Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00824)

At 03:16 PM 6/24/96 -0400, alexis dolgorukii wrote:
>At 10:16 AM 6/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>
>>If you look at the end of the message you'll see I jokingly laughed about
>>it.  Thoses were my words :)
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>O.K. by me. But I had purposefully filtered Mr. Roxendol. I had what seems
>to me a valid reason to do so. That reason is that I have absolutely no
>desire to communicate with him, on any subject, or for any reason. As Mr.

I understand that.  I didn't forward it with the intention of slipping it
past your defense grid <g>  I merely was responding to his message.

>Roxendol so clearly put it, he and I live in entirely different universes,
>and I am more than content that it should remain that way. I had made that
>desire for no contact fairly clear, or so I believe, and so I wonder why it
>is felt necessary to do an "end run" as it were. Are we not allowed to "pick
>and choose" who we wish to communicate with on the internet? Because my

I believe that is definately the case.  We most certainly should be able to
pick and chose who we talk to.

>filter program has developed what I think are called "glitches", I have
>taken it off line (Is that the proper expression? You obviously know lots
>more about these damn machines than I do.) It had taken to filtering

I firmly believe my computer's doing things behind my back to try and
directly provoke me.  Glitch or bug's a good term-  but don't think that
gives you a license to use Raid on the monitor!  <hehe> Just kidding.

>everything and not just the three names on it's list (mine being one of
>them). So what I am going to do until I can "fix" it, is simply delete my
>own messages and the other two people's as well, unread. If you like, and
>ask me to, I will gladly detail why I put Mr. Roxendol on that list.
>

No need to rehash old problems.  I'm sure I'll develop my own opinions of
people in due time :)

Sorry for the intrusion.

Chris