Why in the hell are they

[mtmynd]

The internet is really a ridiculous place to try to communicate.

Harsh statement..? What else do we have to communicate with? Words are our expression for getting across our ideas, our thoughts, our humanity, whether it be thru the spoken word or the written word. The internet is not to blame but our inability to get our ideas into words to share them with others is at fault. All the information we have to date is from words, mostly books that have been written using... words. The internet is no different. What is different is the inability of the communicator to clearly express their views using the age old method of writing, or even speaking... an art that seemingly is not given the importance it deserves to serve the individual in a world based on words.

[Doreen Peri]

Cecil, sorry, I was being facetious.

I guess I need to use emoticons all the time.

I really truly honestly thought that the statements made by Barry were directed to the people he was talking to (me and hester and SLD).

But this thread got out of hand so I apologized and gave him the benefit of the doubt, saying I must have misread him.

As you say, words have been used to communicate for eons. Did I really read him wrong?

By saying the internet is a ridiculous way to communicate, I was saying that words are a ridiculous way to communicate and that was a ridiculous statement meant to be humorous and to shed some light on the fact that the words are right here in black and white.

Again, did I really read him wrong?

What do you think?

I was trying to be nice by saying I must have read him wrong. But did I?

[Barry]

If this discussion had taken place with all of us in an actual room, in person, where we could all hear tonal inflection, see each other's faces and read body language (the other 90% of communication besides the words, spoken or printed), I've no doubt it would not have gotten near as out of hand as it did. Sure, there might have been some momentary hurt feelings, but I doubt even that. We would have heard and seen the smiles, the good cheer, the hearty ribbing even that is all a part of love, most especially when we differ in opinion. And we would have heard vocal cues, undertones of deception and subtlties of derisive purpose where they were present. But in this internet medium those are all lacking, or at best, part of the subtext, which it is up to the individual to fill in, and so, precarious.

Two respondents to this thread did not get out of hand, were not taken in by what was missing. They read between the lines, I can only assume, and I admire them. All the rest of us...myself included...we should applaud the perceptivity of these two.

When I read Cecil's contribution, when he ended with "I'm puzzled," I did not believe him. I believed he was not puzzled at all, or thought himself not. But maybe I misread him. Perhaps there was no effort to deceive. Only he can say. Had he said it to my face, I might have "read" him differently, as perhaps he would have "read" me differently face to face.

You are correct, Doreen. This internet is a less-than-satisfactory method of communication. Worse even than on the phone. Everyone reads their own foibles into the words they see. Not all of us can write great literature of the type Cecil alludes to in his mentioning the great body of words that have been handed down over time. We are human. We struggle along best we can just like everyone else. No one of us is better or knows more than any other. It was not my intent to make it look like I did or even thought I did. It was my intent to illustrate that information is at our disposal like no other time in the history of this planet, yet still we accept at face value, without really thinking about it, what we are told by the so-called "authorities" on a given subject. And we allow ourselves to then become outraged or upset in some way. This, I feel, sets us up to be used by those who would have a mind to do so. And it is what I consider a worthy mission in life to speak out against and seek to overturn such endeavor.

My sincere apologies to anyone who felt like I was say they are sheep.

Peace,
Barry

[hester_prynne]

"This is ridiculous, this outrage at the moon being "shot." It's ridiculous, like being outraged at a child being bitten by a mosquito in Panama. Are we all so knee-jerk we just clamor for things to be outraged about?

Who got upset when NASA "shot" that comet for the same reason they are about to "shoot" the moon?

Not one of you. And for good reason.

Peace,
Barry "


I'm tired of belaboring this thread but I feel I must. Upon review of it, I think the above quoted post is where the critical tone came in (for me anyway) and it escalated things in that it called my outrage at the bombing of the moon, (which I still feel by the way) ridiculous and then took on a chiding tone by assuming "not one of us had read about a previous assault on the moon.
And it is here where I should have just backed off and stopped participating in the thread and I truly apologize to all for not stopping my input and letting go when this tone arrived. I truly wish in retrospect that I had just backed off of it. I have learned a lesson here that I consider very useful. Soozen was right on...ignore it.
Also, Barry, as many know here already, I always sign my posts with this emoticon. You twisted this into something negative too, however it's not meant that way at all so get used to it and deal with it, or better yet, just leave my posts alone, i'll leave yours alone and that will be that. I think we are very different types of people, prone to clashing so let's just avoid that peacefully.
H

[Artguy]

So what does the man in the moon have to say about it all....

[Barry]

Nasa Video link

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROS ... index.html

If you look at the slideshow and watch the video, it doesn't look like he said much of anything. My interpretaion? The man in the moon scratched at the small gnat (humanity's "bomb") and went, "Eh, no biggie."

Much ado about nothing.

Peace,
Barry