Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbncc5.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!bbncc5!sdyer
From: sdyer@bbncc5.UUCP (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: "The Invisible Partners"
Message-ID: <253@bbncc5.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 10:58:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: bbncc5.253
Posted: Tue Jul 30 10:58:37 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 04:49:49 EDT
References: <2135@pucc-h>, <230@bbncc5.UUCP> <2155@pucc-h> <1342@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 27

I haven't yet received Jeff's response, though Rich seems to have
quoted the most interesting parts, and in his own inimitable way
replied to J.S., addressing many of the same issues I would.

What is most amusing, or distressing, depending on your state of mind
at the time, is the following canonical interchange between J.S. and
AnyOneElse:

J.S.:   (Innocently insulting) X is suboptimal (or choose any other adjective.)
A.O.E.: Hey, where do you get off saying that? etc.
J.S.:   Why are you getting upset?  I was finally trying to show how much
	progress I have made in the last {timeframe}.  Perhaps it is
	really because I hit a little close to home.  Maybe you'd better
	examine your own motivations now that I've hit on the truth.

Of course, it's pretty easy to get impatient with this.  Like Eliza, there
is no variation, and after you've seen it once, it quickly loses its charm.
I don't wish to continue with another long J.S. harangue; perhaps it was
the novelty of seeing J.S. post after a long absence that got me fired up.
I wish he would show some sensitivity that what he posts can often be
offensive, but his self-absorption prevents that.

Now, back to discussing issues and not people...
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbnccv.ARPA