[Rose Kelleher]

Having recently bitten someone's head off, on another board, over a perceived (but unintended) insult, I believe the problem is ecological. As you know, late September is the peak season for prickly pears, which propagate through microscopic prickly particles that waft on the breeze, and, when inhaled, have been known to cause prickly sensations. The high winds from Hurricane Ivan seem to have exacerbated the problem this year, hence the heightened prickliness among the general population; and this perhaps poses an even thornier problem among poets, many of whom seem particularly susceptible to this allergy.

[Elle Bruno]

Fred, I have noticed on this board that the smallest things can cause offense to others. Off-hand comments that the writer feels are humorous or informative can be misinterpreted as rude or hostile. We've all had our feelings hurt in this manner.
I think your curt comment, without the benefit of thanking Simon for his comments, could certainly be misinterpreted.
It's your choice to think that the exchange poisoned the well. Thanks, Dee

[Simon Hunt]

Thanks to those who have expressed concern and/or solidarity with me over this little dust-up. I'm just fine. I wish to note that this thread conflates two separate topics: 1) Fred vs. Simon; and 2) poisoned wells at eratosphere.

1) Fred vs. Simon
Fred: It seems to me that you ARE concerned with who's right and who's wrong. You're still trying to prove I threw the first "stone," and you're still calling your posts "honest" and "straightforward." (A sensitive-type might infer that you're calling my posts dishonest and crafty...) From my perspective, you and I did the same thing: we responded over-sensitively to posts that we thought were insulting us. I'm sorry--again--that I seemed to call you a boor; it was not my intention, and I STILL like your poem. I would eagerly accept your apology for seeming to call me a thicko (and your thanks for my critique), should you change your mind about extending it. I hope you will not find that my comments on your poems in the future will automatically sully the energy of their threads (you put it something like that...). If you'd rather I refrain from comment, just say so and I'll honor your wish. Either way, best wishes.

2)Poisoned Wells
I appreciate Michael Juster's historical perspective on this issue, and I agree with everything he says above about the kind of forum this should be. I want to say, though, that my experience here as a new guy has been throughly positive. I have felt this an extremely welcoming forum, although some people on the Deep End have not recognized my genius as enthusiastically as in my daydreams. Hard readings are what I came here for, and I'll tolerate freestyle wit at the expense of my poems to get them. In fact, it's part of the fun.

[Tom Jardine]

.

[This message has been edited by Tom Jardine (edited January 29, 2005).]

[Fred Longworth]

Tom,

You have the most colorful, poetic language I've run into all day, and I don't even think you were trying for a poem. Bravo.

Fred

[grasshopper]

There seems to be something about online communication that heightens sensitivity and emotions. I remember reading about a piece of research where people in separate rooms had to communicate by emails, and things rapidly got so heated that some of the subjects had to be led out of the building by the researchers (which is a lovely image - come along, dear, everything's all right now..).

The trick is, I think, not to take it, or ourselves too seriously.
I know on some boards, and with some authors, I feel I'm walking a tightrope between sounding like a pompous twit, and doing the Oriental Grovel : O, forgive my lowly opinion and my audacity in commenting on your august and mighty poem, but.....

At the end of the day (cliche-alert) it's only one poem, not the end of the world. If I ever get too po-faced, please feel free to tickle me.
Regards, Maz

[Clay Stockton]

Originally posted by grasshopper:
There seems to be something about online communication that heightens sensitivity and emotions.

It's a baseball truism that pitchers in the American League are much more keen to throw at a batter's head than their counterparts in the National League.

The reason why? In 1975, the American League instituted the designated hitter rule, meaning that AL pitchers never have to take their own turn in the batter's box--the DH will do it for them. Not so for NL pitchers, who seem a lot less likely to bean someone when they themselves can get beaned back.

I think that flame wars are here to stay until I can send someone an email attachment that will smack the recipient upside his ignorant gob.


--CS

[Amy Small-McKinney]

Fred, Simon, All, You know, I think it is the nature of the beast - this kind of structured/free fall where you can not look the reader in the eye or touch him or her. I mean here we are flinging our work out to people we only know through little letters typed on a screen. It is very weird actually. I do find, luckily, that there are a fair number of very smart and very supportive writers here and I think we are all struggling for the same thing - struggling to find our voice, find the best way to say something that feels impossible to say. I always love checking in and reading your work Fred. I don't always comment, but appreciate it greatly, appreciate the riskes you take to intertwine clarity and complication. You know, I sometimes am amazed by what language is like without subtle nuance of voice. I mean each one of us is adding an overlay of what we think the other means. I never ever listen just to words but watch someone's body, their eyes, their other meanings. GEEZE, Here we all add what we think the other is saying. I find this whole process endearing, moving, and incredibly brave. I am glad you are staying. Amy

[Robert E. Jordan]

Clay,

You've hit the nail on the head. Whack.

Bobby

[Angin Daley]

.

[This message has been edited by Angin Daley (edited March 02, 2005).]