[Magdalen] Oscars Schmoscars

[Ann Markle]

I forgot to respond to Scott, and appreciate Roger including his response.
Scott, it wasn't the lack of volume that I interpreted as indifference --
I'm sorry I wasn't more clear.  It was the statements made about not caring
for or actively disliking movies and/or the Hollywood movie-making,
award-granting system.  And it wasn't meant as any sort of reprimand or
criticism, really.  I continue to be surprised when people I care about are
different from me!  I know that sounds incredibly narcissistic, so I
suppose I am confessing to that -- but I always assume that EVERYONE cares
about things that I do, and that EVERYONE

Ann

The Rev. Ann Markle
Buffalo, NY
ann.markle at aya.yale.edu
blog:  www.onewildandpreciouslife.typepad.com

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Roger Stokes <roger.stokes65 at btinternet.com
> wrote:

> On 24/02/2015 19:51, Lynn Ronkainen wrote:
>
>> From: "Scott Knitter" <scottknitter at gmail.com>
>>
>>> I've long believed you can't interpret the lack of volume on an
>>> Internet list thread as indifference. There are just too many factors,
>>> including timing of posts, technical mysteries, relative attention
>>> span, things going on in the background, and many more.
>>>
>>
>> ...especially technical mysteries... I like that : )
>> Lynn
>>
>
> I can as well, especially since my email client has been reluctant (read -
> refused over prolonged periods) to download messages.  U can see them on my
> ISP's server but I Do Not Like using webmail.
>
> Roger
>