "I want a written rule" stuff just irks the crap outta me. It's like asking for a new way to make a loophole.

I'd actually prefer a forum where those that want to argue and ask for proof can do it on their own threads. Or else it's like making the victims keep their stories hidden - again.

That's what I meant. I don't really want to see more rules. I find it almost absurd that adults cannot manage to take responsibility for their actions.

:)

So you're suggesting a "About the Way and 'Tacks" much like "Politics and 'Tacks"...?

Sorry WW - but it had been nearly a day and a half - and I figured I was ticking folks off...