WAKE-UP CALL (My offering to Andy and Phil)

[Ron Nossaman]

OK, I'll give it a shot,

*** major trimming *****
> Perhaps it's among the 'hidden' messages I have yet
>to read. However, as has been said before, this medium misses the mark by
>being one dimensional. I'm guilty of using (too many) words when an
>occasional smiley-face would suffice. The characteristics of words w/o face
>or body language often leads to confusion, flare-ups, and yes, hurt
>feelings. 


*I've run into this a bunch of times. In the quick interchange of verbal
conversation we can often head off the minor misunderstandings before they
become major offenses. I, for one, am pathologically prone to spewing my
spontaneous opinions without sufficient buffering. Y'all might have noticed
the tendency. In conversation, I can back patch quickly enough to prevent
most lethal misunderstandings, but in an E-mail format, it gets very VERY
cumbersome and more than a little hazardous. It's not that I have any
fundamental aversion to offending people, it's just that I hate to see it
wasted as a result of a misunderstanding.  



>* SYMPATHY: This one I can't hide with selective phrasing -- it is
>specifically for Phil. As one who routinely drives 2.5 hours (one-way) to
>chapter meetings; who frequently drives 4 or more hours (one-way) to visit
>other chapters; who, while returning from these meetings often pulls off to
>nap before becoming a traffic hazard; who foregoes income potential while
>getting to these activities on time, and who drove from Los Angeles to
>Hollywood, Florida to attend a PTG convention (at a time when I could least
>afford it), I'm afraid I don't have much room for understanding in this
>area. Sorry to plant this negative into what is intended to have positive
>(or at least healing) implications.


* We have a guy who drives in 4 hours one way for monthly Guild meetings. I
am in awe of his dedication while, at the same time, I can't imagine that we
(collectively) are worth the trip.


>
>* SUMMARY: Now y'all see why I try to be selective in my responses. Since
>it appears I'm incapable of a terse response, I must be selective if I'm
>going to write a book! As Newton Hunt wrote to me (and others think) "My,
>how you do go on." In this case, I feel the lengthy reply is both
>appropriate... and warranted.
>
>Without the face, voice and body language, I hope this message is received
>in the spirit it was intended. Why do I get the feeling that the message
>title and the results are working at cross purposes...?
>
>Jim Harvey
>harvey@greenwood.net
>Greenwood (n): the largest city in South Carolina WITHOUT an Interstate

* You're doing just fine, even though I can't see you real clear.

 Ron