Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [existlist] the pathologically selfish

Expand Messages
  • Eduard Alf
    Biggie, I do not understand you point. So what if the person who is selfish happens to mention others . It still amounts to selfishness. I doubt that there
    Message 1 of 72 , Jun 4, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Biggie,

      I do not understand you point. So what if the
      person who is selfish happens to mention "others".
      It still amounts to selfishness. I doubt that
      there is any evidence that people are more or less
      selfish than they ever were ...

      eduard

      -----Original Message-----
      From: iambiguously [mailto:iambiguously@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 12:06 PM
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [existlist] the pathologically selfish



      In America, there has evolved a new kind of
      selfishness. Conventional
      selfishness is still rampant, sure, but it has now
      been supplanted by
      what I like to call pathological selfishness.

      The conventionally selfish are those folks who
      choose to behave in
      ways they will acknowledge as selfish: "I want to
      do this and I don't
      care if others want me to do that, instead."

      With the pathologically selfish, on the other
      hand, other folks do
      not even enter into the equation at all: "I want
      to do this so I'll
      do it." Period. Only after they act and others
      happen to bring the
      selfish behavior to their attention are they even
      cognizant of it AS
      a selfish act.

      It is particularly insidious, I suppose, because
      with conventional
      selfishness, blame can be more readily expressed:
      you knew it was
      selfish and you did it anyway. With the
      pathological kind, on the
      other hand, how can you really heap scorn upon
      someone who did not
      even choose to BE selfish in the first place?

      Personally, I blame the Global Economy. A
      paricularly virulent
      admixture of predatory capitalism and Pop Culture
      comsumerism. I can
      barely even imagine how much worse it will be 10
      years from now!!

      Biggie




      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups

      Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

      TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • clickhereforinsignificance
      The reason why we have to control this confusion? I ve been told because it will isolate you and make it difficult for you to make choices. This might be
      Message 72 of 72 , Jun 13, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        The reason why we have to control this confusion?

        I've been told because it will isolate you and make it difficult
        for you to make choices. This might be correct as I am currently off
        from work and seeking therapy because of my current investigation.
        However I have no interest in thinking 'right' again... because it is
        a trick of the light. This is not 'better' because better is not a
        well defined word... only perhaps a more accurate form of reason from
        a different perspective. I may need to make some comprimising with
        allegedly 'structured' thought to continue to exist though.

        You do not follow me because I make no sense but that is sense
        into it self. From sentence to sentence my reasoning changes. I only
        argue a 'point' when I want you to see one. But the point is there is
        no point that can be explained.. only felt. Or is there?

        ~ confusing eh? Tell me about it.

        --------------------------

        --- In existlist@y..., "Charles" <cvas2002@c...> wrote:
        > J. Aiden,
        >
        > I don't follow you on this one. Why do we have to
        > control and hide this confusion? For what I have
        > notice, language has been your favorite subject
        > matter considering reality, so language makes
        > no sense either in that respect; is pure and
        > simple confusion.
        >
        > Charles
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "clickhereforinsignificance"
        > <livewild@h...>
        > To: <existlist@y...>
        > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 12:11 PM
        > Subject: [existlist] Re: the pathologically
        > selfish
        >
        >
        >
        > Charles,
        >
        > "you don't have to reply to this post which makes
        > no sense."
        >
        > Your confusion makes perfect sense. It's
        > completely rational just
        > not in the classical sense of what rational means.
        > Call it rational
        > the next generation.... or insanity. Not sure
        > which yet as I am
        > currently investigating it myself.
        >
        > As it exists now, in order to function in this
        > society we need to
        > control and hide this confusion. It does not mean
        > it is not there.
        >
        > J.Aiden
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In existlist@y..., "Bill Harris"
        > <valleywestdental@q...> wrote:
        > > Charles From what I can gather, we are probably
        > far apart in our
        > histories and experience. I was raised by WW2
        > warriors, who were
        > raised by warriors, ect, ect, ect. My great
        > grandfather homesteaded
        > wild land with money he earned as a gun guard on
        > silver trains. I
        > still keep his weapons.
        > > I am a reluctant warrior. As a child I was told
        > to fight. I hated
        > it. I was forced by the draft to go into the Army.
        > I hated it. I
        > detest authoritarianism and coercion of the
        > individual by the
        > collective.
        > > My art collection is much larger than my gun
        > collection. I was
        > forced into participation in the catholic church.
        > I quit as soon as I
        > left home. Yes they tried to abuse me sexually,
        > much to their
        > physical determent. In college I found science. I
        > had a 3.5 with no
        > high school prerequisites. In catholic college
        > the humanities were
        > laced with church lies and convenient omissions.
        > I think I will
        > always see the humanities in a tainted light .
        > Science was clean and
        > often directly at odds with church teaching, I
        > liked that. In
        > undergrad I had the chance to meet artists and
        > musicians whom I got
        > on well with. Personally I had little talent in
        > that area but I
        > enjoyed them and their productions. I bought my
        > first two woodcuts in
        > my junior year and have collected ever since.
        > Since I was a deans
        > list student, I wormed my way into a graduate
        > level existentialism
        > coarse. I was completely taken by it , dropped out
        > of catholic
        > college early and went to dental school. So you
        > see I am a roughcast,
        > scientific existentialist. I am combative by
        > training and experience.
        > By nature I am solitary and contemplative. I am
        > what an
        > existentialist can be, a product of his genes and
        > life experience.
        > Bill
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: Charles
        > > To: existlist@y...
        > > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 9:08 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [existlist] the pathologically
        > selfish
        > >
        > >
        > > Bill,
        > >
        > > It's amazing how a little and simple indignant
        > > disagreement can arouse such an "emotional"
        > > response from an
        > > empirical, analytical, and accomplished grown
        > up
        > > gentleman like yourself. Actually and
        > honestly, I
        > > was
        > > not expecting you to repy to my post, but I am
        > > glad you did, since this makes my point clear
        > > about
        > > the "emotinal" issued, wich, according to you,
        > > it's not a toy to be play with; a kaleznikov
        > or a
        > > rifle seem
        > > to be your favorite toys (calm down there
        > Rambo, I
        > > was not trying to bite you). The philosopher
        > who
        > > does
        > > not get involved in discussion is not a true
        > > philosopher according to Wittgeinstein.
        > Perhaps,
        > > quoting
        > > others seem to be my only intellectual
        > abilities,
        > > but I just happen to believe in the authorithy
        > of
        > > the
        > > greatest. Also, I did not say "I don't like'
        > the
        > > goverment or the two party system or people
        > who
        > > wear masks;
        > > those were just general observations as to the
        > > nature of the ideal "Republic" you believe in.
        > > From now on
        > > when I say I don't like something I will make
        > sure
        > > you understant it under quotation marks. A
        > > philosopher
        > > should always be objective and question the
        > > validity of the current social conditions
        > without
        > > taking sides
        > > and putting his judgement in the doubtful
        > nature
        > > of either democracy, aristocracy, monarchy or
        > the
        > > utopian society.
        > >
        > > Yes Bill, I am the "detached one", I like that
        > > better than the "alienated one", the solitary,
        > the
        > > one who's
        > > head is buried in a bookish delusion, and I am
        > > very proud of it. I am the one without a
        > > philosophy, the
        > > one who likes to participate without
        > > participating, without making donations on
        > > political affiliations, the
        > > one who does not know how to use a rifle or a
        > > kaleznikov, the one who trembles in the face
        > of
        > > 'hope'
        > > instead of fear, the pleasure seeker, the
        > > unbeliever, the one who is not affraid to
        > express
        > > his emotions;
        > > if a torrent of blood were coming out of my
        > skin's
        > > pores right now, I would laugh at it like a
        > wild
        > > hyena
        > > without regrets or remorse, the one who hates
        > to
        > > teach, the one who has found his happiness in
        > > nothingness. Whitout indignation, I am "the
        > trop".
        > > I am the melancholyc and mediocre artist who's
        > > pencil has
        > > been shutter by the incomprehensible.
        > >
        > >
        > > ps. Bill you don't have to reply to this post
        > > which makes no sense.
        > >
        > > Charles
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "Bill Harris" <valleywestdental@q...>
        > > To: <existlist@y...>
        > > Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 11:54 AM
        > > Subject: Re: [existlist] the pathologically
        > > selfish
        > >
        > >
        > > Charles, I have written my personal philosophy
        > and
        > > posted it, have you? Your intellectual
        > abilities
        > > seem to reside in quoting others. You don`t
        > like
        > > the government, you don`t like the two party
        > > system, you don`t like people who wear masks.
        > So
        > > what is your accomplishment that we should
        > > entertain such indignation from you.
        > > Do you believe, do you act on those beliefs? I
        > > hope not, but I fear you do.
        > > I can assure you a Democrat would have done
        > none
        > > of what Bush has done. If you would
        > misconstrue
        > > that you have nothing but a neophytes idea of
        > the
        > > political debate in this country. Do you
        > donate
        > > money to the political process, I do . Have
        > you
        > > held position within your party, I have. Have
        > you
        > > served in the military, I have. Have you ever
        > > fired a Kaleznikov, do you know what it does,
        > do
        > > you know millions of fundamentalists would
        > like
        > > to introduce you to the business end of one?
        > You
        > > are the one who is detached, the one with his
        > head
        > > buried in a bookish delusion.
        > > What do you do to improve capitalism, or are
        > you
        > > something else? I own two profit making
        > > corporations, so tell me of your economic
        > > theories. Enlighten me Charles, what
        > existential
        > > truths have you lived, and how can I benefit
        > from
        > > your insights? Bill.
        > > , From: Charles
        > > To: existlist@y...
        > > Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:11 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [existlist] the pathologically
        > > selfish
        > >
        > >
        > > Bill,
        > >
        > > Another bureaucratic institution in this
        > country
        > > is nothing less but what the whole system
        > is
        > > all
        > > about. I am
        > > pretty sure that a democrat would have done
        > the
        > > same under the same current social
        > conditions.
        > > If
        > > the whole
        > > system is called a "democracy" it is just
        > > because,
        > > on the collective level, not on the
        > individual
        > > level, is putting
        > > on a mask like Biggie said, and playing the
        > role
        > > of concern for "the people". This is not a
        > > democracy!!!!
        > > We have to stop watching so much TV; it is
        > not
        > > nice to be manipulated by the press.
        > "Instead of
        > > ruling by the
        > > ruled, we are being ruled by the rule." In
        > order
        > > for a democracy to exist there must be
        > > dissension
        > > among the
        > > political parties. But what political
        > parties do
        > > we have. . . just one. (It s that a
        > > dictarorship?).
        > >
        > > Speaking of my last post addressed to you
        > > concerning emotions and what you called
        > > "analytical", I was more
        > > than impress by your reply. As I found
        > myself
        > > driving to the library to read some poetry,
        > I
        > > thought of you
        > > cleanning and shining your rifle and getting
        > > ready
        > > for the hunt or, like a well armed soldier,
        > > ready
        > > for war. Bill,
        > > you seem to be the most active member of
        > this
        > > group and I don't know what role are you
        > playing
        > > or what
        > > mask are you wearing as your posts usually
        > > consist
        > > of two or three sarcastic, meaningless and
        > > isolated
        > > sentences whith no purpose or insight into
        > > "existentialism". Personally I believe that
        > > poetry, philosophy and
        > > science itself are beyond your intellectual
        > > abilities. If this is just for entertaiment.
        > .
        > > .that's fine.
        > >
        > > Charles
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "Bill Harris" <valleywestdental@q...>
        > > To: <existlist@y...>
        > > Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 10:42 AM
        > > Subject: Re: [existlist] the pathologically
        > > selfish
        > >
        > >
        > > George, Dubya has crossed a line that may
        > > finally
        > > be his undoing. He is ordering the
        > bureauracracy
        > > to change. The telling facet is that many
        > of
        > > the
        > > segments he plans to change have thin
        > security .
        > > While the FBI and the company were the
        > > responsible
        > > entities, their tough societies of silence
        > kept
        > > the inept bungling from the press and
        > congress.
        > > Now we have FEMA and the Coast Guard to
        > > scrutinize. The press will have access to
        > the
        > > soft
        > > bureauracacy and when they find out that
        > nothing
        > > of worth is being done the paper trail leads
        > > straight to the white house. Notice the
        > > Democrats
        > > are agreeing with the move, giving Dubya
        > plenty
        > > of
        > > rope.
        > > Finally I would like to point out that in
        > the
        > > whole list of agencies promoted to the Home
        > > Security role there are no wet work people
        > > involved, It is no more than a paper chase.
        > The
        > > terrorists and drug lords must be laughing
        > their
        > > asses off. Even if the military got orders
        > from
        > > this new conglomerate the paperwork will be
        > so
        > > foreign they will never act on it. And this
        > time
        > > we will find out because the whole thing
        > will
        > > leak like a sive. Bill
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: George Walton
        > > To: existlist@y...
        > > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 3:59 PM
        > > Subject: RE: [existlist] the
        > pathologically
        > > selfish
        > >
        > >
        > > Eduard,
        > >
        > > You are just NOW becoming aware of what
        > Dubya
        > > refers
        > > to? Wasn't the election 2 years ago?
        > Really, I
        > > would
        > > like to suggest that you spend
        > considerably
        > > less
        > > time
        > > in here and considerably more time poking
        > your
        > > head
        > > out the front door.
        > >
        > > Responsibility is not a rock-word, true.
        > We
        > > all
        > > take
        > > out of it what we put into it: our self.
        > My
        > > point,
        > > however, is that, in doing so, it
        > neccessarily
        > > involves construing and then conveying to
        > > others
        > > our
        > > own rendition existentially. An absurd
        > world,
        > > after
        > > all, does not obviate human
        > > responsibility....it
        > > merely expresses it as part and parcel of
        > our
        > > own
        > > unique existential trajectories. Thus it's
        > > "meaning"
        > > has to be negociated with others, right?
        > >
        > > Well, sure, if Martha Stewart starts
        > insisting
        > > to
        > > everyone that she is now Woody Allen, I
        > > suppose
        > > you
        > > could say that, if she thinks she is, it
        > is
        > > not
        > > a
        > > "false belief" from her perspective.
        > Besides,
        > > when you
        > > think about it, most of what she says
        > these
        > > days
        > > IS a
        > > hell of a lot funnier than Allen. And I'll
        > bet
        > > he
        > > still believes he's a great film maker
        > too!!
        > > That's
        > > the neat thing about living in an
        > essentially
        > > meaningless world, I suppose: no God is up
        > > there
        > > to
        > > prove otherwise.
        > >
        > > Biggie
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --- Eduard Alf <yeoman@v...> wrote:
        > > > George,
        > > >
        > > > Oh I get it ... Dubya = "W"
        > > >
        > > > I doubt that Bush says anything without
        > > > considering it first. But then if he
        > does
        > > say
        > > > something off-the-cuff, then that is no
        > > accident
        > > > as well, since he should be aware of
        > what he
        > > is
        > > > saying.
        > > >
        > > > As to responsibility, this has nothing
        > to do
        > > with
        > > > one's perception as to whether the world
        > is
        > > > meaningless or absurd [not my
        > perception].
        > > One
        > > > can still act with responsibility in an
        > > absurd
        > > > world.
        > > >
        > > > You are basing your end point on the
        > premise
        > > that
        > > > "I" is self-delusion. I do not agree.
        > I do
        > > not
        > > > think that one can have a false belief
        > about
        > > > oneself, since the "you" is there for
        > you to
        > > see
        > > > at every moment.
        > > >
        > > > eduard
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: George Walton
        > > > [mailto:iambiguously@y...]
        > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:31 PM
        > > > To: existlist@y...
        > > > Subject: RE: [existlist] the
        > pathologically
        > > > selfish
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Eduard,
        > > >
        > > > Next time I'll use knives to illustrate
        > the
        > > story,
        > > > okay?
        > > >
        > > > As for there being no accidents, how do
        > you
        > > > explain
        > > > most of what Dubya Bush says then? I
        > mean,
        > > I'm
        > > no
        > > > fan
        > > > of the man, true, but even I wouldn't be
        > > vicious
        > > > enough to suggest that what he says, he
        > says
        > > on
        > > > purpose!!!
        > > >
        > > > Faceteously though, what can "taking
        > > > responsibility"
        > > > really mean in an essentially
        > meaningless
        > > and
        > > > absurd
        > > > world? Try this experiment, for example.
        > The
        > > next
        > > > time
        > > > you do something, I want you to start
        > from
        > > the
        > > day
        > > > you
        > > > were born and try to grasp, encompass
        > and
        > > express
        > > > all
        > > > of the countless thousands upon
        > thousands of
        > > > experiences you had such that you can
        > > objectively
        > > > articulate why you did what you did and
        > why
        > > you
        > > > are
        > > > wholey responsible for it.
        > > >
        > > > It's really about trying to figure out
        > what
        > > will
        > > > happen to you if you do this rather than
        > > that.
        > > > It's
        > > > about consequences, for the most part.
        > > >
        > > > Man, if I think "I" is a self-delusion,
        > > that's
        > > > nothing
        > > > compared to the collective self-delusion
        > I
        > > think
        > > > folks
        > > > invest in "society". Here, it is all
        > about
        > > > compromise
        > > > and power. The law [one of the most
        > > important
        > > ways
        > > > to
        > > > judge consequences, of course] has
        > always
        > > been
        > > > [historically] about give and take
        > between
        > > those
        > > > who
        > > > have and those who do not have the power
        > to
        > > > ENFORCE
        > > > the consequences, eh?
        > > >
        > > > Biggie
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --- Eduard Alf <yeoman@v...> wrote:
        > > > > George,
        > > > >
        > > > > Well first allow me to say that I
        > would
        > > hardly
        > > > be
        > > > > out in the woods with Bill, if I had
        > > murder
        > > on
        > > > my
        > > > > mind. I have no idea of how to use a
        > gun,
        > > > whereas
        > > > > Bill ....
        > > > >
        > > > > Anyway, I see your point about the two
        > > thieves.
        > > > I
        > > > > agree that there is a difference in
        > the
        > > way
        > > one
        > > > > might view these two individuals. You
        > > might
        > > > dump
        > > > > the law on the guy who does something
        > > > > intentionally and perhaps be lenient
        > to
        > > the
        > > guy
        > > > > who perhaps stole something by
        > accident
        > > [or
        > > > > whatever]. But surely from an
        > > existentialist
        > > > > point of view, this does not hold. A
        > > person
        > > > makes
        > > > > a decision to do something [there
        > really
        > > are
        > > no
        > > > > accidents] and must take personal
        > > > responsibility.
        > > > > That is, the way we look at the act,
        > is
        > > through
        > > > > the eyes of the person who does the
        > deed.
        > > > > Instead, you are assessing this
        > decision
        > > from
        > > > the
        > > > > point of view of society. Which is an
        > > entirely
        > > > > different thing.
        > > > >
        > > > > eduard
        > > > >
        > > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > > From: George Walton
        > > > > [mailto:iambiguously@y...]
        > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 11:56
        > AM
        > > > > To: existlist@y...
        > > > > Subject: RE: [existlist] the
        > > pathologically
        > > > > selfish
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Eduard,
        > > > >
        > > > > They do say the road to Hell is paved
        > with
        > > good
        > > > > intentions, true, but, in any number
        > of
        > > > > circumstances,
        > > > > intentions are manifestly crucial.
        > > > >
        > > > > For example, you are out in the woods
        > and
        > > shoot
        > > > > Bill
        > > > > Harris dead. Now, were you
        > > self-consciously
        > > > > stalking
        > > > > him because he ridculed NOOism [and
        > you
        > > decided
        > > > to
        > > > > murder him for that] or were you both
        > out
        > > there
        > > > > hunting, instead, and Bill's death was
        > > just
        > > a
        > > > > tragic
        > > > > accident? The cops, in particular,
        > will be
        > > > > interested
        > > > > in your intentions, I would imagine.
        > > > >
        > > > > Sure, both guys are thieves. But
        > clearly,
        > > how we
        > > > > respond to what they did, may well
        > come to
        > > > revolve
        > > > > around intentions. The guy whose
        > action
        > > was
        > > > > self-consciously motivated is almost
        > > certainly
        > > > > going
        > > > > to rip folks off again and again. Only
        > > some
        > > jail
        > > > > time
        > > > > or other form of punishment might
        > dissuade
        > > him.
        > > > Or
        > > > > maybe psychological counseling will
        > work.
        > > For
        > > > the
        > > > > guy
        > > > > who is not even self-consciously aware
        > of
        > > what
        > > > he
        > > > > is
        > > > > doing to other people, however, there
        > is
        > > always
        > > > > the
        > > > > possibilty that actually pointing this
        > out
        > > to
        > > > him
        > > > > will, in and of itself, start to turn
        > him
        > > > around.
        > > > > Plus, in acknowledging the role of
        > social
        > > > > conditioning
        > > > > in this sort of behavior, it may be
        > > possible
        > > to
        > > > > attack
        > > > > the problem from both
        > > ends---psychologically
        > > and
        > > > > politically.
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Biggie
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Our Home:
        > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > > > (Includes community book list, chat,
        > and
        > > more.)
        > > > >
        > > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send
        > an
        > > email
        > > > to:
        > > > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > > > >
        > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject
        > to
        > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > __________________________________________________
        > > > Do You Yahoo!?
        > > > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA
        > World
        > > Cup
        > > >
        > > === message truncated ===
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > __________________________________________________
        > > Do You Yahoo!?
        > > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA
        > World
        > > Cup
        > > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
        > >
        > > Our Home:
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > (Includes community book list, chat, and
        > > more.)
        > >
        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an
        > email
        > > to:
        > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > the
        > > Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > > removed]
        > >
        > >
        > > Our Home:
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > (Includes community book list, chat, and
        > more.)
        > >
        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an
        > email
        > > to:
        > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > ADVERTISEMENT
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Our Home:
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > (Includes community book list, chat, and
        > more.)
        > >
        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an
        > email
        > > to:
        > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        > > Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > > removed]
        > >
        > >
        > > Our Home:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > (Includes community book list, chat, and
        > more.)
        > >
        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email
        > to:
        > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Our Home:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > > (Includes community book list, chat, and
        > more.)
        > >
        > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email
        > to:
        > > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        > Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        > removed]
        >
        >
        > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
        >
        > Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        > (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)
        >
        > TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
        > existlist-unsubscribe@y...
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.