Am I insane?

From: Craig Hubley 
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown (fwd)
To: clburke@carolyn.org
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 22:09

Forwarded message:
From daemon Sat Apr 27 21:34:32 1996
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 21:34:32 -0400
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem 
Subject: Returned mail: User unknown
Message-Id: <199604280134.VAA13078@convoke.com>
To: craig

This is a MIME-encapsulated message

--VAA13078.830655272/convoke.com

The original message was received at Sat, 27 Apr 1996 21:34:18 -0400
from craig@localhost

   ----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
clburke@nexus.yorku.ca  (unrecoverable error)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
... while talking to nexus.yorku.ca.:
>>> RCPT To:
<<< 550 ... User unknown
550 clburke@nexus.yorku.ca... User unknown

   ----- Original message follows -----

--VAA13078.830655272/convoke.com
Content-Type: message/rfc822
*
Subject: Is Carolyn evil?  (was: Hi Craig)
To: 73624.3252@CompuServe.COM (Ritu Sikka)
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 21:34:18 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: clburke@nexus.yorku.ca
Reply-To: craig@hubley.com
In-Reply-To: <960423222130_73624.3252_FHV64-1@CompuServe.COM> from "Ritu
Sikka" at Apr 23, 96 06:21:30 pm
Content-Length: 4243      

Your position looks reasonable to me. If you have asked Carolyn to take down (or change names in) the controversial material and she has not, and has changed details to suit herself (e.g. the stripping thing) then you are correct in observing that she is a hypocrite. Most people are, of course, about something or other (that's what makes people interesting) but when it starts to hurt people you ostensibly care about, and they tell you so, the 'evil' are those who choose to justify themselves rather than spend the effort to seek an agreeable resolve. She is probably not as evil as Reiner but she is moving in that direction, which is why I spend no time with her. People who have not already been through the cycle of 'lover-teacher-enemy-friend-acquaintance' with her may have the patience for her antics but I do not anymore. I don't send her mail. I don't call. I have given up. So has Peter, from what I can tell. So have a few others. Of course, we can be easily replaced, now that she has a global fan club...

No doubt there are myriad justifications for her editing of personal detail about herself but not about others - for instance, she is far more exposed by her diary than any one other person, so a glimpse of someone's view of someone else will never be as revealing as a detail about her which can be fit into the matrix of everything else she and others say about Carolyn(.org).

I believe she would be best off divesting herself of 'friends' who approve of what she is doing, but if that's her, she can attract a nest of rats for all I care... I see no good being done by Carolyn.org, to herself or others, except perhaps to warn sane intellectuals what happens when you try to think your way through everything and never settle on a small number of fixed, purpose-specific epistemologies (Reiner being a good example of what happens when you choose to stick only to one, or to be so self-serving in your choice of points of view that you successfully evade any self-insight whatsoever).

I have several good friends that have now realized that she is insane... it's a gentle form of insanity, of course, but nonetheless when you are living in a world defined only by yourself and can't shut up about the discrepancies between what you see and what others see, and can't respect others' points of views on fundamental matters (like privacy) you are (by definition) insane.

People have choices about who they become. I have no problem with exhibitionism but it is simply revenge to force others into one's own fetish pattern involuntarily. In this respect I would note that you are as guilty as her, for forcing your own correspondents into your own view that no matter is too private to discuss in public. Carolyn has simply expressed your desire and turned it back on you by refusing to edit out things others find offensive (reserving to herself the right to spend her own time editing things important to her personally, or to people important to her personally, if such exist - as I say, there are always justifications).

Anyway, I am CCing this to her (although not your original note, respecting your privacy) so she can decide if it is 'interesting' enough to publish. I love her a little too much to frankly discuss issues of vital importance to her growth without her knowledge... perhaps that is a fault of mine... also a hypocrisy or two but that's natural - just my personal 'Goedel point' (a term I invented - let's see if she leaves that claim in the publication!)

In case she doesn't publish it I am also BCCing it to a few interested (and interesting) parties. Mostly insane people who will respect my definition of the term.

It's good to hear from you. I've been very busy, both with work and with my own personal stuff. My only real personal goal is to be wise, and it is starting to seem as if I have made some fools' progress towards that goal. I have been thinking of adopting modesty as my next goal but that seems too big a goal for such a limited person as myself at this time. It's hard to find others to be your PR department when so few understand what you do (start software companies and projects in 1/2 to 1/4 the normal time).

Yours,
Craig Hubley
craig@hubley.com

--VAA13078.830655272/convoke.com--