Subject:
|
Re: Brad J Brickfest 2002 Keynote Speech synopsis
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Jul 2002 02:47:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
200 times
|
| |
|
|
I trimmed lugnet.events.brickfest and left admin.general. I see Todd pointed
his FUT to off-topic.debate. I'm not sure I'd send it there, this seems more
at this point to be about what is a personal attack and what isn't...
In lugnet.events.brickfest, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Larry chose to end his reply with a kind of personal attack also
If you took this as a personal attack:
"Richard, you're a much nicer and smarter guy than I used to think you were,
but every now and then you lapse back into your old ways. Too bad, really,
because it's pretty boring hearing the same old same old from you when you
do. You're much more interesting if you don't."
I do apologise. Really I do.
But I didn't see it that way when I wrote it. Put it this way, I saw this
discussion sliding down (via well greased rails) into the same tiresome
discussion about what reality in the business world is all about that we've
had so many times before.
That discussion brings out your worst. Your worst isn't as bad nowadays as
it used to be (I could dredge up some appends where you slung some pretty
good mud... the one where you likened me to a dragon raking my claws through
my hoard of pieces and sets really really hurt deeply, you know...) Nowadays
you just insult me by calling me an apologist. That's pretty mild compared
to your old behaviours, but it's still an insult, dictionary citations or not.
I would prefer not to go there again if at all possible. It's no fun for me
or you or anyone else and it's not adding anything new. That's what I was
driving at with my statement. Rereading it perhaps I could have phrased it
better, and I'll try to do so next time should there be a next time (one can
hope there won't be, the underlying topic is so very very mined out).
> (this is the guy that is allowed to moderate and curate newsgroups here
> and on bricklink?).
"allowed to" ?? it's not some big prize, you know.
It's a way to give back to the community in some small way for all the
community has done for me.
Why did you help run the recent IP 2002 contest? For personal glory?
Hardly... you did it because, while it might have been fun for you (one
hopes), it was your way to give back. It was good for the community. (I only
wish I could have forced myself to make time to get an entry in)
Why do you push your grading standard? Because it's good for the community.
We'll all benefit if it becomes generally accepted.
Why do key WAMALUG members work so very hard on BF? For the community.
Why did I transcribe the talk in the first place? For the community.
THATS why we do things, not just for egoboo.
But more importantly there's a connotation in your phrasing ("this is the
guy that's...") there that I don't care for at all. I think my curatorship
(and gentle guidance, but not moderating) record on .trains is pretty good.
Not the best but not bad.
Further, I think my track record moderating on bricklink is better than
pretty good, it's exemplary, although that's rather hard to prove... You
have no idea how many fires have been tamped without you even knowing about
them there. (that you don't know about them means Dan and Mark P and I are
doing a good job, it's less visible there than here)
And that (in both cases) is despite a few twits that do their best to make
trouble just because it's me. You and I both know they're out there.
> James posed a famous trick question that cannot be answered yes or no
> without admitting fault (in this case the *really sweet* assertion that I
> beat women).
Posed not because he felt you were really in need of answering but rather to
try to get you to realise that you were posing similar dilemnas of your own
to others. If you seriously think he was asserting that you beat women then
I'm not sure what to say... don't be disingenuous, it doesn't become you,
you know what he was trying to show, that you were using an unfair
rhetorical device.
> I might disagree with some of the views stated by Larry P., James B., or
> even those of Erik O. but I don't think I go out of my way to insult them
> personally.
Like you used to.
> Maybe there is some confusion about the word "apologist" -- it
> merely means "A person who argues in defense or justification of something,
> such as a doctrine, a policy, or an institution."
That's the denotation, yes, but it carries a *very* negative connotation and
to overlook that connotation and blithely say it's not insulting is
disingenuous too. (I can never spell that word right without looking it up!)
> Frankly, I am not sure why some of you are not banned from posting for
> failure to keep a civil tongue when replying to others' posts.
Don't go there. You might find yourself banned too... that's a rather tough
row to hoe. You really don't want people dredging up old posts you made any
more than any of the rest of us want some of our imperfections dredged up.
Somewhere in here we may have crossed the line into baiting, so... Let's
drop this and get back to doing good things for the community. I've said
what I wanted to say about the original topic, and I suspect you have too,
and if we dig into this meta topic further it's not going to be a good
thing. Not at all.
You can have the last word here or you can email me if you like, I'm done.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Brad J Brickfest 2002 Keynote Speech synopsis
|
| (...) Well, the fact that you think it's cool to make a public examination of my behavior or character traits is rather annoying. And the statement was qualified in weird ways that made it a fairly backhanded compliment if that's what it was (...) (22 years ago, 24-Jul-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
