Re: [no subject]

[Chuckigo@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/10/99 1:03:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
lawyer@world.std.com writes:

<< BTW, to be fair, I think you should also chastize the people who made 
 personal attacks against Movie Man >>

    actually, any comments addressed to Mr. MovieMan were directed to him 
personally, signed by B.R.I. subscribers with their names.  
  if you feel that our taking of exception to his anonymous, 
aspersion-casting posts are personal attacks, then allow me to apologize to 
you for creating that illusion.  
     harboring no ill will towards his opinions (all were very well thought 
out and expressed), there were comments included in his postings directed at 
named individuals that questioned their motives and/or professionalism.  had 
he raised the suggestions of "conflicts" in decisions made at the company in 
question by "the management", and not naming certain management-level people 
as the target of those aspersions, then there would not have been as big a 
hue and cry over the perceived "personal attacks".
   again, to you, i, at least, offer my apology for what you interpreted as 
"return" attacks.  at least in my questioning of bria, er, Movieman, asking 
him to at least stand up and sign a name other than the enigmatic "Movieman", 
i had, as do you on all of your postings, signed mine.

respectfully,

Chuck Igo  

------------------------------