Subject: Hi Dawn.
Date: Mar 6 2006 7:14PM
As one of those (possibly even the principal one) who gave you such warnings about Tempo, I'm glad to read that they resulted in some measure of protection for yourself. I sensed at the time that you may be one of those who would be sucked in by her recruiting methods, which is why I took pains to emphasize what would, in all probability, lie ahead and to share what I'd learned of her methods and motives.
I still post with her (as I do everyone) and even enjoy the exchanges at times, but although I'm one of the world's truly great suckers on the first pass, I tend to remember what I've learned. I suspected (and still do) that you shared that first trait and probably also the second.
My main purpose in posting to you now is to tell you that you need not be reluctant about naming me as a source or referencing the comments regarding Tempo that I made in emails to you. Although I respect the privacy of individuals and never pass their personal info and rarely mention my email traffic at all, for the most part, in this case I consider it a public service to provide fair warning to innocent posters who might be blindsided by Tempo, a maniac who devotes too much time to Fray machinizations and sells out principle at the drop of a hat for even the most trivial of personal gains. Her desire to by known as the Fray Diva is nothing short of pathological.
So thanks for regarding private conversations and info as a sacred trust (a view I share) but in this case feel free to reveal and discuss--it has my blessings.
Poor Tempo can't help herself and no amount of argument or discussion will ever change her from being the basically selfish, dishonest user/abuser that she is. Her talk of morals and principles only add insult to injury!
She does everything Jack said in his post on the subject, and he didn't say the half of it. If she could, she would tell everyone on the planet what to say, when and how to say it, which threads to load with responses (mainly hers) and which to abandon as orphans (mainly everyone else's), and her posting pals would need her permission to go potty. I rebuked her sharply for those presumptions from my earliest days on the Fray but it did no good. Only when I slammed her hard on the board did those outrageous attempts at manipulating my postings stop.
Again she can't help herself. It's her psychosis and she won't part with it. Still, I get a kick out of her at times and I suspect that she gets a great deal of latitude on the board simply because she's box-office. Ka-ching, ka-ching, when she's spamming up the board I'm sure many sane and semi-sane posters open a few because they can't help asking themselves, "I wonder what that whacky bitch is up to today!" That's my theory and I'm sticking to it:)
A few words about emailing in general, while I'm in the mood to prattle on: I have never blocked anyone, neither on the Fray nor from my email account. I can understand that some feel the need, but I don't. I like my own policy on this subject and never intend to ammend it. The day I can't handle it is the day I should close both accounts--that's my view.
Although I have email communications with a great many posters (the amount and some of the names included would probably surprise many) I am probably one of the world's laziest emailers. This is a matter to which you yourself could attest. Even among my most favorite posters, email traffic with me are probably less frequent than Papal Bulls (although hopefully more sensible and interesting to read).
As for email ethics, I think most of us can easily distinquish between innocuous comments and personal and/or delicate data and would conduct ourselves accordingly, so that the issue is largely a non-issue to begin with. But some can't and/or won't. Regrettably, Tempo is one of those so challenged in respect to concept recognition and ethics. It's sad and it'll piss her off--again--but it's true. So I urge people to follow my example and deal with each person according to how you find them. When dealing with Tempo: beware:)
Sorry to prattle on but I knew of no way to make it shorter without suffering clarity.