re nhl letter roger s response again i assume this is not just flame bait by roger but actually a truly held opinion in article apr ramsey cs laurentian ca maynard ramsey cs laurentian ca roger maynard writes i would say that the letter clearly implies representation of the views of a group that i belong to and i don t share those views and i don t believe that the majority of posters on r s hockey share those views and so i have no intention of allowing them to simply go ahead without making my feelings on the subject clear thanks for speaking for all those who didn t feel it was important enough to say something themselves i wouldn t say that the letter clearly implies representation of the views of a group that you belong to it represents a subset that you don t belong to of a larger group which you do if only because this isn t a moderated group look there are several ways to state an opposing viewpoint three that come to mind are as follows say it subtly result it may not be clear say it directly yet politely result probably it will spark some interesting conversation say it directly and obnoxiously result validity goes right out the window i would agree that unwarranted use of said term is entirely immature you realize that anything you say can and most certainly will be used against you paul w francisco in the shadow an angel cries catcher netcom com front line assembly
