Eva

[kevin doherty]

Go Back To New York

[AngelaT]

That is very mean of you….

 

---

From: AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com [mailto:AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of kevin doherty
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:25 AM
To: AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [AB2006] Eva

 

Go Back To New York

[BC Adam]

Wow, impressively immature. Eva has become a voice of reason where she
is able to balance issues and realize that the status quo means that
no one wins. No one can force a developer/university to build
something that is economically unfeasible or aesthetically
undesirable. Just as it's not possible to stay at the status quo
forever - cities change, building materials change, economics of
building and land values change.

Perhaps you should go back to the insular community where you came
from.

[ab_resi...@hotmail.com]

I would agree that the response to Eva is immature but keep in mind
that this could be an attempt by someone to undermine those who oppose
some proposals of the IMP.

[AngelaT]

Do we all need to respect each other even though we may not agree with
his/her opinion?

We can't tell people go back to where he/she came from once we don't
agree with them. That is horrible!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of

[Eva Webster]

On 2/20/09 8:25 AM, "kevin doherty" <kdocd...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Go Back To New York

Why New York?  I also used to live in Brookline, New Jersey, London (England), and Warsaw (Poland).  Which of those places should I be deported to, according to you?  And what if I continued posting to this group from there?  Your poor head might explode from excessive intellectual stimulation that makes you so angry.

And while at it, why don’t you petition the US government to ship all Americans of Irish extraction (that would be you) to Ireland, all Jews to Israel, all American Muslims to wherever the heck they came from, all American Chinese back to China — or just put all those non-natives or recent decedents of immigrants in some ethnic-specific concentration camps (like the Japanese Americans were treated during WWII).  Or just eradicate everyone whose ways of thinking annoy you (in the tradition of the Nazi state in Germany or the early US treatment of American Indians).

Or maybe you have just attended too many Sox/Yankees baseball games, and let the sports culture color your entire outlook on life?  

[Jimmy Sloan]

everyone moved over to ab2006 to get away from a certin person and she just followed to cause more problems.
 
> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:37:02 -0800
> Subject: [AB2006] Re: Eva
> From: ab_resi...@hotmail.com
> To: AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com

[joh...@comcast.net]

Nothing will get accomplished when adults act like children. Some
people enjoy and respect both sides of a discussion. My only concern
is that the person makes sense. I do have another concern. There seems
to be 2 people posting for the BNU whose thoughts are too alike to be
from 2 different people.
John Thompson

On Feb 20, 4:11 pm, Jimmy Sloan <ashbo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> everyone moved over to ab2006 to get away from a certin person and she just followed to cause more problems.
>
> > Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:37:02 -0800
> > Subject: [AB2006] Re: Eva

> > From: ab_resident...@hotmail.com

> > To: AllstonBr...@googlegroups.com
>
> > I would agree that the response to Eva is immature but keep in mind
> > that this could be an attempt by someone to undermine those who oppose
> > some proposals of the IMP.
>

> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect.http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_AE_Faster_...

[jrcreamer]

Depends on the children. Sometimes they have great fun together and
treat each other well.

[Eva Webster]

On 2/20/09 4:11 PM, "Jimmy Sloan" <ashb...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> everyone moved over to ab2006 to get away from a certin person and she just
> followed to cause more problems.

Poor Jimmy.  I must have longed to have elegant, cerebral discourses with you.  What was I thinking?  (FYI, I was a part of this group from the beginning in Jan./Feb. 2007; you joined 6+ months later — so who followed who?)

But since I’m cheeky enough to express my opinions here on BC and Harvard issues that you find extremely annoying, maybe it’s time to tar and feather me.  

Better yet, perhaps we should have Allston-Brighton’s first witch trial.  Would you like to be the executioner?  I know a handful of guys who’d be begging you to let them have the pleasure (I’m unforgiven for using logic and reason to out-argue them on this or that matter).

Seriously, those in the past who were burning women at stake (often for nothing more than just having a perceptive mind and opinions of their own) were always feeding of a group frenzy, too.  Ditto for stonings in biblical times, and the Inquisition in the Middle Ages.  I feel lucky we’re not living during those times.  I’d be toast — hung, or drowned in a sack, together with my innocent cat! (the darling is sitting next to my computer, hoping I might play with him)

Your statement above (sorry, but I can’t call it a message) suggests to me that you expect AB2006 to be just a Mutual Adoration Society -- where everyone reinforces everyone else’s views, and they congratulate themselves for being “right” even at times when they are not -- all for the sake of holding on to egotistic pride -- because the thought that an opposing opinion may have some merit is just too unnerving (I’m going to resist explaining what causes it).   

While I try to send meaningful, analytical, and thought-provoking postings to this group (I weigh every statement I make very carefully) -- each of the hostile missives I got in response has been empty of any legitimate content.  It’s just personal hits, but no substantive comments pertinent to the original subject matter!  It only proves one thing:  that this group should be MODERATED because some people here lack self-control -- and their postings are an electronic equivalent of drive-by shootings.

You don’t need to be at fault for anything to get shot; you just need to express opinions that some people don’t like to hear.  This — in the country founded on free speech! (Nothing that I have ever written here used language that would not be acceptable in an opinion column of a reputable newspaper.)

Also, Jimmy, cut that BS with blaming me (“she just followed to cause more problems”), the victim, for other people’s impulsive, intentionally ad-hominem attacks.  It’s you and those guys that are the problem — YOU are unable to tolerate it when I make a case that challenges your beliefs or prejudices.

It’s not that I can’t stand the heat that I myself ignite.  I CAN.  I’m not afraid of conflict.  Like everyone else, I should not be exempt from constructive criticism.  I welcome a debate; I appreciate knowing other people’s point of view, especially when expressed thoughtfully.

I just have a problem with pettiness, small-mindedness, and malice.  

When a person writes something that’s filled with much content, you want to get something intelligent in response — here, the chances are get schoolyard-bully-like abuse (because no moderator steps in to prevent it).  I started what I hoped would become an interesting, substantive discussion about Harvard -- and in the very first response, a guy changed the title of that message thread to “Eva”.  What genius changes the topic of a legitimate discussion to a person’s name?  Am I more interesting than Harvard?  

Civilized society (or group) is marked by tolerance of dissent.  Alas, the way some people here deal with dissent is immature and leaves a lot to be desired.  To me, it’s reminiscent of the attacks on Hillary Clinton during Bush years.  The conservative media didn’t try to argue on political issues that Hillary stands for; they just tried to assassinate her reputation with unsubstantiated or overblown accusations (e.g., “divisive”, “untrustworthy”, “corrupt”, “dishonest’) — just as Alex Selvig did to me on Feb. 13.  

Alex sent a message in response to Sandy Furman’s intelligent posting on BC student housing — but his response had NOTHING at all to do with Sandy’s points; it was entirely about “Eva” — an attempt to discredit me (clearly, as punishment for my making a case for Brighton Campus dorms).  Mind you, I had not had any contact or email exchanges with Alex since he co-founded Brighton Neighbors United many months ago -- nor had I made any direct references to him in any postings preceding his Feb. 13 attack on me.
  

Now, let me remind everyone that this is a large group (448 members).  How many are brave enough to send meaningful opinion postings?  A few at best.  Don’t people have any meaningful opinions?  Sure they do, but they will not post anything controversial or from the heart.  I suspect that deep-down, most people are scared of being “stoned” if they say something disagreeable — and that is sad.

This intolerance for dissent actually kills this group’s ability to have high quality postings that would widen our collective horizons. If this continues, AB2006 will only have meetings/events announcements, links to articles, and occasionally copies of letters to City Hall.  There will be no MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION.

Maybe some time in the future, A-B will have a closed, elite (by necessity) neighborhood discussion group only for people who are secure enough to handle and enjoy honest, in-depth, analytical discussions, people who don’t shoot the messenger when they don’t like the message.

Eva