mailto:Mezzoid@a...
> She has been called a liar, naive, amoral,
> in need of (implied) psychiatric help -- instead of passing judgment on
her
> personally, let's open dialogue about age limits and need-based awards
rather
> than age-delineated awards.
You mean: let's pretend she didn't ask what she actually did and let's talk
about something else!
I don't think so, and I was very clear: if she is THINKING about lying,
that's HER business, but a person can't come to us and ask for advice on
being honest or not as if it were the same as choosing this or that aria to
sing at a wedding! And asking that question may be a display of Amorality
and/or naivety at their highest degrees, mostly considering we have her full
name ( supposing it's correct, otherwise the naivety possibility would be
automatically ruled out... as well the A in amorality. It would be
Imorality! ) and e-mail! BTW, any of us may be competing with her!
>Good people think about things that aren't right; it's a question
> of acting on them or talking them out. I like to think that's what this
> forum is for - talking things out.
But 'good people', I'd say 'normal people', wouldn't feel right to ask such
a thing! Normal people have moral dilemmas, sometimes give in to
'temptations', but NEVER think it's normal to discuss LIES that will benefit
themselves and HARM others on a public list, mostly considering people from
the list may be harmed.
If she thinks those words were offensive, she should know her question was
even more offensive, both to my morality and my sensibility. She definitely
needs help ( psychiatric maybe! Help, for sure! )
Bye,
Caio Rossi
|
