To ElysePosted by Julie on 3/04/05 at 03:15 (170406)
Elyse, for the past two years, maybe longer, Dorothy has almost daily put her time, compassion, and wisdom at the service of people who are in physical and/or emotional pain. For that she is liked and respected. Like all of us, she has faults, of which she is almost certainly more aware than anyone else. The fault for which you have pilloried her is - as with most people - the flip side of her greatest quality. I mean her passionate good heart. She is passionate about fairness and justice, and she hates small-mindedness and viciousness. Her passion has occasionally led her to make impulsive and sometimes intemperate posts, some examples of which you have now dredged up from the past for our edification.
I can only imagine how what you've done has made Dorothy feel, but I know how it would make me feel. And I know how I feel now. A year ago I experienced Dorothy's intemperance, and it hurt. But the situation passed, like water under the proverbial bridge, and we have become friends, each of us experiencing the other's support in times of need. So I am grieved at what you have done.
I don't know what your motives were - apart from simple dislike, which is obvious - and I don't want to. But I think it was an unfriendly and unkind thing to do. Even in spoken conversation, it's mean to throw someone's past words at them. When a person's words have been archived on a website forum, to find them and plaster them up for all to see is very mean indeed. You took time and trouble to do this, so you clearly gave it thought before you did it, which makes it a good deal worse.
You made an accusation to Dorothy, and she asked you to explain yourself. You could have done that straightforwardly and honestly. You could even have referred to past posts that have got up your shirt. That might have cleared the air; instead you chose to embarrass her by raking up posts going back a full year, which she herself may regret making. If Dorothy were to abandon heelspurs now I would not blame her - and we would have lost one of the most valuable, helpful, posters we have. I hope she won't do this.
When you've been here for a few years, Elyse, and have spent a hundredth of the time Dorothy has spent in trying to be of some use and of help, I feel sure you will think twice before doing such a thing again.
Re: To ElyseElyse B on 3/04/05 at 07:58 (170414)
I don't get it. I posted something innocuous about Martha Stewart and Dorothy did what she always does, stirs the pot and then starts attacking an individual poster and their comments. How about all the posters that have been attacked by Dorothy, how do YOU think they feel after posting something and then being viciously attacked? I don't believe that is very fair nor helpful nor good hearted as you say Dorothy is.
This is a social board. When Dorothy changes a post and starts to attack another poster, that is hijacking the Board and my examples are evidence of how she does it. Why am I not ALLOWED to defend myself and make a point? It seems that Dorothy is given the most leeway here and no one else is allowed to have an opinion.
I cannot fathom why she does this on the social board. This is about OPINIONS and free speech and it seems that only Dorothy can have it. Not fair.
Re: To ElyseElyse B on 3/04/05 at 13:46 (170442)
from Susan below under Explanation. I could not hav explained it better myself. Julie I would appreciate your responding to this. Thanks.
To anyone questioning what Elyse means by Dorothy hijacking the board, I think I can explain because I have had the same impression myself.
To start with, Dorothy demeans people who disagree with her by calling them a variety of ugly names. She has used words like anti-intellectual and anti-intelligent in some of her insults. She has called me anti-intellectual I believe. Now the two things I have been called more than anything else in my life are intellectual and intelligent. So I know that this is mere name-calling on her part and as such, inappropriate. She also demeans people who disagree with her by calling them creeps, weird, stubborn, unwilling to learn and grow and change (because they are not interested in her advice), and this is an incomplete list. Many of her ugliest posts have been deleted.
She mocks people for misspelled words while misspelling plenty of words herself. I recall she mocked Elyse for misusing a word, while misusing them herself. (For example using 'affect' where 'effect' would have been correct.) She writes on and on and on ad nauseum against writing in all-caps, calling it shouting, while repeatedly typing words in all-caps herself - and not just as an example in her all-caps tirade. She has even mocked someone for using quotes where they would not normally be used, conveniently ignoring that they are being used as a substitute for bolding or italics. The things she doesn't do correctly don't bother me, but her demands that others do those things her way and they way in which she posts these demands seem like bullying to me.
She posted a false statement about something Janice said, then proceeded to attack Janice for it (the foot-trainers post). To me this was probably the most offensive and inappropriate thing of all from her. I definitely considered this to be bullying.
She demands in a haughty tone that people prove any of their assertions, while claiming to be a published author, but showing no evidence of it. Why is that?
Dorothy chooses to behave nicely to people who never contradict her, who are willing thank her profusely, who post that they like her, who post that they want her to stay and also to people who present themselves as strong, such as you and John H.
No bully behaves in a bullying manner at all times, but that doesn't mean the person is not a bully, at least not in my book.
In short, her bullying derisiveness and hostility toward people who display opinions of their own that may not be hers, and who may seem weak to her or without alliances on the board is what drives people off, which I think is what Elyse meant when she said Dorothy has hi-jacked the board.
Re: To ElyseJulie on 3/04/05 at 14:27 (170445)
Elyse, my post this morning was intended to show respect and support for Dorothy. I do not question your right or hers to think harshly of her, or of anyone else. What I questioned - and you would have 'got it' had you thought about what I said - was the way in which you chose to respond to her yesterday.
I have no more to say: I am just sorry that my post has led to more criticism.
Except for one thing: I read all the posts. You may know this, as I have said so here only this afternoon. There was no need for you to re-post Susan's diatribe.
Re: To ElyseSusan on 3/04/05 at 14:39 (170449)
My goodness. Diatribe! What do you base that on, given that the definition of diatribe is a 'bitter, abusive denunciation'? I thought it was pretty factual and low-key. But if I'm now delivering diatribes, shouldn't you start liking and defending me?
Re: To ElyseElyse B on 3/04/05 at 14:41 (170450)
Julie... what is fair is fair and you know I am right. How come you NEVER, EVER question Dorothy's tone and the way SHE responds to posts and are quick to defend her vicious attitude and are even quicker to criticize the way I respond? That is whole point and I am really sorry and it is beyond my ken that you don't understand that.
P.S. Why could you call Susan's post a diatribe? That is pretty negative.
Re: To ElyseSusan on 3/04/05 at 15:27 (170455)
Ok, if what I wrote is a diatribe, Julie, then so is your To Elyse post. Although I have a feeling you don't really know what it means.
Re: To ElyseJulie on 3/04/05 at 16:43 (170460)
I meant 'your right or Susan's'.