Re: Off-Topic, New Orleans Images

On Apr 29, 2006, at 6:02 PM, Katharine Thayer wrote:

> What? I have to assume Pam is talking to someone else, even though
> she quotes my message below as if she were responding to it,
> because my remarks have simply nothing to do with what she's
> talking about here. My remarks refer precisely and exclusively to
> Sandy's two posts of today which for no discernible (to me) reason
> seem intended to reignite the poltical flap which had died down.
> He argued that this is a perfectly reasonable place to argue
> politics, and went on to have several things to say about US
> politics, and I was simply agreeing with Tom that this isn't the
> place for that discussion. I'm not referring to any of the earlier
> discussions, at all, only specifically to Sandy's post today.
> Katharine
>
>
> On Apr 29, 2006, at 5:46 PM, Pam Niedermayer wrote:
>
>
>> Oh, come on, it was a harmless remark. I don't watch the late
>> night shows, so can only imagine the cutting jokes made after the
>> Cheney shooting. Did any of these objecting people stop watching
>> Jay Leno or David Letterman because of these jokes? The event was
>> a national joke for a couple of weeks. It was a funny event, and
>> the reason was because of the kernal of truth in Cheney's
>> clumsiness, the victim's taking on the blame for the event, and
>> the way all the administration's friends closed ranks. It's as if
>> the devil shot off his own foot and hopped around in circles
>> acusing everyone else of shooting him.
>>
>> Pam
>>
>> Katharine Thayer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Sorry about that empty message; I'm not sure how I did that. But
>>> I did mean to say something about this, and here it is below:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2006, at 4:40 PM, Sandy King wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Because in the end what is going on in New Orleans, the Gulf
>>>> Coast and Iraq is a lot more important than alt photography.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But no matter how important it is, it is NOT alt photography. Tom
>>> is right; this list is for alt photographers regardless of
>>> their political persuasiion or country of origin, and it is
>>> disruptive to the list and disrespectful to individuals of
>>> different political viewpoints or extra-American geography to
>>> carry on discussions of US politics here. Imagine how baffled
>>> US participants would be if David and Loris suddenly started
>>> having an argument about Turkish politics on this public list.
>>> See, it's hard to imagine them doing this, which is my point.
>>>
>>> But on reflection, perhaps Liam is right; I might find a
>>> discussion of Turkish politics interesting. But not US politics,
>>> because feelings on all sides are so intense that I don't think
>>> it's a good idea to air them here.
>>> Katharine
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 29 19:04:06 2006