[PLUG-TALK] Being plonked on plug...
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
Thu Nov 13 21:45:26 UTC 2003
I'm going to try to be patient and helpful here, so read along and try to
understand and take this to heart.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Michael C. Robinson wrote:
> Certainly individuals have stated that I'm homophobic and that I should
> just leave plug for good. I've also been called mentally ill and worse.
So far, so good...
> All because I have an opinion that there are problems at Portland State
> and that there are disturbing trends in plug discourse involving
> profanity and general disrespect between people.
No, Michael, that is not at all the reason people have made those
comments.
And, in fact, it is exactly this kind of failed comprehension and
unreasonable interpretation of the situation that has caused people on the
list to call you mentally ill (that, and the rambling, incoherent nature
of some of your posts).
You have thrown out all kinds of paranoid fantasies and delusions. Here
are some facts: Your instructor was not hitting on you. Gay men are not
interested in you. You cannot get AIDS or any other blood-bourne illness
from dried blood in a painting. And much, much more...
> I suppose I could ignore the God this God that tendencies of some
> pluggers every time their upset and I suppose I could ignore Zot when he
> insults me for saying something that's wrong even if I do put a
> disclaimer with it.
Yes, you should. You should forgive and move forward.
But I have no idea what you mean by God-this, God-that tendencies. (And
do pay attention to punctuation... that sentence makes no sense unless you
infer the hyphens after the initial parsing.)
> I'm not homophobic. I'm not going to drag a "queer" out of a bar and
> abuse him.
Outward violence is not a requirement of homophobia. Your homophobia is
manifest in the paranoid delusion that homosexuals are jealous of you or
want to fuck you or something and that they are only showing their
feelings for each other to manipulate you or greater society. This is
nonsense and extremely harmful thinking.
> I just don't want to be around any homosexual who is going to have a
> male boyfriend in public and make it obvious that it isn't just a
> friendship for both dramatic affect and ultimately political leverage.
What about for love and deep expression of personal feelings?
> I don't care about gay feelings used to leverage policy considering that
> feelings change in most people every five seconds and there are
> consequences for all actions people take. It's a shame that people
> under 25 for the most part seem stuck on feelings around here as if they
> are enough to guide morality, ethics, ...
While there should be a logical basis for the higher level morals (like
our behavioral guidelines in particular situations), the ultimate basis
for the axiomatic ethics from which we logically build our higher ideas
are not much more than feelings.
For example, some people believe that we are ultimately responsible only
to ourselves while others believe we are ultimately responsible to all
other human beings, all other living things, one or more supernatural
creatures, or the cosmos itself. Those ideas are based on nothing more
than feelings.
> Kulongoski is the worst moral coward this state has ever elected to
> governor where I'd guess that the youth, voters under 25, are most
> responsible for his victory.
This is the kind of non-sequitor craziness that folks use when forming
their opinion of you and your posts. You lept straight from what seemed
to be an attempted explanation of your own behavior and thoughts into a
tirade against Kulongoski.
> What kind of Catholic goes to a NARAL party and eats cake with a full
> intentional media blitz? Mannix is the real Catholic out of the two,
> though I wonder about his tough on crime stands. Still, I strongly
> believe Mannix can do a better job with this state than Kulongoski can.
If you want a strict authoritarian with a hard-on for hegemony and
antipathy for the poor, sure.
> And I haven't for the last time made everything about God.
Is english your first language? What does this even mean? This kind of
thing causes people to question your ability to think clearly.
> I suppose I didn't ask about perl and get information about
> Net::EasyTCP. There's more than that too, including a question about
> ultra wide hard drives.
What the fuck, man? Is this supposed to make some kind of sense?
There's more than a question about Net::EasyTCP that you didn't ask?
Well, no kidding! There are an infinite number of questions you didn't
ask.
> There are numerous anti religious comments on the list now, they show
> how misinformed some people are about "church power" and abuse also
> showing a level of angst and desire for violence against organized
> religion.
Who wrote anything about "church power" or violence against organized
religion?
You are paranoid. There were no such comments.
In fact, there were no anti-religious comments at all, either. Some
people wrote that there was no reason to bring up God on the list, but
that's about all I've seen and I read every single post.
> I've been told before by people when showing I have religious beliefs to
> leave, get lost, stop interfering with us... I honestly wonder
> sometimes if some people are best left alone in the long run.
...then you are questioning one of the basic teachings of Christ.
> If the political environment is left to the anti religious folks though,
> I bet that the discrimination will get worse.
The discrimination is in your head. There are very few people who are
straight-up anti-religious. Most people just believe it is a personal
thing and should be left to each individual. "Get your religion out of
here" is not the same as "Get rid of your religion".
> It may not reach a point where those who need to learn the hard way how
> wrong religious discrimination is will even at the extreme of organized
> religion driven underground.
This sentence is grossly non-grammatical and unparsable.
> The holocaust of abortion is worse than all the holocausts of all the
> wars combined. This holocaust has inspired the assault on organized
> religion.
Well, I disagree with this on several key points, but the only one that
needs to be pointed out here, in a post about your relative sanity and
coherence, is the paranoid idea that the abortion debate is the
inspiration for a perceived "assault on organized religion".
IF (and that's a big "IF") there is an assault on organized religion, it
was inspired by a little thing we call "The Enlightenment" which began in
the latter half of the 18th century, long before the abortion debate.
This was a time when rationalism came to the fore and the principles of
fraternity, liberty, and equality became the moral and ethical foundation.
Personally, I think this is completely in line with the teachings of
Christ if you ignore the alterations made by the Catholics in the Middle
Ages and accept the Gnostic Gospels.
> The lack of a statute of limitations on sex abuse cases is wrong,
> justice and vengeance are not equal.
Non-sequitor alert!
> The goal of replacing organized religion with agnosticism, communism, or
> atheism is neither civil nor prudent.
Depends on what you think of as the purpose of organized religion.
However, I don't think ANYBODY thinks organized religion is an economic
system, so certainly noobody considers communism a replacement for that.
I think perhaps you have Ronald Reagan's understanding of communism rather
than one resembling real life.
> For those who are angry with religion, a history note might help. The
> Spanish conquistadors who conquered Mexico were a concern of Spanish
> queen Isabella so she sent someone to figure out what was really going
> on hearing about enslavement of natives in the New World. Isabella was
> too far away for that time period to have any practical affect on the
> situation.
Again, this is not a rational response to the issue of "those who are
angry with religion". It's a single anecdote that bears very little
relationship to any current issues with religion.
Do you really think the persecution of the natives in the New World is the
only vicious crime committed in the name of religion? Do you think
Catholicism is the only religion or just the only one used to justify
atrocities?
> Perhaps a mailing list is too far away to curb religious hatred today.
Too far away from what? You're not making sense. A mailing list is
nearly direct human interaction. How else does one curb hatred?
> Speaking out on this list appears to be dangerous, Zot and others like
> him being the proof.
Speaking out anywhere is always dangerous. Hell, they nailed Jesus to a
tree for it.
And how is Zot proof of anything? He's a person, not an argument.
> There are some trying to complain about this, I wish they hadn't though
> from the standpoint that they are going to get what I've been getting
> now.
Huh?!?
> There are some decent people on this list who I'm grateful to.
This sentence just makes me think you're careless with language. The
meaning can be inferred, but the sentence itself is grammatically wacky
and misuses the word "grateful" (or the word "to", depending on how you
read these things).
> Perhaps an off plug list list for those who have shared religious
> dissimilarities with Zot would be good.
Why? So you could further cloister yourself from reality and only share
with the like-minded?
I have no idea what Zot's religion is and neither do you. The only thing
he wrote was that you mention God more often than is strictly necessary
for a mailing list that is ostensibly concerning Linux/Unix or Free
Software.
> If I don't use another account I've never used before and post under an
> alias, I don't think my troubles on PLUG will ever stop.
If you use an alias, we'll still know it's you because of your incoherent
style, penchant for knee-jerk reactionary non-sequitors and
stream-of-consciousness technical diatribe.
Hope that helps.
And speaking as someone who has been killfiled as much as anyone, surely,
I'd say that I've never been plonked by anyone that has ever had any
useful input for me anyway.
J.
--
-----------------
Jeme A Brelin
jeme at brelin.net
-----------------
[cc] counter-copyright
http://www.openlaw.org
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list