[Ssf] HARSH READING BUT YOU MUST READ:

noone noone machinevman at hotmail.com
Thu Jan 20 16:39:51 GMT 2005


"perhaps archives ought not to be "open", given consequences"

open archives are definatly a step forward because of many many reasons 
which i don't have time to repeat right now.


>>>  "it will put people off from participating in the ssf."
>
>"We will have to directly ask the person involved if that is his intention 
>in fact."

of course it wasnt his intention but it is the out come of his actions 
(which maybe he needs to think about).


>But it has been said before so perhaps someone is having a deaf ear: 
>someone needs to be loved.

There is something that accompanies love and that is respect and 
unfortunatly by sending such emails mozaz has shown no self respect or 
respect for others and is devaluing his story and himself for political 
capital.  It is not me that hasnt put any effort into trying to 'understand' 
or whatever else i am asked to do, it is the constant flow of emails that 
have been sent over the last few weeks that have put me into this position - 
as some sort of bad guy that doesnt appreciate emotion, feeling and has a 
"deaf ear" to a man in need.


Maybe i need to show some "love" or "breathe easy" but i want to inform 
people that i am in a f-ing amazing place in my life at the moment and no 
email is going to knock me off my perch.  I am probably breathing easier now 
than at any point over 2004 so there is no need to patronise me.

from
cuthbert



>From: "@mparo" <robin_amparo at tiscali.co.uk>
>To: noone noone <machinevman at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Ssf] HARSH READING BUT YOU MUST READ:
>Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 05:57:58 +0000
>
>
>>Don't get me wrong, i like the idea of being nice to people and getting to 
>>know people but i just dont have the time to spend hours upon hours going 
>>to loads of political meetings which end up being unproductive precisly 
>>because of self-centred self-indulgence.
>
>I know i might get hit on the head for admitting that if i don't have
>the need to do it sometimes i don't read public open messages at all.
>
>by the way then perhaps archives ought not to be "open", given
>consequences.
>How many persons are encrypting their mail?
>Or encrypting their feelings, emotions,? Who is liable here? Has the
>peson involved being promised something?
>Has an offence being committed?
>
>>>Why? Because it has nothing to do with the sheffield social forum and
>>>  it will put people off from participating in the ssf.
>
>We will have to directly ask the person involved if that is his intention 
>in fact.
>But it has been said before so perhaps someone is having a deaf ear: 
>someone needs to be loved.
>
>
>OK see you on Thursday by the way perpahs next meetings notices and
>agendas should include facilitator(s)' names, such as CUPID CUPIDO:)
>
>
>cheers
>amparo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>noone noone wrote:
>
>>I strongly believe that mozaz should not have sent his last email this 
>>e-list.
>>
>>Why? Because it has nothing to do with the sheffield social forum and
>>  it will put people off from participating in the ssf.
>

_________________________________________________________________
Want to block unwanted pop-ups? Download the free MSN Toolbar now!  
http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/




More information about the ssf mailing list