Question:
>Thank you. I will killfile Steve. Can you tell me how? And should I also >killfile everyone who mentions the word Steve or all threads that include >Steve because some might have responded to Steve in a similar manner? Yes, >Nan, you’re right. I’m just an attention seeking griping middle aged mother >who has nothing better to do than post messages so I can see my own writing. >Big fun!
One question. Should we also killfile people who mention the word "faggot" compulsivily? I’ve really seen huge posts whcih contain the word faggot there and i dont really think fat people are that bad, some are nice and that’s kinda mean to encage them all to perverts, dont you guys think? regards, maia
Response:
> P. S. Nan, I don’t seem to have something to click called "message." Maybe > I don’t have a new enough version of OE. Can anyone else tell me how to > kill file?
Hmm… across the top of your window, you should see buttons that say, file, edit, view, insert, format, tools, message, and help. If you don’t, I guess you could have an older version of OE, but I’m pretty sure even the last version I had, had this option. Another option is to click on tools, then on Message rules, then on "news". A window will open and you can create a rule for blocking. It’s more difficult that way, but it works. — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me 
Response:
> P. S. Nan, I don’t seem to have something to click called "message." Maybe > I don’t have a new enough version of OE. Can anyone else tell me how to > kill file?
You are using: X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0. I am not familiar with that version. I suggest reading Help to find the "Block Sender" option. In OE5 the steps are: – select a message from the person whom you wish to block [killfile] – select menu option "message" [upper left, main menu area] – select "block sender" and, voila, sender is blocked. Good luck. Killfile is a very useful item, although i rarely have more than two or three in there at any given time. -Aula
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m really not basing my conclusion on just > one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have > better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts > about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share > with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously > (ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions >If all you wanted to do was the moral equivalent of sharing cookie >recipe’s, then sure, instead you got an issue-oriented group where >everything is debated seriously because there are severe disagreements >about these issues abroad in the culture. If you wanted a collection of >mealy-mouthed people stating points of view but ignoring each others >points of view so you can select from among them like a fucking chinese >menu, then you definitely came to the wrong place! >Steve
I don’t call verbally abusing people who disagree with you serious debate. The only serious debate for you seems to be who you think is the biggest moron.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> I’m really not basing my conclusion on just >> one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have >> better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless > posts >> about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to > share >> with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously >> (ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions >If all you wanted to do was the moral equivalent of sharing cookie >recipe’s, then sure, instead you got an issue-oriented group where >everything is debated seriously because there are severe disagreements >about these issues abroad in the culture. If you wanted a collection of >mealy-mouthed people stating points of view but ignoring each others >points of view so you can select from among them like a fucking chinese >menu, then you definitely came to the wrong place! >Steve > I don’t call verbally abusing people who disagree with you serious debate. > The only serious debate for you seems to be who you think is the biggest > moron.
You’re doing just what you came in here complaining of others to be doing, which is responding to steve. <sigh> — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me
Response:
> My message to you, Steve is that you are not going to convince anyone by the > unbelievable amount of abusive language you seem to find so appealing, so > why do you bother?
I enjoy calling the people whom I think should be killed, maimed, or enslaved and prevented from even speaking, the worst possible things I can think of. It’s immensely satisfying!! It’s the next vest thing to torture-killing them. > All you’re succeeding at is making people ignore you.
They don’t DARE! I might say soemthing about THEM, dontcha know! > And, yes, I do know what fallacy in argument is and I do know that when you > attack the person instead of the idea you are presenting a fallacious > argument (*ad hominem*= to the man–or person–and that’s only one of many).
Not if you believe the "man" is the one at fault. It’s not an argument, it’s pure HATE! When I’m arguing with you you’ll see long-winded paragraphs of logical explanation. That’s how you’ll know. I present both logical reason and also hateful vituperation. The best of both worlds. > If you believe that calling people morons and idiots and every other > expletive is therapeutic for you, go right ahead. Just don’t delude > yourself that you’re convincing anyone of anything.
I count on logic to do the work of logic and hate to do the work of hate. A place for everything all at the same time. You see: I hate the everlovin’ shit out of most people I’ve ever met, and love the rest of them dearly. When I convince the minority to kill off that majority we’ll all have a wonderful time on this planet as we’re supposed to. > If you really cared > about children, you would find a better way to get your message out there. > It’s too bad; maybe you could do some good.
Maybe. The world is a pile of shit and most people are full of erroneous shit up past their eye-sockets, it may take 1000 years to fix, but then if people took MY advice I think it could be done in 10. But it might take 1000 years simply to convince enough of them to begin my "10-year plan"! > You’re right, everybody, Steve can say whatever he wants. Whether I agree > or disagree or can even decipher the point he’s trying to make in between, > matters not one bit.
Probably not. Steve
Response:
You know, I had no idea what I was getting myself into when I commented in this newsgroup. Please don’t assume that you know anything about me and whether I agree or disagree with you. Just because you say in a newsgroup that you have children doesn’t make it true. Maybe you have the most wonderful children in the world, who think the same of you; maybe you don’t. At this point, after so many issues have been raised, I no longer find it relevant. My message to you, Steve is that you are not going to convince anyone by the unbelievable amount of abusive language you seem to find so appealing, so why do you bother? All you’re succeeding at is making people ignore you. And, yes, I do know what fallacy in argument is and I do know that when you attack the person instead of the idea you are presenting a fallacious argument (*ad hominem*= to the man–or person–and that’s only one of many). If you believe that calling people morons and idiots and every other expletive is therapeutic for you, go right ahead. Just don’t delude yourself that you’re convincing anyone of anything. If you really cared about children, you would find a better way to get your message out there. It’s too bad; maybe you could do some good. You’re right, everybody, Steve can say whatever he wants. Whether I agree or disagree or can even decipher the point he’s trying to make in between, matters not one bit. Thanks anyway. P. S. Nan, I don’t seem to have something to click called "message." Maybe I don’t have a new enough version of OE. Can anyone else tell me how to kill file? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Subtitle: Why are you here, Steve? > First of all, he does not have children >First error, I have two, ages 27M and 25F. > and has no clue about children. >Second error. My kids feel that I did wonderfully. > Isn’t it obvious? >It’s obvious that you’re wrong! Is that what you mean? > Second, every time he gets in a little over his head, he > starts calling people idiots and liars. >1) I don’t "get in over my head", and 2) I call my enemies those things >ALL the time. > He’s really a child himself. >No, I’m 51. > Isn’t > that also obvious? >It’s obvious that you’re wrong! Is that what you mean? > The question is, Steve, and this coming from someone who > actually came to this newsgroup to read about "parenting solutions," why are > you here? >To explain and defend a better way of rasiing children and to assault >the enemies of children. >Steve
Response:
> I’m not sure who made you spokesperson for the group,
No one is, and everyone is. > I was particularly > nauseated by some of the comments on child sexual abuse, which, as > incoherent as Steve is, he seems to think is A-OK.
No. Child "abuse" is not OK with me, but children consenting to sex is not abuse. Your error is thinking that it is. You see: I myself WAS such a sexually precocious pre-adolescent child and teen, I LIKED sex, craved it, and I know MANY *MANY* more who were like me. I was not authority-abused or shamed about sex, and that was one reason why I WAS fully sexual early. I have no interest in children personally now, but as a child I was sexually interested in older kids and adults! Many of my fond memories and fantasies, even though I also love group-sex with my friends, and with plump-tummied fat-assed hairy women my own age, ALSO involve myself as the child and the sexual exploits of children AS a child !!! So MAKE NO MISTAKE: As an adult children are NOT interesting to me sexually. I haven’t been interested in sex with kids since I WAS a kid. And consequently I am a defender of children’s rights to their autonomy and their sexuality and their own sexual freedom and their choices. So if you wish to try to denigrate me at least get your facts straight!! Steve
Response:
> I know Nan and I don’t *think* that your sarcasm offended her in > the slightest. If I’m not mistaken, what she was saying is that > to complain about what someone else has to say on usenet is > pretty useless, especially when almost everybody else has figured > out how to deal with him.
Thank you for taking the time to respond to this, Glen. I was in a hurry to get my housework done, take care of the babe, and get ready for work, so my answers were short. And no, nobody ever offends me 
— ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me
Response:
>Well, gosh, Nan, I don’t think saying that I was griping just to see my own >post was very nice either. Perhaps sarcasm is just a different kind of not >being very nice. I’m not sure who made you spokesperson for the group, but >I think I have made some valid pts about the group. It would be darn near >impossible to name the offenders individually, and if you take my statements >about the group– which you have to admit are frequently off the >subject–personally, I apologize for that.
Aw, look; what you said had a lot of validity. It has been said my multitudes of people since he has been posting, here. But the point is that usenet is anarchy in its purest form. There is nothing that anybody could do about all of his innane off-topic rants except by the use of killfiles. Would you have his account yanked because he says things that offend you? (not gonna happen, BTW, because John is one of those kool dudes who feels that everybody on the net is an adult …. or should be treated like one … and is comfortable allowing people to make their own decisions) If you *could* get his account pulled because what he says offends you, next would be who? Who is next in line to offend you? Nan, perhaps? Me? Do you see where that would go, ultimately? Most people are offended by something and if that is an offense that earns one’s account being pulled, eventually there would be only one person on the net, talking to themself. >Thank you for telling me how to killfile. I will do that with Steve.
There ya go! I would hazard a guess that if it were possible to add up all of the people in all of the killfiles on usenet, he would be somewhere in the top 10. I woulda said that he would be #1, except that there is Alex (who cross-posts widely, so has a wider audience for killfiles) and Brad from the psych groups, who has been around almost as long as I have been on the net. By comparison to those two, he is small potatoes … well, this is a good description of him, anyway. He is relatively new here, so he doesn’t have the advantege of pissing people off for almost 20 years. Heck, you *might* think of him as a newbie, and with that attiture, it wqould be perfectly acceptable to killfile him by his own "philosophy" ("It’s OK to have abortions because a fetus is too new to have awareness or memories.") So killfile away and do it with a clean conscience. >Here’s some more sarcasm for you. I know a seasoned insider like yourself >must see someone like me as being terribly tiresome for coming to this >newsgroup and complaining about someone like Steve.
Well, it has been done to death. > I am no stranger to >computers but haven’t signed on to very many newsgroups. And when someone >like me signs on to a newsgroup about parenting and sees the kinds of things >going on here, a certain amount of anger is bound to arise because, well, I >haven’t been around the block with Steve like you have.
OK, notice: You will find off-topic stuff in almost every newsgroup. You will find cranks in almost every newsgroup. Keep yer finger in the trigger of yer killfile. Use it well and use it often. >I was particularly >nauseated by some of the comments on child sexual abuse, which, as >incoherent as Steve is, he seems to think is A-OK. Here comes the sarcastic >part. Forgive me for becoming a little upset and >griping/complaining/whining about it.
And that griping/complaining/whining will do …. what? Add to the Steve-related traffic in this group? See where she is coming from? >What’s really interesting is that you >think Steve ever has something worthwhile to say, but my sarcasm offends you >so deeply. Go figure!
Recallibrate. There is not more than a handfull of people in the entire world who think that he has something worthwhile to say. It’s just that, occasionally, he might slip something almost acceptable into his innane rants …. if you look *really* closely and squint. I know Nan and I don’t *think* that your sarcasm offended her in the slightest. If I’m not mistaken, what she was saying is that to complain about what someone else has to say on usenet is pretty useless, especially when almost everybody else has figured out how to deal with him. "Who we are and who we become depends, in part, on who we love." — "A General Theory Of Love" Thanks, Mom
Response:
> Yes, maybe I was being judgmental about the whole group, but unfortunately, > every time I look at a thread I think might be helpful, I notice Steve > inserting his name-calling and fallacious arguments,
That you will need to address logically, I bet you can’t. > obscuring any valuable > information that might come out of a newsgroup like this one. I never said > he bothered me that much. I just don’t understand why he’s here. I do not > agree that "coming up with something useful now and then" (by pure chance, > perhaps) is enough of a reason. He makes it obvious that his main reason > for being here is attacking people,
No, that’s only ONE of my reasons, and I only attack those whom I regard as the enemies of children and humanity generally. > and much of what he says is "off the > deep end"
Lessee, that just means you don’t agree. You will need to say why. > not just "at times." And it certainly gets him a lot of > attention–what he craves most, I’m sure, and I suppose you could say I’m no > better for giving him this attention now.
Everyone posting here could be denigrated by saying they do so "just for the attention", but it’s not precisely true, people are here to defend abstractions. > Regrettably, people who come to a newsgroup for the first time looking for a > discussion of "parenting solutions" find only Steve, Steve and more Steve > responding inappropriately to almost every topic,
It’s not "inappropriate", you simply disagree with it. You’ll have to say why! > and when it’s not Steve, > it’s people responding to Steve. Truly, I do feel some sympathy for him and > what must be a bitter, empty life.
This hobby takes no more than 1.5 hours a day, and is enjoyable. > Admittedly, I know nothing about his > life, except what I see here–oops, being judgmental again–but you > certainly seem to "know" something. How would you know he has grown > children, unless you are a personal acquaintance and/or friend of his?
A couple lurkers here DO know me personally. > Maybe that’s why you seem to approve of his atrocious behavior.
She didn’t say that. > Really, Nan, thanks for pointing out to me that I’m an outsider, not worthy > of people like you and Steve.
You’re as welcome here as anyone else. > I’m really not basing my conclusion on just > one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have > better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts > about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share > with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously > (ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions
If all you wanted to do was the moral equivalent of sharing cookie recipe’s, then sure, instead you got an issue-oriented group where everything is debated seriously because there are severe disagreements about these issues abroad in the culture. If you wanted a collection of mealy-mouthed people stating points of view but ignoring each others points of view so you can select from among them like a fucking chinese menu, then you definitely came to the wrong place! Steve
Response:
> Subtitle: Why are you here, Steve? > First of all, he does not have children
First error, I have two, ages 27M and 25F. > and has no clue about children.
Second error. My kids feel that I did wonderfully. > Isn’t it obvious?
It’s obvious that you’re wrong! Is that what you mean? > Second, every time he gets in a little over his head, he > starts calling people idiots and liars.
1) I don’t "get in over my head", and 2) I call my enemies those things ALL the time. > He’s really a child himself.
No, I’m 51. > Isn’t > that also obvious?
It’s obvious that you’re wrong! Is that what you mean? > The question is, Steve, and this coming from someone who > actually came to this newsgroup to read about "parenting solutions," why are > you here?
To explain and defend a better way of rasiing children and to assault the enemies of children. Steve
Response:
> Thank you. I will killfile Steve. Can you tell me how? And should I also > killfile everyone who mentions the word Steve or all threads that include > Steve because some might have responded to Steve in a similar manner? Yes, > Nan, you’re right. I’m just an attention seeking griping middle aged mother > who has nothing better to do than post messages so I can see my own writing. > Big fun!
You’re not the first person who has come in here, blasting away, about Steve. And, you chose to insult everyone with your sweeping generalizations. If you’re using OE, just click on "message", then "block sender" when you’re on one of his posts. Your sarcasm tells me you’re not interested in participating in the group, however. — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>> So, killfile him. >>But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think > people >>just like to gripe to see their own posts… >>– >>~Nan~<– >Yup. I do think that’s what’s going on. >But in all fairness, sometimes to kf Steve is to kf about 3/4 of the posts! >And even killfiling isn’t effective if too many people get involved with > the >killfiles poster, and the quality of the newsgroup goes down. In this > case, >however, so many people have killfiled him, that the discussions by and > large >proceed without him very well. Certain once-useful threads, though, do get >"Stevified". >Banty
Response:
Well, gosh, Nan, I don’t think saying that I was griping just to see my own post was very nice either. Perhaps sarcasm is just a different kind of not being very nice. I’m not sure who made you spokesperson for the group, but I think I have made some valid pts about the group. It would be darn near impossible to name the offenders individually, and if you take my statements about the group– which you have to admit are frequently off the subject–personally, I apologize for that. Thank you for telling me how to killfile. I will do that with Steve. Here’s some more sarcasm for you. I know a seasoned insider like yourself must see someone like me as being terribly tiresome for coming to this newsgroup and complaining about someone like Steve. I am no stranger to computers but haven’t signed on to very many newsgroups. And when someone like me signs on to a newsgroup about parenting and sees the kinds of things going on here, a certain amount of anger is bound to arise because, well, I haven’t been around the block with Steve like you have. I was particularly nauseated by some of the comments on child sexual abuse, which, as incoherent as Steve is, he seems to think is A-OK. Here comes the sarcastic part. Forgive me for becoming a little upset and griping/complaining/whining about it. What’s really interesting is that you think Steve ever has something worthwhile to say, but my sarcasm offends you so deeply. Go figure! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Thank you. I will killfile Steve. Can you tell me how? And should I >also > killfile everyone who mentions the word Steve or all threads that include > Steve because some might have responded to Steve in a similar manner? >Yes, > Nan, you’re right. I’m just an attention seeking griping middle aged >mother > who has nothing better to do than post messages so I can see my own >writing. > Big fun! >You’re not the first person who has come in here, blasting away, about >Steve. And, you chose to insult everyone with your sweeping >generalizations. >If you’re using OE, just click on "message", then "block sender" when you’re >on one of his posts. >Your sarcasm tells me you’re not interested in participating in the group, >however. >– >~Nan~<– >Remove XX to e-mail me > >>> So, killfile him. > >>But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think > people > >>just like to gripe to see their own posts… > >>– > >>~Nan~<– > >Yup. I do think that’s what’s going on. > >But in all fairness, sometimes to kf Steve is to kf about 3/4 of the >posts! > >And even killfiling isn’t effective if too many people get involved with > the > >killfiles poster, and the quality of the newsgroup goes down. In this > case, > >however, so many people have killfiled him, that the discussions by and > large > >proceed without him very well. Certain once-useful threads, though, do >get > >"Stevified". > >Banty
Response:
Thank you. I will killfile Steve. Can you tell me how? And should I also killfile everyone who mentions the word Steve or all threads that include Steve because some might have responded to Steve in a similar manner? Yes, Nan, you’re right. I’m just an attention seeking griping middle aged mother who has nothing better to do than post messages so I can see my own writing. Big fun! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> So, killfile him. >But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think people >just like to gripe to see their own posts… >– >~Nan~<– >Yup. I do think that’s what’s going on. >But in all fairness, sometimes to kf Steve is to kf about 3/4 of the posts! >And even killfiling isn’t effective if too many people get involved with the >killfiles poster, and the quality of the newsgroup goes down. In this case, >however, so many people have killfiled him, that the discussions by and large >proceed without him very well. Certain once-useful threads, though, do get >"Stevified". >Banty
Response:
I just emailed this woman to tell her to reconsider…in defense of our group, we have terrific individuals who have been extremely helpful to one another. There is usually one bad apple in any group, and for us, it is Steve. I don’t think he means any real harm, but depending upon what kind of hair day he is having, he either dishes it out intelligently (which I so very much appreciate because he surprises me sometimes) or needs to mutter it out because he has his head up his butt. Susan
Response:
>> So, killfile him. >But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think people >just like to gripe to see their own posts… >– >~Nan~<–
Yup. I do think that’s what’s going on. But in all fairness, sometimes to kf Steve is to kf about 3/4 of the posts! And even killfiling isn’t effective if too many people get involved with the killfiles poster, and the quality of the newsgroup goes down. In this case, however, so many people have killfiled him, that the discussions by and large proceed without him very well. Certain once-useful threads, though, do get "Stevified". Banty
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> So, killfile him. >But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think people >just like to gripe to see their own posts… >– >~Nan~<– > Yup. I do think that’s what’s going on. > But in all fairness, sometimes to kf Steve is to kf about 3/4 of the
posts! Between Steve and explorer, I think 85%-90% of the posts get dumped on my server. But, that’s okay, because it leaves the more meaningful ones open > And even killfiling isn’t effective if too many people get involved with the > killfiles poster, and the quality of the newsgroup goes down. In this case, > however, so many people have killfiled him, that the discussions by and large > proceed without him very well. Certain once-useful threads, though, do get > "Stevified".
"Stevified" is a pretty apt term. Usually once he jumps in with his nonsense, the meaningful discussion has passed it’s time. — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Banty
Response:
> I just emailed this woman to tell her to reconsider…in defense of our group, > we have terrific individuals who have been extremely helpful to one another. > There is usually one bad apple in any group, and for us, it is Steve. I don’t > think he means any real harm, but depending upon what kind of hair day he is > having, he either dishes it out intelligently (which I so very much appreciate > because he surprises me sometimes) or needs to mutter it out because he has his > head up his butt. > Susan
The thing is, there are some very good discussions here. Problem is, wading through the junk. It seems like at least once a month, if not more often, a new poster comes in and rants about Steve. I know I don’t foresee this group improving any time soon, but I keep it on my server because there is the ocassional good discussion. Once in a while, I’ll let Steve out of my sin bin, but he goes back whenever he starts ranting again — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me
Response:
> So, killfile him.
But, but, that’s such an *easy* solution. I swear sometimes I think people just like to gripe to see their own posts… — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Yes, maybe I was being judgmental about the whole group, but unfortunately, >every time I look at a thread I think might be helpful, I notice Steve >inserting his name-calling and fallacious arguments, obscuring any valuable >information that might come out of a newsgroup like this one. I never said >he bothered me that much. I just don’t understand why he’s here. I do not >agree that "coming up with something useful now and then" (by pure chance, >perhaps) is enough of a reason. He makes it obvious that his main reason >for being here is attacking people, and much of what he says is "off the >deep end" not just "at times." And it certainly gets him a lot of >attention–what he craves most, I’m sure, and I suppose you could say I’m no >better for giving him this attention now. >Regrettably, people who come to a newsgroup for the first time looking for a >discussion of "parenting solutions" find only Steve, Steve and more Steve >responding inappropriately to almost every topic, and when it’s not Steve, >it’s people responding to Steve. Truly, I do feel some sympathy for him and >what must be a bitter, empty life. Admittedly, I know nothing about his >life, except what I see here–oops, being judgmental again–but you >certainly seem to "know" something. How would you know he has grown >children, unless you are a personal acquaintance and/or friend of his? >Maybe that’s why you seem to approve of his atrocious behavior. >Really, Nan, thanks for pointing out to me that I’m an outsider, not worthy >of people like you and Steve. I’m really not basing my conclusion on just >one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have >better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts >about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share >with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously >(ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yes, maybe I was being judgmental about the whole group, but unfortunately, > every time I look at a thread I think might be helpful, I notice Steve > inserting his name-calling and fallacious arguments, obscuring any valuable > information that might come out of a newsgroup like this one. I never said > he bothered me that much. I just don’t understand why he’s here. I do not > agree that "coming up with something useful now and then" (by pure chance, > perhaps) is enough of a reason. He makes it obvious that his main reason > for being here is attacking people, and much of what he says is "off the > deep end" not just "at times." And it certainly gets him a lot of > attention–what he craves most, I’m sure, and I suppose you could say I’m no > better for giving him this attention now.
Bingo. > Regrettably, people who come to a newsgroup for the first time looking for a > discussion of "parenting solutions" find only Steve, Steve and more Steve > responding inappropriately to almost every topic, and when it’s not Steve, > it’s people responding to Steve. Truly, I do feel some sympathy for him and > what must be a bitter, empty life. Admittedly, I know nothing about his > life, except what I see here–oops, being judgmental again–but you > certainly seem to "know" something. How would you know he has grown > children, unless you are a personal acquaintance and/or friend of his? > Maybe that’s why you seem to approve of his atrocious behavior.
Steve has talked about his grown children, in here. > Really, Nan, thanks for pointing out to me that I’m an outsider, not worthy > of people like you and Steve. I’m really not basing my conclusion on just > one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have > better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts > about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share > with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously > (ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions
Oh, Puh-leeze. Get over your sarcasm already. If you wish to discuss parenting issues, then do so. If you wish to put Steve in your killfile, then do so. If you wish to inject your additional criticism on top of what is already in this group, then do so. But quit whining about it already. — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me
Response:
So, killfile him. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Yes, maybe I was being judgmental about the whole group, but unfortunately, >every time I look at a thread I think might be helpful, I notice Steve >inserting his name-calling and fallacious arguments, obscuring any valuable >information that might come out of a newsgroup like this one. I never said >he bothered me that much. I just don’t understand why he’s here. I do not >agree that "coming up with something useful now and then" (by pure chance, >perhaps) is enough of a reason. He makes it obvious that his main reason >for being here is attacking people, and much of what he says is "off the >deep end" not just "at times." And it certainly gets him a lot of >attention–what he craves most, I’m sure, and I suppose you could say I’m no >better for giving him this attention now. >Regrettably, people who come to a newsgroup for the first time looking for a >discussion of "parenting solutions" find only Steve, Steve and more Steve >responding inappropriately to almost every topic, and when it’s not Steve, >it’s people responding to Steve. Truly, I do feel some sympathy for him and >what must be a bitter, empty life. Admittedly, I know nothing about his >life, except what I see here–oops, being judgmental again–but you >certainly seem to "know" something. How would you know he has grown >children, unless you are a personal acquaintance and/or friend of his? >Maybe that’s why you seem to approve of his atrocious behavior. >Really, Nan, thanks for pointing out to me that I’m an outsider, not worthy >of people like you and Steve. I’m really not basing my conclusion on just >one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have >better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts >about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share >with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously >(ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions
Response:
Subtitle: Why are you here, Steve? First of all, he does not have children and has no clue about children. Isn’t it obvious? Second, every time he gets in a little over his head, he starts calling people idiots and liars. He’s really a child himself. Isn’t that also obvious? The question is, Steve, and this coming from someone who actually came to this newsgroup to read about "parenting solutions," why are you here?
Response:
> Subtitle: Why are you here, Steve? > First of all, he does not have children and has no clue about children. > Isn’t it obvious? Second, every time he gets in a little over his head, he > starts calling people idiots and liars. He’s really a child himself. Isn’t > that also obvious? The question is, Steve, and this coming from someone who > actually came to this newsgroup to read about "parenting solutions," why are > you here?
Being a bit judgemental about the group, aren’t you??? I have to wonder about someone that will judge an entire group based on one poster. Oh, and Steve does have grown kids, and although he goes off the deep end at times, he can come up with something useful now and then. I’d suggest, if he bothers you that much, you put him in your killfile, and ignore him. — ~Nan~<– Remove XX to e-mail me
Response:
Yes, maybe I was being judgmental about the whole group, but unfortunately, every time I look at a thread I think might be helpful, I notice Steve inserting his name-calling and fallacious arguments, obscuring any valuable information that might come out of a newsgroup like this one. I never said he bothered me that much. I just don’t understand why he’s here. I do not agree that "coming up with something useful now and then" (by pure chance, perhaps) is enough of a reason. He makes it obvious that his main reason for being here is attacking people, and much of what he says is "off the deep end" not just "at times." And it certainly gets him a lot of attention–what he craves most, I’m sure, and I suppose you could say I’m no better for giving him this attention now. Regrettably, people who come to a newsgroup for the first time looking for a discussion of "parenting solutions" find only Steve, Steve and more Steve responding inappropriately to almost every topic, and when it’s not Steve, it’s people responding to Steve. Truly, I do feel some sympathy for him and what must be a bitter, empty life. Admittedly, I know nothing about his life, except what I see here–oops, being judgmental again–but you certainly seem to "know" something. How would you know he has grown children, unless you are a personal acquaintance and/or friend of his? Maybe that’s why you seem to approve of his atrocious behavior. Really, Nan, thanks for pointing out to me that I’m an outsider, not worthy of people like you and Steve. I’m really not basing my conclusion on just one poster, just the most prolific one. You’re absolutely right. I have better ways to waste my time than spending it wading through endless posts about, involving, and in response to Steve. If I really did want to share with other like-minded parents issues about parenting, I’ve obviously (ironically) come to the wrong place at alt.parenting.solutions – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
Posted in Parenting Solutions | 
No Comments » |
looked at and touched > each other’s private areas. She kept this in for many months, and > finally cried, saying that she thought she had sex. We assured her > that what she did wasn’t sex. We had several conversations with her to > be certain that what she described is all that happened. We have > approached it so many ways, we are confident that nothing else > happened, and with no one else. > However, for the last month or so, she seems so obsessed with what > happened. At first it was like she was unable to forgive herself. We > tried many things. We explained that we forgive her; we told her that, > although she must never do anything like it again, but that what she > did was out of curiosity (because she told us that she was curious to > see how boys were made) I gave her a crucifix to wear, hoping a symbol > of forgiveness would help. It didn’t. We asked if it would her her if > we approaced the oldest of the other kids in her presence to tell her > that we won’t tolerate future similar activity. She said it would help > her, so my wife arrange for the girl to visit, and they talked. This > didn’t seem to help much. > It is now getting to the point that everything she talks about, seems > to involve sex (at least what she thinks she knows about it). If she > sees a carrot, she says it reminds her of a penis; lightbulbs remind > her of breasts, etc… Sometimes she cries because she says she just > can’t seem to stop thinking about it. We’ve told her that it would be > better to let herself think about because if we know we can’t think > about something we are bound to think about it more. > Between me, my wife, and my wife’s sister, we have had lots of > opportunities to talk with my daughter. We asked all kinds of > questions so many ways, that we are certain that it was just curiosity > between the kids. We don’t know where to draw the line. When we ask > her not to talk about sexual objects (or how she perceives something to > be a sexual object) she says she feels like she must tell us each > time. It has become that almost all time spent with her is on this > subject. We don’t know what to do. Where do we draw the line? What > could we say or do to make her realize that what she did isn’t the end > of the world? I don’t want to go on for the next year talking about > it. It’s the same thing day after day. Any suggestions? 