New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Job Market
Real Estate
New York Region
NYT Front Page
Readers' Opinions

Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Week in Review
Learning Network
Book a Trip
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (16729 previous messages)

cantabb - 08:11am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16730 of 16734)

rshow55 - 04:04am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16723 of 16729)

The only one ["affiliation"] I actually know about in any detail is the affiliation she [lchic] has to her family - and the people she knows. For a long time, because of correspondence, I thought that she had very good contacts with the New York Times - and might work for them. That's clear from the record here.

Those are the kinds of affiliations (family, friends etc) most of us have, but “affiliation” here meant exactly what she (and you) have been demanding of others, including ME. Normally, I wouldn't ask you or anyone questions about another person, but lchic seems to speak and defend you and your work and you do the same for her, your collaborator. And she has been (just like you) demanding "affiliation" of other posters (and, if you get an answer you don't like, then 'assigning' them to NYT or government, etc) --poster harassment, plain and simple !

So, to be fair, tell us who does lchic work for and what’s her interest here? You can mention this in your next conversation.

As to your own "affiliation," it looks like posting here (and elsewhere) IS your FULL-time effort, and your “work” !

cantabb - 08:22am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16731 of 16734)

rshow55 - 04:33am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16724 of 16729)

In self defense, I think it right to post these letters now. If that is "bad manners" - there have surely been plenty of bad manners in postings over past weeks from bluestar23 and cantabb .

Asking questions and explanations is NOT “bad manners.”

Reallly "bad manners" : Demanding poster affilations --- questions like : Did you work for NYT, etc? – not just once but repeatedly and insistently. Actually, height of insolence !

Also, making totally self-serving and one-side comments on my posts on other Forums [Guardian and elsewhere ], WITHOUT posting my responses, IS “bad manners.”

Thanks for posting your 26 October letter to Sulzberger, NYT (in which you mentioned me and other posters), and Len Apcar’s response (Oct 29) to you. To me, the only surprise was their unusually prompt action: kate_nyt decision to shut the forum down (Nov 3).

In your letter to Sulzberger, this I thought was key to a lot of anguish about “leaving gracefully” :

“At the same time, the thread has been something of a prison to me - for exceptional reasons known to your organization. I'd appreciate a chance to leave that "prison" - under circumstances that will accentuate the positive and eliminate some negatives - rather than have to leave it "mangled and spun dry". I'd be grateful for help in doing that. “ [rshow55] [emphasis added]

This thread “a prison” to you ? Looks more like you locked yourself in a cell and have kept the key, and now pleading others to release you. The key has always been in your hand. This was also pointed out to you on this thread, but you repeatedly declined the suggestions for “leaving gracefully.”

I've NO idea why you should feel "mangled and spun dry,” and have seen no evidence to point to anything/anyone. This couldn’t have been caused by asking questions you never answered or by pointing to the inadequacies in your arguments and speculations.

I think Apcar pointed you to the obvious – the way others did here for sometime.

“Many people come and go from our forums and you are certainly free to do so. If it feels like a burden to you, I would certainly understand your decision to move on to other projects and interests,” [Len Apcar, Oct 29 to rshow55].

And if you think this comment was “entirely consistent with [your] request,” then what’s the problem, then ? You are free to leave the “prison” [or “house arrest”] however “gracefully” you wish -- the key has always been with YOU, not with NYT or other posters.

lchic - 08:46am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16732 of 16734)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

Cantabb ... you've been posting NYT threads for years ... and yet ... it was only on 17th Sept 2003, around the time that Colin Powell visited the NYT to demand of media more 'good news' that you came and sat on this thread - in a non-contributory manner, with no interest in the subject matter of the thread - whatsoever!

lchic - 09:12am Nov 7, 2003 EST (# 16733 of 16734)
ultimately TRUTH outs : TRUTH has to be morally forcing : build on TRUTH it's a strong foundation

More Messages Recent Messages (1 following message)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense