Parallel of Two Turmoils

Toledo · 12-31-2008, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Igzy

I've read two books published by former LCers. Jane Anderson's and John Myer's.

Just a minor caveat: Dear Jane is a former LCer. John Myer is not.

OBW · 12-31-2008, 02:28 PM

Ohio,

I understand your position. I did not intend to suggest that Steve’s work become a full-blown book, or that it needs to be grammatically correct (although too many gross grammatical errors often cause me to question the quality of what is being written as much as how it is written). I just feel that the tone of much of his work tends to drive a wedge between the content and potential readers. Ones who have seen the problems and are open to learn more about what has happened, especially in terms of what was essentially lied about — people like you, me, Terry, Toledo, and others — might ignore the tone since it is somewhat consistent with something that you/we already think. But those who have never even considered such things as possible but are lurking here (despite dire warnings of the BBs) are much more likely to simply move on to the next post or thread if it seems too didactically opposed, negative, or harsh without being given the opportunity to read real facts in a neutral way first.

Ohio · 12-31-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toledo

Just a minor caveat: Dear Jane is a former LCer. John Myer is not.

Ahhhh ... I'm not so sure ... by his own admission he "was" ...

Toledo · 12-31-2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Ahhhh ... I'm not so sure ... by his own admission he "was" ...

I am sure. I know him. It is not that he "was", but that he "is"...

Ohio · 12-31-2008, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toledo

I am sure. I know him. It is not that he "was", but that he "is"...

Are we once again parsing what the word "is" is?

12-31-2008, 02:28 PM	#2
OBW Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: DFW area Posts: 4,384	Re: Parallel of Two Turmoils Ohio, I understand your position. I did not intend to suggest that Steve’s work become a full-blown book, or that it needs to be grammatically correct (although too many gross grammatical errors often cause me to question the quality of what is being written as much as how it is written). I just feel that the tone of much of his work tends to drive a wedge between the content and potential readers. Ones who have seen the problems and are open to learn more about what has happened, especially in terms of what was essentially lied about — people like you, me, Terry, Toledo, and others — might ignore the tone since it is somewhat consistent with something that you/we already think. But those who have never even considered such things as possible but are lurking here (despite dire warnings of the BBs) are much more likely to simply move on to the next post or thread if it seems too didactically opposed, negative, or harsh without being given the opportunity to read real facts in a neutral way first. __________________ Mike I think . . . . I think I am . . . . therefore I am, I think — Edge OR . . . . You may be right, I may be crazy — Joel

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode