Talking of social networking & this list as well.
Another point here is that emails have no emotion attached to them.
I can have an idea of what to put down in an email, based on my SOH and
mood, and personal view at the time. The email gets transmitted, and
then the email gets recompiled by the reader(s) who then interpret what
was written according to their own ways of thinking, SOH and mood(s) at
the time.
But the biggest problem is that as you're not actually stood in front of
the person who sent the email, you've no idea if they are joking or
being serious, due to not seeing their facial expressions etc. Even if
you know the sender, do you know them well enough to know if the email
was intended to be funny, or serious ?
Another major factor is both local language barriers, like differences
in the whole UK, and even worse, language barriers of the rest of the
world.
An Indian lady runs a shop near by where I live, Ive known her for
years, lovely as hell, but the Indian accent is still (40%) hard to
understand. Her two sons speak better English than I do. And thankfully
she has dragged her sons up to be really friendly and polite and great
to get on with. Her only problem is her husband who she is divorcing,
and trying to get rid of.
Hence why I try to write an email in a text editor first, read it three
times minimum, correct any errors, change a saying if I think it may
offend, and then send it.
But no matter what you do, there is always going to be someone who takes
offence with any email you write.
Now talking of being geeky. I hates football, rugby & cricket. Ive done
the getting drunk down the pub, done the cattle market, (sorry
nightclub), I hates the current fashion and music. I like hobbies that
are not the norm, like 3 day eventing. My music tastes include Elvis,
Garth Brooks, 60's, classical, Neil Diamond etc.
So to most "normal" people Im a boring old git, so once they bug me
about what I do, they then think "He's a geek, lets get out of here"
hence why I only mix with people who share the same type of hobbies or
have the same kind of humour and music tastes.
I dont go out of my way to get to know people outside of my own social
network, because whats the point, my life isnt about facebook, Im not
for having "friends" just for the sake of looking popular, or having a
large social network. I try to hold conversations about some non IT
subjects, but a major part of my life is computer related, so thats what
my life revolves around. My small circle of friends offer quality time
due to being able to have chats about hobbies and music that we all
share. I fail to see the point of talking about football and latest
fashion just to have another "Friend" when those two subjects bore the
hell outta me ?
Now I'll shut up and go get the kettle on, anyone for tea ?
On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 12:43 +0000, b.stevens611@??? wrote:
> oh for goodness sake. read my original email properly and you will see i was not comparing the atrocities committed by the nazis to the theft of public money. i was comparing the mindset of two sets of people who used flimsy excuses to justify their actions.
>
> regards
>
> bryan
>
> --- On Sun, 31/5/09, Graham Bleach <graham@???> wrote:
>
> > From: Graham Bleach <graham@???>
> > Subject: Re: [Hampshire] sigs, was Godwin's law
> > To: hampshire@???
> > Date: Sunday, 31 May, 2009, 9:08 AM
> > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:59:49AM
> > +0100, b.stevens611@???
> > wrote:
> > > So... It's ok to be sanctimonious and patronise people
> > but not ok to
> > > call people on it?
> > > Hmmm...
> >
> > No, both of those things are fine by me. I just don't think
> > that's whwat
> > happened.
> >
> > > It was an OT thread about godwin's law. I was trying
> > to have a laugh
> > > when graham took exception to what i said about MPs. I
> > called him on his
> > > holier than thou attitude and now a bunch of you have
> > your knickers in a
> > > twist.
> >
> > I understand that you are rightfully pissed off about MPs
> > claiming for
> > ridiculous expenses. I am pissed off about that too. I just
> > don't
> > believe that it bears any comparison with Hitler. That is
> > literally all
> > I said.
> >
> > By saying that fiddling expenses is not as bad as the
> > actions of the
> > Nazis, I am not saying that fiddling expenses is not bad.
> > Fiddling
> > expenses and appropriating taxpayers' money is definitely
> > bad. I hope
> > that clears up any confusion on the subject.
> >
> > The reason I responded to your original mail is that by
> > making these
> > sort of trivial comparisons I think the magnitude of the
> > Nazi crimes
> > gets diminished in our heads.
> >
> > > Still, graham... What more could i expect from someone
> > who describes
> > > the wholesale theft of millions of pounds of taxpayers
> > money as
> > > "opportunist expenses claims"? Are you sure you're not
> > related to an MP?
> > > :-)
> >
> > Ha, I do believe it was theft and I should have said so.
> > Not sure if it
> > is worth arguing about the use of wholesale, although it is
> > tempting ;-)
> >
> > Actually I am related to an MP, but he's not a politician.
> > He works for
> > the Australian Navy if you need any further clues ;-) Other
> > than that,
> > I don't know of any.
> >
> > > It was all tongue in cheek (hence the smilies) but if
> > the result was
> > > making the politically correct brigade have a fit of
> > the vapours, it was
> > > well worth it :-)
> >
> > Ah, the "smilies absolve me of all responsibility for my
> > actions" card. I
> > haven't seen that played for a couple of years. It's
> > about as effective
> > an argument as saying that anyone who disagrees with you is
> > part of the
> > "PC Brigade" ;-) [*]
> >
> > My expectation of this list, even on OT threads, is that
> > people will at
> > least attempt to have some sort of rational debate, which
> > means
> > at least responding to each other's points and not getting
> > distracted
> > into personal attacks. Maybe my expectation is
> > unrealistic.
> >
> > Obviously it is quite infuriating to be called a
> > patronising arse hat,
> > but I'm not that bothered about it as long as you actually
> > bother to
> > respond to my arguments. "You were right all along,
> > MPs' dodgy expenses
> > claims are not as bad as the actions of Hitler." will do
> > fine, thanks.
> >
> > I think I've spent enough of my time on this now, so that
> > will probably be
> > my last contribution on the subject, unless I feel that
> > anyone needs to
> > be patronised into submission.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Graham
> >
> > [*] You many not take exception to anything with a smilie
> > after it,
> > remember. Otherwise I will be able to say unkind things
> > about you.
> >
> > --
> > One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines
> > of code.
> > -- Ken Thompson
> >
> > --
> > Please post to: Hampshire@???
> > Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
> > LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> --
> Please post to: Hampshire@???
> Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
> LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
