Steve and I returned from the 50th anniversary week for Steve's parents
last night.  Now, I will again start to get caught up and maybe eventually,
hopefully have a few of my duties completed.
 
In our home experiences there have been individuals for whom Proglycem was
a very, very important drug in advanced insulinoma.
 
E. wondered why people mind being flamed.  Human live in societies.  At
times we have to buck the conventions of our groups to follow our
consciences, but for the most part we rely on the social responsibilities
of humans every hour of every day: to not have a plane come apart in the
sky, to eat foods which aren't molded, to have the medicines we need when
we need them, to have children with a decent enough education that they
will not starve, to be pulled from a burning building... This means that
it is built into us to have social responsibilities ourselves (as well
as continually, quietly benefiting minute by minute from the social
responsibilities of others) and one way we know when we are behaving
destructively is by understanding the responses our actions or words
garner.  Granted, no matter what someone says or does in any large enough
group there's going to be someone who objects, but the normal reaction is
then to review what one did and carefully judge one's own actions (rather
than reflexly being stubbornly defensive), then adjusting the actions or
statements as found fit to meet one's own needs as well as those of the
society.  Sometimes the critic is found to be wrong, sometimes oneself is
found to be wrong, usually it's a mixture.  Hey, it's basic, everyday
education, whether it happens here on the FML or out on the street.
Constructive criticism (as opposed to destructive ones like bigotry or
flame baiting) is less painful as the years go on, but it is still a
learning tool and a very effective one for such a social animal.  We all
make mistakes, and we all sometimes just plain handle something in a less
effective manner than we'd like to think we actually used.  Seeing how
others respond tells us when we manage to be effective -- whether that is
in coalescing, or in changing opinions.  If we get flamed consistently and
in large numbers then we are not very effective in helping the group with
whatever it is that we happen to know, simply because we can't impart that
information in fashion which people find useful.  Inviting flames may be a
great way to get attention for oneself, but who else does it help?  Finding
a way to explain the issue which is constructive is more likely to assist
others and to not be ignored on an intellectual level.
[Posted in FML issue 2714]