On 2/11/07 20:40, in article lid, "Stewart Robert
Hinsley" wrote:

In message , Sacha
writes
On 2/11/07 19:39, in article , "K"
wrote:

"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes


"Puke"
Well that is the name of something that most people find repulsive and
vile.
I don't think David is far off the mark.

That may be true, but name calling is not a particularly clever way of
arguing, nor one which readily helps newcomers recognise the validity of
your case.

You will, of course, be making that remark to Helene Rudlin, too, won't you,
Kay? In the interests of newcomers, of course, not those who've been
helping others for years.

I think the old saying about "two wrongs not making a right" applies
here. While I see the provocation, and understand the temptation, the
name calling is neither ethical nor productive. It may be
counterproductive; firstly it makes it harder for the casual reader to
tell who is on the side of the angels; and secondly it helps the
recipients self-misperception as an innocent victim.

Having someone watch her so-called (ex) 'friends' ripped to shreds and then
smugly smacking the wrist of one of those coming late to the party in their
defence, doesn't sit well with me or a lot of others, either.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'