| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Just an open question to Lugnet.
In the recent thread about Richie Dulin’s Nazi Spiffcraft, I felt the need to
speak my mind about the subject matter Richie posted. I made, what I felt,
was an honest and accurate critique. That critique prompted a host of
responces, etc which has turned into a fairly ugly flame war that doesn’t seem
to want to die.
My question is this: Should I have kept my mouth shut? I felt that I should
say something, but that might have been the wrong thing to do. I wanted to
critique Richie’s MOC, but I was also concerned about what that MOC might say
about AFOL community at large.
Second question: Should I have said my peace and then left the conversation,
despite accusations that I wanted to censor Richie, or that I support Stalin’s
mass murders, that I’m a racist or the other misunderstandings that were being
spread?
This seems to happen from time-to-time, where I have an opinion that is
unpopular and people feel the need to speak out against me. At BrickFest,
Jude asked me why I was always so negative. I don’t want to be negative, but
when someone says something untrue about me or my motives, I feel the need to
correct it. It is that, I think, that turns it into a flame war.
Hmm.. Just ideas
|
Well, you’re a curator, so when your posts are viewed with that in mind.
Granted, curatorship doesn’t impart any magical powers, but it makes you seem
more “official” than those of us who aren’t curators, for what that’s worth.
I wouldn’t worry about the current flame war, if such it may be called, because
it strikes me as fairly minor in the scale of past LUGNET disputes. Granted, no
one likes to be called a racist censor, but even that epithet is based upon an
interpretation of recent events (as contrasted, for example, to those times when
I blast Dave Koudys as a nutty liberal Canadian West Wing fan, which is a more
personal attack).
So here’s the first part of the problem as I see it: Richie posted an MOC with
insufficient background to provide viewers with the context for making an
informed critique. That’s a failure on Richie’s part, and the condemnatory
posts that followed result directly from that lack of context. Sure, no one
really susposed that he’s an actual Space Nazi, but without any real sense of
what he was trying to achieve, the viewer is left to his own interpretations. A
newcomer to LUGNET could be forgiven for seeing the MOC and inferring that
Richie harbors some pro-Nazi or at least Nazi-friendly views, and these may be
objectionable to the viewer. By extension, a newcomer could infer also that
LUGNET provides safe harbor for such sentiments and might therefore reject
LUGNET for that reason. That’s a problem in itself, but if the viewer tells
others about Nazi-LUGNET, then the problem is compounded.
The second part of the problem is that Richie seemed unwilling to accept
critical input despite his claim that he wishes to grow as a creative builder.
Me, I’m so darned fantastic that I’m just not accustomed to getting criticism,
but it’s problematic to solicit input and then take offense upon receiving it.
The third part of the problem is that LUGNET does not censor, even if certain
people here seem to think otherwise. But even if LUGNET did censor, no one
has any basis for complaining, because they’ve accepted the Terms of Service and
thereby surrendered any subsequent claims against the TOS. That’s a draconian
interpretation, and LUGNET commendably doesn’t take that hardline stance, but
LUGNET would be free to do so if it chose.
The fourth part of the problem is the failure to distinguish between a person
(or people) calling for self-restraint versus actual censorship. Honestly,
I’m baffled when people can’t make this distinction. Heck, even John Neal and I
agree on this point, and when we agree, you know it must be obvious!
So let’s propose a hypothetical. Say that LUGNET Member X (LMX) recently lost
his twin brother in a fiery car crash. If another LUGNET poster created an MOC
poking fun at the fiery car-deaths of twins, it seems likely that someone might
raise a concern about its lack of sensitivity. The same is true here. Richie
shared an MOC that some interpret to lack sensitivity regarding an event still
fresh in many people’s minds. The problem isn’t that he made a Swastika-craft;
the problem is that he seemed not to understand the perceptions of his lack of
sensitivity. That’s why Nazism can be (some would say must be) spoofed, but
it must be done without cheapening—even inadvertantly—the ugly reality of the
subject matter.
I think Richie erred in two main ways: he initially provided no context for his
MOC; and he reacted with hostility to criticism resulting from that lack of
context.
Whether you, Lenny, are or aren’t a racist censor (which I suspect that you are
not) is ultimately irrelevent, IMO. The relevent matter is the sincere offering
of MOCs for critique and a mature acceptance of criticism when it’s received.
All else in this discussion is tangential bluster.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: When to speak one's mind?
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote: <snip> (...) Nutty SOCIALIST Canadian West Wing Fan (with libertarian tendencies where personal choices--vis a vis affecting no one else--are concerned) Get it right! <snip> (...) (19 years ago, 23-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | When to speak one's mind?
|
| Just an open question to Lugnet. In the recent thread about Richie Dulin's Nazi Spiffcraft, I felt the need to speak my mind about the subject matter Richie posted. I made, what I felt, was an honest and accurate critique. That critique prompted a (...) (19 years ago, 23-Aug-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
