Re: Important Follow-up Message

*******BEGIN MAND********

John, stop it.

********END MAND*********

At 02:34 PM 4/12/2002 -0400, John Eshleman wrote:
>In a message dated 04/12/2002 2:23:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[email protected] writes:
>
><< That was one bizarre response, man. I suggest you regroup a little, cool
>  off a bit, and then put this issue back into perspective. Peter thought he
>  was engaging in a noble endeavor, good for him. You then pointed out the
>  urban myth status of the circulation of this email, good for you. Beyond
>  that, I think nothing more needs to be said on this issue. >>
>
>But more does need to be said, and will be said.
>
>Who are you to characterize what I said as "bizarre"?
>
>Who are you to pronounce judgment on what is a noble endeavour
>and what isn't?
>
>I tried to point out to you that different people may believe in different
>things as being noble endeavours.  Is that bizarre?
>
>Someone might want to support the Boy Scouts.  Should they
>post this support on Behav-An, and further, ask people to support
>the Boy Scouts there? Is that a noble endeavour? Or not? (I hope
>that you are aware of the controversy regarding the Boy Scouts
>that's been in the news the past year after the Supreme Court
>affirmed their right to disallow gay scout leaders).
>
>So, is support of the Scouts a noble endeavour, and should one
>post that on Behav-An?
>
>I think you are opening yourself up to duplicity on this if you answer
>that one way or the other.
>
>That's precisely WHY the best policy, IMHO, is to make political
>and "noble endeavour" threads out of bounds. If I were managing
>a forum, that is what I would do.  The only purpose of a behavior
>analysis forum is as a place where people, regardless of their
>social or politica views about other matters, can come together
>and support the one field they do agree about.  That's how I
>view it. Obviously, not everyone shares that view.
>
>Do with your list as you want.  I want no futher part of Behav-An.
>
>   -- JE