Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!texbell!ficc!jeffd From: jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Reality and Perception Summary: Perceptions of flames Message-ID: Date: 25 Feb 90 03:43:34 GMT References: <1990Feb22.012655.5065@everexn.uucp> Organization: Ferranti International Controls Corporation Lines: 19 In article <1990Feb22.012655.5065@everexn.uucp>, Karen Valentino writes: > Flaming is in the eye of the beholder, because people perceive it > differently from each other. Only to an extent. While John Doe might perceive a posting by Jane Roe saying "John Doe is the most brilliant, kindly individual on Usenet!" as a flame, it's unlikely. And if he responded to it as tho it were a flame, he'd make himself look foolish and likely get some pretty sharp replies, both posted and mailed. But I'll agree that a statement such as "This article is totally inaccurate" might be seen as a flame by some and not by others. Jeff -- "Will you still love me tomorrow?" -- The Shirelles