BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Shadowsax: discussion of possible disciplinary action

 
  

Page: 1234(5)678910... 14

 
 
matthew.
16:33 / 18.04.06
Apologies, my last post sounded snarky. I didn't mean it, but I would like an example of someone not giving SS the chance. I can think of plenty of examples where what SS says is commented upon based on its content, not on SS's perceived attitudes about feminism. Say, for example the Sopranos thread, or the Female Music Appreciation thread (except Flyboy commented on it here)
 
 
Ganesh
16:34 / 18.04.06
Example, please?

Or not? Or in a separate thread where it's not going to drag things off into a Math/Haus spat, possibly one on the subject of teh Barbeclique? I'm sure there's one in the archives somewhere, if someone wants to revive it. Let's try to keep this thread on course.
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
16:46 / 18.04.06
I'll reply as much as possible, respectfully, to respectful questions, without trying to overlap posts, etc.

Fair enough. These questions I now ask are not out of disrespect, but to ascertain context. Since you have stated that most of the problems you’ve had on Barbelith have been caused by miscommunication, I hope the answers to these question will assist in resolving these issues.

1.)Do you understand that– intentionally or not- multiple posts you have made on this board have offended several members and have caused them to look at your unfavorably?

2.)If in fact you do understand that, to what level do you, personally, accept responsibility for these unfavorable impressions? That is to say, if (unintentionally or no) you offend someone, do you feel you need to apologize?

3.)I gather from several posts of yours, most notably in the F4J thread, that you may have had a rather messy divorce that you believe treated you unfairly. If that is the case, you have my condolences; I know that the legal system is hardly infallible. However, do you think it is possible that this incident(s) could have in some way made you prejudiced to groups whom you feel slighted by? This is not to say it has made you prejudiced, I’m just asking if it is possible.

4.)You have stated before that “statistics can prove anything”. I don’t have thee location where you stated that directly on hand, but if you would like, I can hunt it down. Do you stand by this statement? If so, how would you suggest we (as a board) should back up claims of facts? What evidence should we use instead? And if in fact you wish to retract this statement, for what reason do you retract it? Did you intend to retract it anywhere on this board?

5.)Multiple times in this thread comments have been made regarding using your particular case to “set a precedent” for dealing with cases of misogyny. You maintain that you are not intentionally a misogynist. Do you understand how this conception of you came about? Have you made any attempts to curtail it? If so, where?

6.)Do you personally feel hat sexism and misogyny should be a bannible offense on Barbelith?
 
 
miss wonderstarr
16:48 / 18.04.06
people are making these claims because they are taking comments out of context, and because it's easier to stereotype me into a predetermined personality than to actually read what i'm saying.

I'm not sure about this, for two reasons.

- your comments have been quoted on here but (I think consistently, I could be wrong) linked to their context. In some cases, eg. on a discussion of the "F4J" thread, it has been explained out what came before, who replied to you, how the conversation developed from that point; and also, who insulted you by calling you an idiot.

See for example these posts from upthread.

*

**


On page 1, as a further example, I attempted to clarify the difference between "whore" and "attention whore". In some ways I would suggest your words have had a pretty fair deal and have even been subject to generous interpretation.

- secondly, for the reasons I suggested (that it would, due to the nature of Barbelith's boards and the fact that much of your activity has been confined to Switchboard, be easy for a fairly active contributor to have never encountered your posts) I'm not at all certain that people approached this thread with a preconceived notion of you.

It's interesting that you mention your other posts (on Hemingway, Eugenides) which haven't been discussed here. As I suggested, I wasn't really aware of your contributions and had little sense of your online "personality" before reading these Policy threads.

However, one criticism of you that's been voiced here is that every thread you post on returns to your core concerns, hobbyhorses and bugbears. That seemed the case with the "teen fiction"/Naomi Wolf thread I saw cited above.

Subsequently, two questions:

- are there in your opinion other threads that you have posted on without it turning into the kind of depressing debate we see on "F4J", and without the thread gravitating back towards your attitudes about feminists?

- if your posts have been taken out of context, what is the important and meaningful context, in your opinion, that might change a fair and objective reader's interpretation of your comments?


and also because people are ganging up. just like i may never convince many of you that i'm not a misogynist, many of you can never convince me that you havent come to the conclusions you've come to because of a kind of mob mentality.


I don't get this impression either. I feel people have their friends and loyalties here, behind the scenes sometimes, but I also get the sense that Barbelith attracts people who don't want to feel they're part of a majority, or who identify quite happily as marginal to Barbelith, or as "contrarians".

for instance, Slim:

As someone who believes himself to be on the fringes of Barbelith, I was very much concerned that this thread was a case of posters overreacting and getting rid of someone who holds unpopular opinions. First they came for the conservatives, then the moderates, then the liberal moderates...etc.

Lurid Archive:

I'm in a tricky position here, because I'm going to attempt a limited defence of SS. Its tricky, because I am well aware of his behaviour and the reaction he causes, and this does put me somewhat at odds with MC and others. ... maybe I'm being an apologist for sexism on Barbelith, but I think I'd rather be wrong and be argued down than just keep silent. (I'm also something of a contrarian...)

Math:

I know that I'll be told how wrong I am about this, as it goes completely against what the big boys want ... whatever, but I've read the material posted here, and I do think there are times when people automatically jump on shadowsax or a comment he makes, and don't try to understand the point he's making, just shout or get angry at him. And while I think that is reasonable when he's rude to someone (for example, the chick comment in the sensitive rapist thread), there are other times when he may make a reasonable point that is ignored because of who he is.

and there is hardly a mob mentality at work among these regulars:

Mordant: I really don't like the idea of banning anyone from the board

Haus: something needs to be done. I am still unsure of what that something should be.

Alex's Grandma: I was going to attempt to mount a defence of Shadowsax (in the Lacrosse thread in Switchboard, it does seem as if some of his comments were misinterpreted, and he did apologise for for 'immoral attention-gate'; his actual remarks in the Sensitive... thread aren't in themselves as bad as I remember them being, anyway, they seem more garbled than anything else, it was mainly the context that made them so unfortunate; he's posted a couple of interesting things in Books...)


"causing offense" is far too broad to discuss in these terms. if i'm being considered for banning because i've caused offense, then go ahead and ban me. i'm pretty sure that all grownups can handle being offended a few times here and there.


The impression I've gained is that people feel more than just offended "a few times here and there"; some of them feel that you consistently upset and anger them to the point that they no longer feel comfortable on the board as a whole, which is really a whole different degree from having your views challenged once in a while.

****

Took me so long to do this with a bad connection that things may well have moved on. ShadowSax, you may not even wish to engage with someone who has such a femme name, but my points are out there anyway.
 
 
ShadowSax
17:32 / 18.04.06
Is there anything you regret posting? If you were joining that discussion again, is there anything you'd do/say differently?

yes. at first, i was simply expressing a view, not expected, based upon the posts ahead of mine, to elicit any kind of agreeable response. but the degree of anger/lack of any kind of sense of humor on the part of others ("dont i have the last word?" - obviously - to me - sarcastic) was surprising. and, knowing the culture here now, i would have approached it differently.

1.)Do you understand that– intentionally or not- multiple posts you have made on this board have offended several members and have caused them to look at your unfavorably?

obviously.

2.)If in fact you do understand that, to what level do you, personally, accept responsibility for these unfavorable impressions? That is to say, if (unintentionally or no) you offend someone, do you feel you need to apologize?

anything i feel that i owe an apology on, those apologies have been made. sometimes, we write things that we know will offend in order to make a point. and i'm not sorry about any of those things. it's unfortunate that it's gotten this far, but my actions alone arent responsible for this degree of insanity, and i wouldnt expect anyone who's coming at me here to apologize for being offended.

3.)I gather from several posts of yours, most notably in the F4J thread, that you may have had a rather messy divorce that you believe treated you unfairly. If that is the case, you have my condolences; I know that the legal system is hardly infallible. However, do you think it is possible that this incident(s) could have in some way made you prejudiced to groups whom you feel slighted by? This is not to say it has made you prejudiced, I’m just asking if it is possible.

anything is possible.

4.)You have stated before that “statistics can prove anything”. I don’t have thee location where you stated that directly on hand, but if you would like, I can hunt it down. Do you stand by this statement? If so, how would you suggest we (as a board) should back up claims of facts? What evidence should we use instead? And if in fact you wish to retract this statement, for what reason do you retract it? Did you intend to retract it anywhere on this board?

while as a human being i'm not immune to regret, i dont wish to retract anything. i do believe that statistics can be presented in so many ways as to render them in some cases useless, or at least secondary to a larger discussion. i didnt mean, literally, that statistics can prove anything. sometimes, i swear, i feel like this forum is overrun with the autistic kid who's narrating the book i'm reading right now, where everything is as literal as possible. if i were to tell a youngster here "you can be anything you want," would i really be called out on that? would someone ask me if i really meant that she could be a banana?

5.)Multiple times in this thread comments have been made regarding using your particular case to “set a precedent” for dealing with cases of misogyny. You maintain that you are not intentionally a misogynist. Do you understand how this conception of you came about? Have you made any attempts to curtail it? If so, where?

yes, i understand how that misconception came about. i already noted that here, in fact. have i made any attempt to curtail it? sure. in the F4J thread i said i wasnt a misogynist, and that i love women and that i love all people. i've stated directly that i'm opposed to rape and domestic abuse. i dont know what else to do. and i'm not interested in trying to sway anyone for whom "rape is very very bad," doesnt convince them that i think rape is bad. most of the feelings towards me, particularly originally in the F4J thread, were, as stated by those people with those feelings, based upon suspicions. enough said.

6.)Do you personally feel that sexism and misogyny should be a bannible offense on Barbelith?

attitudes cant be banned, and those are attitudes. in all communities, sexist and misogynistic and racist and intolerant speech should be monitored and dealt with as the owner(s) of the community see fit. you have the right to ban me, but you dont have the right to judge me (someone else said that, or something like it). and time and again i've defended the actual words i've said, but i've no interest in defending myself against people who suspect that my words clue them to some underlying attitude that doesnt affect them at all, despite direct words to the contrary.

- are there in your opinion other threads that you have posted on without it turning into the kind of depressing debate we see on "F4J", and without the thread gravitating back towards your attitudes about feminists?

yes. in books, creation, film, conversation.

- if your posts have been taken out of context, what is the important and meaningful context, in your opinion, that might change a fair and objective reader's interpretation of your comments?


that feminism does not mean women, at least how i'm referring to it, despite others' insistence that it does (how can others define my intent?), and that all y'all need to lighten up a bit in terms of trying to gain literal meaning from this one dimensional space.

The impression I've gained is that people feel more than just offended "a few times here and there"; some of them feel that you consistently upset and anger them to the point that they no longer feel comfortable on the board as a whole, which is really a whole different degree from having your views challenged once in a while.

and that is because they are wrong about the messages i'm sending. if theyd respond rationally, i'd do the same.

ShadowSax, you may not even wish to engage with someone who has such a femme name, but my points are out there anyway.

thats exactly the kind of crap snark remark that doesnt belong here. i'm trying to engage in thoughtful debate. by making that remark, you're continuing a false impression based on nothing other than wanting to be funny. still, you asked good questions, hopefully i've answered them.
 
 
Ganesh
17:39 / 18.04.06
ShadowSax:
but the degree of anger/lack of any kind of sense of humor on the part of others ("dont i have the last word?" - obviously - to me - sarcastic) was surprising. and, knowing the culture here now, i would have approached it differently.

How would you have approached it differently? And, again, could you comment on your interactions with others within the Fathers 4 Justice thread? I'm interested not in your perception of other posters ("lack of any kind of sense of humour", etc.) so much as your perception of yourself - specifically, the way you handled yourself there. What do you regret about that thread, and how might you approach the situation differently now? Be specific, if you can.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
17:41 / 18.04.06

thats exactly the kind of crap snark remark that doesnt belong here. i'm trying to engage in thoughtful debate. by making that remark, you're continuing a false impression based on nothing other than wanting to be funny. still, you asked good questions, hopefully i've answered them.


I apologise. I wasn't trying to be funny; this was me protecting myself in case you said something like "I can't stand chicks like you." So, that's me coming with a preconception (my bad) but equally, I came with that baggage because I'd seen you dismiss other people that way (and hence it was perhaps understandable).
 
 
Ganesh
17:44 / 18.04.06
ShadowSax:
thats exactly the kind of crap snark remark that doesnt belong here. i'm trying to engage in thoughtful debate. by making that remark, you're continuing a false impression based on nothing other than wanting to be funny.

ShadowSax, I don't think this is especially fair to Miss Wonderstarr. There are several examples of you making reference to (and, arguably, assumptions about) the gender of those posters with whom you've interacted, and I don't think she's just "wanting to be funny" when she adds this proviso.

I appreciate your trying to engage in thoughtful debate, though, and would be grateful if you'd again reflect on your posting in the Fathers 4 Justice thread, as per my last post.
 
 
Quantum
17:44 / 18.04.06
I dont think anyone has a valid point for banning me unless i'm being banned for offending people, Shadowsax

I must be misunderstanding something, I thought offending people (specifically women) *was* the reason for considering a ban. Not accidentally posting something that offended, but continuously offending group X by disparaging comments about them because they are of group X, failing to engage with posters because you perceive them to be X, Xist behaviour generally. You can see that that's wrong whether X= Women or X= anyone, right? Do you feel you have or haven't been prejudiced on Barbelith?

If you think you've done nothing wrong, why do you think so many women have been offended? I know you said a bad picture of your suit is painted by this thread and the links, but many posters have engaged with you in-thread on the spot some time ago- surely they can't all have been affected by the mob mentality? Or are they the ringleaders who started it? I am striving to understand.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
17:49 / 18.04.06
I have another question for you ShadowSax, if you wouldn't mind.

- Do you want to stay on Barbelith? Is it valuable, rewarding, interesting to you? If so, why? (out of interest, given that you seem to keep ending up in arguments and apparently falling out with people). And if so, how much are you prepared to compromise in order to co-exist with other people within the community (given that, clearly, some people find it very difficult to be part of the community with you as things currently stand?)

... that was a multiple question in the end.
 
 
ShadowSax
17:50 / 18.04.06
How would you have approached it differently? And, again, could you comment on your interactions with others within the Fathers 4 Justice thread? I'm interested not in your perception of other posters ("lack of any kind of sense of humour", etc.) so much as your perception of yourself - specifically, the way you handled yourself there. What do you regret about that thread, and how might you approach the situation differently now? Be specific, if you can.

how? no idea. i cant go back in time. i dont choose to, and if my banning or not is dependent on my revising all my discussions like that, then we're wasting our time with all this typing.

i'll save any actual self-examination for either my therapist or my fiction. i think thats fair. i learn from every experience, good and bad, and often my learning isnt a point in time but rather a process, a journey, all warm and fuzzy and full of lots of regret pooling in my gut and lots of arrogant self-assuredness and ego rebuilding. i learned that haus is a dick, that nina is anal as hell, that alas is pretty smart, and that there arent many critical feminists around here. or fathers. or really big tough guys like me with a harley and a tattoo of superman on their chest. or people who would have a beer with buk, a line with hst, or a debate with houllebecq, and all that is kickass and fine. and i've learned that most of what i say intended to be funny is taken wrong, so that entire last paragraph, this one here, was for kicks and giggles. at least for me.
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
17:54 / 18.04.06
SS- I appreciate you making the effort to engage with people here.

i've no interest in defending myself against people who suspect that my words clue them to some underlying attitude that doesnt affect them at all, despite direct words to the contrary.

Thing is, it does directly affect people. A number of posters have stated that your contributions here make their experience interacting with the board demonstrably worse.

...The thing which I think you're failing to acknowledge is the possibility that your words may have subtext which even you are not aware of. Direct words to the contrary do not eliminate this subtext; simply saying 'I think rape is terrible' does not render it impossible for you to hold dodgy attitudes about rape. By the same token, saying 'I love women and all people' does not excuse what a large group of posters perceive as persistent mysoginy. I would suggest that, rather than believing that this large group of posters are taking many, many, of your posts out of context, you go back and try to see how they are arriving to that conclusion, and try to determine whether it is possible that you hold attitudes of which even you are not aware. That self-examination, to date, has been missing, and I think that it is a lot of what people object to.
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
17:55 / 18.04.06
x-posted with a lot of people, that was in response to SS's initial response to miss wonderstar's questions.
 
 
Quantum
17:59 / 18.04.06
sometimes, we write things that we know will offend in order to make a point. SS

Please fuck off Barbelith you horrible hatemongering git.





See my point there? That it's not OK to write offensive things to make a point?

Do You See?

DO YOU SEE?
 
 
ShadowSax
18:04 / 18.04.06
I must be misunderstanding something, I thought offending people (specifically women) *was* the reason for considering a ban. Not accidentally posting something that offended, but continuously offending group X by disparaging comments about them because they are of group X, failing to engage with posters because you perceive them to be X, Xist behaviour generally. You can see that that's wrong whether X= Women or X= anyone, right? Do you feel you have or haven't been prejudiced on Barbelith?

this is completely wrong. i have not limited my debate to group X or Y, i have not based my responses on who is X or who is Y. that is completely wrong. in fact, i have no basis for this, but i thought all along that alas was a woman. if he's not, or if she is, it makes no difference to me.

Do you want to stay on Barbelith? Is it valuable, rewarding, interesting to you? If so, why? (out of interest, given that you seem to keep ending up in arguments and apparently falling out with people). And if so, how much are you prepared to compromise in order to co-exist with other people within the community (given that, clearly, some people find it very difficult to be part of the community with you as things currently stand?)

about 2 years ago, maybe a bit more, the literary forum that i frequented went down. theyve since come back up in a different format, but me and a large group of other former members disagreed with much of the ownership ideas, so most of us bailed, scattered. around that time, i found barbelith. new membership was closed, but i read here and there, and it seemed to be very active and interesting. around the same time, i needed a high degree of new anonymity on the web if i was going to engage in any kind of forum like this, because me and my partner were being harrassed, and, actually, it had nothing to do with divorce or custody or anything like that. at some point, i put my name on a list for this site, and then i got an email and i joined.

i really dont feel like i keep ending up in arguments with people. i swore a long time ago not to talk politics on the web anymore, because it's rarely productive. and i keep breaking that vow to myself. theres a regret, right there. but i feel like on the other boards, the only thing keeping other people from talking to me is the false impression they have of me. and my way of dealing with that while wanting to read interesting book reviews, talk about writing and music and general nothing with a group of relatively intelligent people (of which there are none in my neck of the woods), is to just go on my way, adding where i feel like it, and watching for responses, and engaging in discussions. eventually, it will either be a waste of time for me to talk to no one, or i'll meet some people and gain something from the experience that i wouldnt normally gain during slow times at work rereading boring emails from idiot coworkers. i dont feel like i'm in endless arguments here simply because i'm not only reading the same (few) threads that everyone is getting upset about. i really feel like the fixation is elsewhere.

how other people react to my being here is a matter for them to take up with me, or, as it mostly seems, not. communities are made up of lots of different people and the way i feel about personal responsibility within this kind of community is similar to other communities. it takes two to have a flame war, and most of my offending comments were drawn out by what i saw as ridiculous comments by other people. if a bystander was offended, thats the risk of standing in a crowd, i guess, and i'm sorry if anyone was unduly offended.
 
 
Ganesh
18:09 / 18.04.06
how? no idea. i cant go back in time. i dont choose to, and if my banning or not is dependent on my revising all my discussions like that, then we're wasting our time with all this typing.

I'm not asking you to go back in time or necessarily revise your discussion in terms of the wording of individual posts. I'm asking whether you're able to reflect in a more general way on your posting (within that thread in particular) and comment, "well, I might not have been as (adjective) with (poster)" or "I might have constructed my argument to emphasise (this) rather than (that)". That sort of thing.

i'll save any actual self-examination for either my therapist or my fiction. i think thats fair. i learn from every experience, good and bad, and often my learning isnt a point in time but rather a process, a journey, all warm and fuzzy and full of lots of regret pooling in my gut and lots of arrogant self-assuredness and ego rebuilding.

That's certainly fair in the sense of being your prerogative. If you're unable or unwilling to self-reflect, then I'll respect that and not ask you again. I have to say, though, that with little evidence that you're able to identify possible flaws or problems with your posting style, it's difficult for me to gauge how self-aware you are or aren't. Additionally, the fact that every time I ask you to comment on potential areas of improvement in your own posting style you highlight other people's perceived faults makes me wonder whether swift attack is your only (or most developed) mode of resolving conflict.

i learned that haus is a dick, that nina is anal as hell, that alas is pretty smart, and that there arent many critical feminists around here. or fathers. or really big tough guys like me with a harley and a tattoo of superman on their chest. or people who would have a beer with buk, a line with hst, or a debate with houllebecq, and all that is kickass and fine.

And quite a lot of assumption, in my opinion. My problem, as I've said, is that when I ask you to criticise your own online presentation, you criticise others - and, in this case, have moved to generalisation based on assumption.

Okay, I'm not your therapist, and I can understand why you might feel on the defensive right now, but I think some demonstration of self-awareness would be really helpful.

and i've learned that most of what i say intended to be funny is taken wrong, so that entire last paragraph, this one here, was for kicks and giggles. at least for me.

You're saying you're not being sincere, or you're joking? For the record, my responses in this post are not "for kicks and giggles". I mean what I'm saying.
 
 
ShadowSax
18:11 / 18.04.06
Please fuck off Barbelith you horrible hatemongering git.

See my point there? That it's not OK to write offensive things to make a point?


i should be offended at that? i mean, so what? so you want me to fuck off, is that the point of that? ok, point made. i'm not offended. i've been told worse before, and there are people out there in the real world for whom taking offense to something means that they were fired from their job because they wouldnt date their boss, or they have to get their newspaper out of the mud because they dont fit in with the racial description of their neighborhoods. those are things to be offended about, not being told to fuck off by someone on the internet.
 
 
ShadowSax
18:18 / 18.04.06
I'm asking whether you're able to reflect in a more general way on your posting (within that thread in particular) and comment, "well, I might not have been as (adjective) with (poster)" or "I might have constructed my argument to emphasise (this) rather than (that)". That sort of thing.

so you're asking me to directly comment on this post or that poster? thats what i thought you meant. and, sorry, it's not going to happen. maybe F4J will throw another devastating bag of purple powder on someone and the discussion will come up again. for now, it's spinning wheels.

If you're unable or unwilling to self-reflect, then I'll respect that and not ask you again.

i'm able and willing to selfreflect, ganesh. just not with you. because, well, you're not my self.

I have to say, though, that with little evidence that you're able to identify possible flaws or problems with your posting style, it's difficult for me to know gauge how self-aware you are or aren't.

well, good thing my wellbeing doesnt hinge on what you think.

My problem, as I've said, is that when I ask you to criticise your own online presentation, you criticise others - and, in this case, have moved to generalisation based on assumption.

i've said on several occasions, including here, that i understand that some of what i said was regretful. i've even used the word "caustic," that much i can remember.

Okay, I'm not your therapist, and I can understand why you might feel on the defensive right now, but I think some demonstration of self-awareness would be really helpful.

if you're going to continue on this line, i'd like to know what standard you're looking for. if i need to convince on a personal level each of you that i'm "self-aware", then you're wasting your time. you'll either get it over time or you won't. if you want to cut bait now, feel free. but these implications that my level of self awareness or anything else related to my self, my attitudes, need to be vetted thru you or anyone else is patronizing and laughable.

You're saying you're not being sincere, or you're joking? For the record, my responses in this post are not "for kicks and giggles". I mean what I'm saying.

i mean what i'm saying, too. i'm about to sign off from you, ganesh. you're being way too uptight for me.
 
 
Jawsus-son Starship
18:19 / 18.04.06
Please fuck off Barbelith you horrible hatemongering git.

See my point there? That it's not OK to write offensive things to make a point?


Oooooh - a paradox! Saying that it's wrong to write offensive things to prove a point, then writing something offensive to prove a point, then being smug enough to make your point in bold? I would personally find the use of bold more offensive then being told to fuck off, but then I'm a supercillious c**t.
 
 
Quantum
18:20 / 18.04.06
No, my point was that it's not ok to write offensive things to make your point. I'm *not* telling you to F-off, that was the first offensive thing that popped into my head.

Because of the inflammatory statement at the start, it was difficult for you to get the meaning from the rest of my post.

Others have the same problem with your posts.

See? I vehemently disagree with the sentence I quoted, where you say it's OK to be offensive. It isn't.
 
 
*
18:23 / 18.04.06
I'm not interested in engaging with this topic anymore. I vote to ban. You can find me when something's been decided.
 
 
Quantum
18:25 / 18.04.06
I would personally find the use of bold more offensive

Then take that as the offensive part of the post. Would you agree with SS that it *is* alright to offend, you know, to make your point?
 
 
Ganesh
18:27 / 18.04.06
if you're going to continue on this line, i'd like to know what standard you're looking for. if i need to convince on a personal level each of you that i'm "self-aware", then you're wasting your time. you'll either get it over time or you won't. if you want to cut bait now, feel free. but these implications that my level of self awareness or anything else related to my self, my attitudes, need to be vetted thru you or anyone else is patronizing and laughable.

In terms of a "standard", I was simply looking for some evidence of ability/willingness to self-examine - not one's psychic motivations or anything too psychobabbly, particularly, but one's online conduct/behaviour/posting style - which didn't immediately move onto the faults of others (eg. essentially "I regret not realising that other people have no sense of humour").

You reckon I'm being "uptight" in asking you for this. That's fine. I will indeed "cut bait" and stop this line of questioning. I appreciate you replying; it's been helpful to me.
 
 
ShadowSax
18:30 / 18.04.06
In terms of a "standard", I was simply looking for some evidence of ability/willingness to self-examine - not one's psychic motivations or anything too psychobabbly, particularly, but one's online conduct/behaviour/posting style - which didn't immediately move onto the faults of others (eg. essentially "I regret not realising that other people have no sense of humour").

well, is it possible that some people in the F4J thread and elsewhere were lacking in some ironic perspective on some of my posts? is it possible?
 
 
Ganesh
18:42 / 18.04.06
well, is it possible that some people in the F4J thread and elsewhere were lacking in some ironic perspective on some of my posts? is it possible?

Yes, it's possible - although that possibility tends to be in inverse proportion to the number of people who don't have the "ironic perspective" to see things the way you do. It's also missing my point, which was to demonstrate some capacity for constructive self-examination.

Again, thanks for answering. I'm going to leave it now.
 
 
ShadowSax
18:45 / 18.04.06
It's also missing my point, which was to demonstrate some capacity for constructive self-examination.

which i've already addressed.
 
 
Ganesh
18:47 / 18.04.06
You have.
 
 
ShadowSax
18:51 / 18.04.06
yes i have*

*see, this is fun. why cant we all just have fun?
 
 
Quantum
18:52 / 18.04.06
Is it OK to be offensive? (you're right, this is fun!)
 
 
Ganesh
18:58 / 18.04.06
I think you've addressed the issue in your own terms. From my point of view, ShadowSax, you haven't demonstrated the capacity I was trying to elicit. As I say, I can understand that you might feel defensive about 'going there', but personally, I'd hoped you might be demonstrably able and willing to examine your posting behaviour more than was the case. This is what I wanted to ask you about and I thank you again for answering; I think it's helped me understand you a little more.

I really don't intend to push this line any further. You're clearly uncomfortable with it, and I'm going to respect that.
 
 
ibis the being
19:04 / 18.04.06
If I can sum up the last page or so, we have ShadowSax characterizing all of the problems and dicussion he has caused as owing mainly to misinterpretation, miunderstanding, lack of humor, taking things out of context, insanity, anal retentiveness and dickery. Is that about right?

Sure, ShadowSax, you've confessed in an extremely vague way to possibly maybe being a little too something or other, but essentially if everyone would just lighten up there wouldn't be a problem. Basically, it takes two to have a flame war, and most of my offending comments were drawn out by what i saw as ridiculous comments by other people. I mean, it's almost amazing how you do that - almost taking responsibility but then swiftly, deftly ducking it.

I obviously vote for banning and I suggest ShadowSax start a blog instead. It's clear that this person has expressed no real interest in being a part of the community, he just needs a platform. I would rather Barbelith not be it.
 
 
ShadowSax
19:04 / 18.04.06
I think you've addressed the issue in your own terms. From my point of view, you haven't demonstrated the capacity I was trying to elicit. As I say, I can understand that you might feel defensive about 'going there', but personally, I'd hoped you might be demonstrably able and willing to examine your posting behaviour more than was the case. This is what I wanted to ask you about and I thank you again for answering; I think it's helped me understand you a little more.

well, on my terms, yes. i think i've explained that i'm not beholden to you or anyone to demonstrate that i'm growing as a person or somesuch. i dont know what the standard would be. i've said that i always learn. as far as "explaning" my "posting behavior", i dont see the need to. the quotes here and there that come up, when appropriate, i've tried to respond. these are the jokes. i mean, these are the answers. it's not that i'm uncomfortable doing anything, about "going there," because what i've said is that i prolly wouldve approached the F4J thing differently, but i cant say how, not because i dont want to, but because now is different. i know more about barbelith now, and i know more about myself now, just like i wouldnt have the same answer to something tomorrow that i had yesterday. if you'd like me to, as you say, demonstrate the capacity (both sort of insulting terms, btw, but, not the point...not offended) to behave differently, the only way to do that is to go on and post and stuff like that. i've already said it, now to demonstrate it will come with time, as threads allow, should it be determined that there will be a future for poor shadowsax to roam freely etc.
 
 
Nakkurusu
19:04 / 18.04.06
Thing I'm getting from the thread is that most people think that if you aren't willing to publicly criticize yourself, then you really shound't publicly criticize other people.

It's really just the golden rule, now for teh internets.


And seriously, just from reading this thread, and the links provided, it seems you don't even want to be questioned on your beliefs. (I personally think that defeats the purpose of communicating on message board.) If that is case, just get a blog, and there is no shortage of people who will agree with you.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
19:05 / 18.04.06
about 2 years ago, maybe a bit more, the literary forum that i frequented went down. theyve since come back up in a different format, but me and a large group of other former members disagreed with much of the ownership ideas, so most of us bailed, scattered. ... i read here and there, and it seemed to be very active and interesting. around the same time, i needed a high degree of new anonymity on the web if i was going to engage in any kind of forum like this, because me and my partner were being harrassed ...

Reading this I can't help feeling it's a shame the situation has developed as it did, and has come to this point. I know I said what I did above about ShadowSax, and perhaps I shouldn't be grateful for someone responding fairly calmly and reasonably to my questions, but frankly, if I'd read this thread about me (and if ShadowSax had compared my posts to piss in a paddling-pool) I wouldn't be answering questions remotely calmly or reasonably, if I was answering them at all.

As such, in the midst of these staccato posts stating "I ban", I can't help but take ShadowSax's posts on this page with a pinch of salt, given that I think any dialogue in this situation is... actually quite surprising.

Yes, you seem to be abrasive, short-tempered, kind of rude, and your persona would not be one I'd rub along so smoothly with; but then, it wouldn't be a big deal if a Hemingway fan wanted to talk about books on here, and me and him weren't exactly each other's cup of tea.

I wonder if this all escalated because of the F4J thread, and ShadowSax's personal investment and (I think everyone tends to agree) history of some genuine grievance, which led perhaps to more heated clashes, more sensitive triggers, deeper-felt grudges, greater vehemence.

I wonder if it could step down from the point it's now reached, given some kind of cooling-off process, and if after time ShadowSax could find a niche that satisfied him well enough here, where these obviously very problematic issues about gender didn't come into play.

I would understand it if anyone said that now they know ShadowSax's beliefs and now they've seen what he's said to them or to their friends (or just to or about women in general) they wouldn't want him present on any thread, even if that thread was tucked away on a forum they didn't visit and was just about 20th century fiction. I can understand that attitude; the belief that you shouldn't have to be careful where you go in case the person whose views deeply offend you is posting there, and that this is a question of principle anyway.

However... I do ask whether ShadowSax may at times have felt he was posting angrily from a corner. And being in a corner involves a dynamic between yourself and other people; it's not something you really do on your own.

I don't know. These are just thoughts. Rather than feeling a disgusted "get this person from the board", I am feeling that it's unfortunate it came to this, and asking (perhaps redundantly... though perhaps it'd be useful in future cases) how things could have gone differently.
 
 
illmatic
19:13 / 18.04.06
Going on current comments in the Duke University Switchboard thread, I have no probs with a ban.
 
  

Page: 1234(5)678910... 14

 
  
Add Your Reply