Request to forward emails

I continue to get forwarded emails asking me to pass them on. The first indicator that it is someone’s political agenda is the request to pass it along.
They center their message on a recognized truth and then add fabrications of untruths with derogatory innuendos. Recent emails indicate that there is a campaign to destroy Obama. They wrap their message in the flag and the bible. Sound familiar?

It’s a lot like spreading manure. It stinks.

Just the cyber edition of the old chain letter, right?  If you break this chain you'll get fired, your kids will be bums, your wife will run off with a button salesman, your unit will fall off and a dog will eat it.

I'm with you on this, Abe. I've had to ask a couple of my "friends" to keep me out of their destructive loop. And when I tell them what I think of their candidate, they cry and call me offensive! Sheesh!

I actually just received one of those old chain letters in the mail the other day promising tons of money by sending $1 to the the six people at the end of the letter. Didn't know there were people still doing that kind of thing through the mail.

Yikes, Lin! Ha!

There is an individual whose name I haven't taken off my list because he supports my book, and sometimes sends material that is quite useful. He also sends those political obscenities. Lately, though, I've been labeling those as spam instead of just deleting them. He recently sent out a letter to the group saying he was offended, because, apparently, several people had reported him as sending out spam. I guess I wasn't the only one.

Ann

Ann,
Good for you. Breaking the chain is important. A once close friend of mine keeps forwarding the political BS. I have determined that just deleting it isn't enough. The next one I receive, I will respond to all addresses listed with some pertinent comments of my own. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Ann, I like that approach to label them as spam and will do that the next time I get one of those offensive emails.

Or maybe I'll take your suggestion, Abe, and just blast back to the whole group!

I'm feeling so powerful and can't wait for the next one to arrive now! Ha!

I just did a "Reply All" on the Writers Digest group and won't do it again.  EVERYBODY ended up replying to all, mostly telling me I was a jerk for objecting to frivolous group mail...and forwarding their comments to 195 people.

Lin,
is responding to "Writers Digest group" the same thing as responding to a forwarded email?

Well, sort of.   People on ning.com groups can send to all friends or to all members of a group.   So you end up getting an email that has the text of the message, plus a link to the group).Same would go for the Published Authors ning group.  WD is worse than most because there all these dum little newbies joining a group then sending out 513 emails that say, "I'm thinking of writing a book some day and just so happy to be here" or something.

The one that got me so much flack was "come to my blog and see my interviews with three unpublished writers".  I wrote back asking to try not to use the "mail to all" for trivial stuff, and suggesting that unpublished authors' wisdom on how to write and get published might not be all that valuable.  GOD, did that bother a lot of people I (and off course 195 others) got all this,  "Well we were all unpublished once, and you're really arrogant (if you can IMAGINE somebody saying that about moi) and how great it was to hear from these hopeful kids.   

Vous? Arrogant? The very idea.

Lin,
I think what you said in your response was truthful and the truth usually hurts someone.

That's the problem with being notified if someone responds to a thread. I hate to remove the notify button but they do tend to clutter the incoming email page and I wind up deleting many of these each morning without reading them. I can't keep up with all the discussions on the various forums and the notify button can be useful although a pain.

Well, my netzero account automatically puts all those people in my contacts. When I don't have time to sort, I send a news release to my entire contact list. I have had some unpleasant responses, too; but I can't tell by the email addresses (over 2000) who I know and who was part of some political group email. I do notice, however, my spam is becoming less as I broadcast emails to my entire contact list. I think those who don't want to hear from me block my email and take me off their list :-) - I hope so.

However, it seems people are polarized these days; they are stuck on a position or idea and they filter all information to support that idea, unflinching. I hope my mind is open; at least I try to question my opinions and I do try to listen to hate radio now and then to get other positions. I just am not a fan of ranting, regardless of the position taken.

DK wrote

Quote :

However, it seems people are polarized these days; they are stuck on a
position or idea and they filter all information to support that idea,
unflinching. I hope my mind is open; at least I try to question my
opinions and I do try to listen to hate radio now and then to get other
positions. I just am not a fan of ranting, regardless of the position
taken.

I like that observation of "filtering information." It is a perfect description of what we do when we look at the world around us. We only see what we can understand, so our perceptions are always limited. If only we could practice a little compassion and see the others through their eyes, we might be able to broaden those perceptions, and those others might not seem so dangerously different.

I get what you mean by the terms, "hate radio" and "ranting," but I wonder if our use of those terms might not be a part of our own perceptual limitations.

Ann

I wondered about that myself, Ann, when I wrote those words. When I turn to those radio stations, however, the announcers do seem to present themselves as angry (even if it's for show). I can't continue to listen very long.

However, I have friends who find my stations annoying also because their political views differ.

Filters in action........

Even in this forum, more people participate when there is a "sound" of anger and controversy. The anger emitted may be for the purpose of arousing the public to voice and action.

I never get angry about anything posted on the 'net. I've been told many times that I'm angry, so I guess that's the way that angry folk read my words. My bluntness might be perceived as anger -- but I'm too lazy to be bothered by cyber comments.

When I've tried to be authoritative, I've been told that I'm showing my true self. LOL! As if anyone ever took any notice of anything I said. Stiil, I do get a buzz out of the idea that I have a nasty side lurking inside me.

Shelagh wrote:

I've been told many times that I'm angry, so I guess that's the way that angry folk read my words. .....

....I do get a buzz out of the idea that I have a nasty side lurking inside me.

I think we definitely project our own perceptions onto the others we deal with. And I also believe that we are healthier when we accept, even embrace, our "dark side."

If we repress our negative tendencies, we lose control over them, and they pop out at unexpected times, in unhealthy ways.

At least, that's what I learn from folks like Jung and Campbell.

Ann

Good for you, Alice! How is the vacation?

Ann