I am responding to Don Baccus here since it is here that he responded to my
post on the above subject.

Don wrote and I respond:

> Do you know who "we" are?

If you mean "you" Don: No, no more than you know who I am. If you mean
Tweeters, yes.
>
> If you find the list offensive, there's a simple solution, which I'm
certain you're bright enough to figure out without any help from me...

Did I say I found it offensive? I don't think so. Matter of fact, did I not
say that I use those "words"? Really, I thought I was explaining how
different people's thought patterns affect their reaction to words. I even
change the subject line to this end: "a different look at the meaning of the
words" Also, I was saying I think it is nice to be consider of others, too,
when it comes to using those "words." It does not take much to do it.

> For starters, I hate it when relative newcomers to the net start
pontificating
> as though they know something about it.

Define relative. One, two, three, five, ten, fifteen years? You do not know
how long I have been on-line or how long I have been following Tweeters.
Further, although I do not post often to Tweeters, this was not my first post.

> I've been online since 1980, or thereabouts.

So what does this prove? Apparently, you have not learned that the net is for
exchanging ideas in the 18 or so years you have been on it. And that is what
I was doing although you apparently have a different interpretation.
>
> As for the "bullshit" bit, we know perfectly well who will be the end
readers of our message - it will be those people who willingly sign up for
tweeters and are willing to put up with a large volume of messages, good and
bad, relevant and not, civil and vulgar, each and every day.
>
I am glad you think you know who are reading your posts. I do not! Over the
years, I have been surprised more than a number of times by whom my readers
were. All my readers have not necessarily been members of the mailing list to
which the original message was sent.

> Let me repeat: I've been online since 1980, or thereabouts."

Again, so what? I did not see any requirement when I signed on to Tweeters
that I had to be on line since 1980 or any other time on-line restriction. I
only thought one had to have an interest in birds and birds of the Northwest
U.S. and B.C. Canada. Am I wrong?

Also, I do not know or understand what in my post could cause your reaction to
my post. Is it because I am one of those dreaded Southern Californians? Or
is it just that you believe that Tweeters is "your" (as in your opening "WE")
sandbox and you don't want any outsiders messing with your sand?


> It's not a bulletin board, bub - it's a mailing list. If you're going to
pontificate, at least get the jargon straight.

You must feel your position is weak if you have to resort to nit picking. So
I am lazy, too and do not feel like writing out "mailing list" and think that
more people will understand my meaning with BB more quickly than they would
with ML. Mea culpa!!!

> That's an easy one. I've never said a damned thing here that I wouldn't
say
> in a group of strangers facing me in an audience. Or, for that matter,
that
> I haven't at one time or another said to a group of strangers facing me in
> an audience, in a class, or on a field trip.

All I can say to this is: You have your social graces that have worked for
you in your life and I have mine, and so be it! Now, lets exchange ideas, not
flames. Also, least we continue to bore others with this discussion, if you
want to continue it, let's do it privately.

Great birding and find that next lifer,

John (One of Birders2)
John + Irma = 2, we are birders, too.

John C. LeVine
Birders2 at aol.com
Los Angeles, CA

The problem with Modern Man is he can no
longer see the stars at night through his city lights.
_____________________________________________________
A thought on a moonless night in Big Bend National Park 4/30/97