Cabal, shmabal. No two people on the board, if challenged to name such a cabal, would list the same individuals.

But let's not start, hey?

That way lies witch hunts and pitchforks, and other fun activities.

Which reminds me, can we have our torches back yet, or are we still in negotiations with the Fire Department?

Upon reflection, what matters is how Trudy feels and where she believes she stands.

That's true, inasmuch as we can't question the validity of Trudy's feelings, but then it rather calls into question your premise, doesn't it?

Because, as we've said above in this thread repeatedly, everyone feels marginalized from time to time. Who then are the mysterious unnamed people imposing their will on the voiceless masses?

You are, of course, welcome to refute my assertion that everyone feels marginalized. But if you accept that Trudy feels so, then why not me, Shawn, ita, or David...?

I have to stop posting here, it's making me crazy(er).

I want to note just for the sake of clarification, that when I talked about "the center" and "the edge" I wasn't talking about individuals here, but issues which had broad support, and issues which were held dearly but less popular.

Tartlets, tartlets...this conversation is losing its pointfulness to me. Not to stifle, but is anything new being brought to the discussion at this point?

New records in blood pressure is the only thing I can think of, at this point.

Not to stifle, but is anything new being brought to the discussion at this point?

A delightful new obsession?

Damn, I know I didn't get that quote right, did I?

Actually, Rafmun, it's not all about you

I don't want to jump to conclusions, or be snippy, so I will simply ask if you meant this to sound condescending? To be clear, I am asking because that is how it comes across to me.

I want to note just for the sake of clarification, that when I talked about "the center" and "the edge" I wasn't talking about individuals here, but issues which had broad support, and issues which were held dearly but less popular.

Me too. And I think you'd find people trying really hard to impose their will on several sides of many issues. Only some of them win -- generally, the ones who most people agree with.

Seems pretty fair to me.

Well...

We have one clear cause-and-effect example. I think it's safe to assume that it probably left a bad taste in some mouths that just stopped coming around.

Trudy, you do this every time we have one of these big debates in here.

Please, please, PLEASE STOP bringing in imaginary, unnamed people who may or may not have been driven away by something without speaking up about it because we have NO WAY OF PROVING THEY EXIST.

It only serves to make the discussion pointless, and drives it off track.

You know what? I have an opinion and I express it. Consistently, even, since it hasn't really changed. It's based on impression and back chanel and anecdotes I am not at liberty to share. I gave an example, an example of Jen K, it is not, in my opinion the sum total of the events.

This is a conversation, not legal brief and I don't feel "proof" is what is at issue.

Rafmun is correct. Though I've been around a fairly long time I'm certainly not in any influential circle. I find this place more ascerbic by the day (see quotes above) and less appealing because of it. Any small influence I do have to change that will peter out eventually and I, like others, will tire of coming around.

It's based on impression and back chanel and anecdotes I am not at liberty to share.

This part I'm tired of, even without the snappy canned response.