I don't believe, or recall, ever asking the net to go after someone.
As far as I know, I have never done that and never will do that; if there
is a need from someone for information, or support, then sure, I'll say,
"Listen, if you have time, and you believe in the project then..." and
let it go.

Do others flame because I flame? Monkey-see, monkey-do? The whole
reason I got into this last contretemps (stupidly, in retrospect) was I
read one of the threads I normally stay away from, in which I came across
the individuals in question...and there were flames racing back and forth
already. This particular flame war, to varying degrees, was going on
long before I got involved with it again. And persists now that I've left
it, AND asked that people simply ignore them and not respond. If I have
the power you suggest -- and I don't for a moment believe I do -- then
all and sundry would have followed that suggestion. Hasn't happened.

(Also, I tend to think that people are responsible for their own
actions. If someone is bringing down the fury of the net, they should
look at their own behavior and be corrected on it. It's the classic
schoolyard scenario of hitting the kid who hit *back*.)

Generally, my response is proportionate to the message. I try to
deal even with the offensive messages with some measure of rationality.
But there comes a point where someone behaves in such a sleazy fashion
that only a tactical nuke can suffice.

You say it can be "vulgar." These are perfectly valid anglo saxon
terms. If colorful language was good enough for Shakespeare, it's good
enough for me. "Vulgar" is a word people often use when they don't like
forthrightness...we should be mealy mouthed and hide our feelings behind
layers of BS. Mark Twain was described as a "vulgar" writer. So was
Dickens, believe it or not. Picasso's work was called vulgar. So that
word means nothing to me.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em. If I'm forthright about what happens in
the business, the network, the show...why should I start censoring
myself when it comes to the nets?

There's also a certain element of netspeak that enters into this;
in general, it seems like it's okay to smear somebody, to lie about
somebody, to question someone's integrity, particularly if it's done
without vulgar language, just the sharp blade of innuendo...but it's NOT
okay for the subject of this to get upset about it. To get ANGRY about
it. Even when it's justified.

Finally (and I know this may read intemperate at times, but it's not
intended as a flame) I'm nobody's role model. Nor should I be. If
anything I should be taken as a warning to anyone sensible NOT to go the
way I go, because the path ain't worth the pain. I'm a loose cannon. I
don't know when to shut the hell up. And I think that the population of
this net is sharp enough, and hip enough, and
intelligent enough and common-sensical enough to KNOW that; I just don't
think there's much problem here with "let's do what Joe's doing because
Joe's doing it." The problem is that some people knowingly and
deliberately go out of their way to make other people *crazy*...and thus
reap the whirlwind. I can just barely manage to be accountable for my
OWN nutty behavior let alone be held responsible for the actions of
others on EITHER side of this.

jms