 |
 |
 |
|
For what it's worth...
I don't know (or have even ever heard of) any of the people "involved" in the whole sordid affair before, which has been an interesting perspective. I only found out through Denise's posting, because I'm a law blawger. There are a whole lotta interesting aspects of this related to free speech, etc. but I'm not going to get into them now. Here's my take: 1. It seems real and credible that Kathy was threatened by some of the postings on "meankids" "unclebob" and via anonymous e-mails. 2. It seems real and credible to me that the people she called out (Chris Locke, Alan Herrell, Jeneane Sessum, etc.) find these threats, etc. as repugnant as everyone else. 3. There seems to be a whole lot of accusation flying around based on rumor, innuendo and half-truths. It's a shame for *all* of the parties involved. Kathy should never have to feel threatened for her words. The "mean kids" should be allowed to speak their minds without fear of baseless accusations. The problem, as I see it, is that the "Mean Kids" were, perhaps, a little too vehement in their name calling against people in the past... it appears to have brought some bad karma back on them when it comes to their credibility; people are all too ready to believe the worst about them. There appears to be some logic behind it, too, unsubstaniated or not. Perhaps it's time for "mean kids" to have some personal reflection? But in their defense, I think it's also time everyone who is taking up arms against them had some personal reflection before jumping to conclusions as well. Most of the people who seem to be lighting the torches don't seem to have any greater access to the facts than I do, which is very frightening. With what's known there seems to be only one reasonable way to view the situation: 1. Support Kathy against people who make anonymous threats. 2. Give the "mean kids" the benefit of the doubt that none of them are the perpatrator of the horrible threatening e-mails. 3. Try to be a little kinder--but not to the point of holding back *legitimate* criticisms. 4. Sit back and wait for some actual, substantiated facts come to light before rushing to pass judgement. Anyway, I have real work to do. Interesting drama, nonetheless. I hope, in the end, the reactionary crowd doesn't burn the village down in the process. There are responses to this message:
|
