J
jim beam
Guest
Tom Kunich wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> I was simply pointing out that a bolt breaking doesn't
>> necessarily result in injury -- which you said it did, at first,
>> without qualification.
>
> I'm beginning to get the idea that John is starting to use the group to
> work off his aggressions
that's not an accurate assessment of this situation. this is one of
jobst's favorite games - the switch between aggressor and victim.
rather than admit to [and correct] one of his frequent mistakes, jobst
vociferously and personally attacks instead. then, when the aggressee
defends [naturally, because defense of the mistake is unjustified],
jobst switches and plays the victim of an "unwarranted" attack!
it's grossly inappropriate and highly childish, but apparently a
successful strategy when it comes to soliciting sympathy from those who
are susceptible to suggestion.
> which obviously is one of the problems with
> groups in general. I suppose it is getting to be time to ignore his
> postings if they aren't going to add anything.
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> I was simply pointing out that a bolt breaking doesn't
>> necessarily result in injury -- which you said it did, at first,
>> without qualification.
>
> I'm beginning to get the idea that John is starting to use the group to
> work off his aggressions
that's not an accurate assessment of this situation. this is one of
jobst's favorite games - the switch between aggressor and victim.
rather than admit to [and correct] one of his frequent mistakes, jobst
vociferously and personally attacks instead. then, when the aggressee
defends [naturally, because defense of the mistake is unjustified],
jobst switches and plays the victim of an "unwarranted" attack!
it's grossly inappropriate and highly childish, but apparently a
successful strategy when it comes to soliciting sympathy from those who
are susceptible to suggestion.
> which obviously is one of the problems with
> groups in general. I suppose it is getting to be time to ignore his
> postings if they aren't going to add anything.