(urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

[Daniel Petersen]

Thanks for your generous interpretation of my comments, Lee.  I actually am
well known among family and friends as being the aggro one at times - I
have to fight hard with myself to be civilised in debate, as I'm naturally
a passionate, opinionated, snarky person (half the time).  Some nasty scrap
and scrape in a forum like this is indeed a very good and healthy and
enjoyable thing.  I have zero problem with some feisty intellectual
punch-ups happening here.  It's when the insults start to sound pretty dark
and vitriolic that I worry it's no longer 'useful' and certainly not fun.
 I may well have misinterpreted, for example, Stockhoff calling Quinn and
'illiterate know-nothing' and this is good debating-buddy language they use
with each other all the time (I have friends I argue with like that -
sometimes it crosses the line and we swear off each other for a while, then
make up and go at it again).

Anyway, at least as much as that, I have problems with a more intellectual
obstinacy and obnoxiousness I sometimes see evident here.  It's
unfortunate, Lee, that I often have to just skim over or skip the (usually
lengthy) comments made by you and Gerry.  But that's what I do rather than
calling for you guys to be debarred.

Two final notes:  I seriously doubt letting off steam on the internet
prevents it happening in real life.  I imagine there are complex studies
into these kinds of notions that show the whole thing is dubiously
unpredictable.  But that's merely an aside.

The second thing is that I feel fairly uncomfortable with the idea of
people having 'goals' for this list.  What in the world?  (Like my sanitary
version of wtf?)  The list has a simple and stated purpose:  to discuss
Wolfe's works.  Let's leave it at that and be busy with it - not trying to
manipulate others and the 'community' toward further ends we've concocted.
 That's just weird.  Not in the good 'weird fiction' way.  It's... creepy.

-DOJP

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> >Daniel Petersen:  I simply don't understand you very well, Lee, and Quinn
> I feel I do
> >understand to some degree but find his seeming obstinacy about....
>
> You seem like a gentle, considerate soul Daniel, which I think is great.
> But do you
> believe in the adage, "it takes one to know one"? Gerry and I understand
> each other very well.
> I recognize him as a social manipulator and his retort to that is to
> accuse me of the same.
> Gerry, in his desire to win every debate, cannot admit to this shortcoming
> but I appreciate
> his honesty in not trying to deny his own mechinations.
>
> I freely admit to it. My explicitly stated goal in rejoining this list a
> couple years ago
> was to restore a sense of freedom of expression, the lack of which had
> previously stifled the
> list for a number of years.  I have employed various strategems to achieve
> this goal. Have I
> suceeded at all?
>
> I think your confusion about Gerry is that you underestimate and
> oversimplify him. You wonder
> why he employs certain strategies when they seem counterproductive to what
> he is trying to
> achieve. But, as I said, I don't consider him an object of pity. Is it
> possible Gerry is
> getting exactly what he wants from this list? Why else would he continue
> his very consistent
> pattern of communication?  Gerry also has goals for this list. What are
> they? (I'll let him
> answer) Has he succeeded?
>
> >Nor do I think my comments betrayed that I was 'missing something',
> especially
> >not 'a recognition of human diversity'.  I am (they are) calling for just
> such recognition and
> >celebration of human diversity - belligerence and'over-stubbornness' do
> not facilitate this.
>
> I think I understand your point of view Daniel. It is a wonderful one.
> Belligerence and pig-head
> stubborness do cause a lot of problems in this world and it might be a
> better place without them.
> No fighting, no killing, no hate.
>
> But the truth is, if we managed to eliminate those things, the world would
> be a less diverse place.
> Currently, aggression IS a part of the human experience and a pervasive,
> influential one at that.
> Much of my professional experience has been in what some might call the
> "dregs" of society and I
> have thus been quite familiarized with the dark side of human nature.
>
> Though I've always preached a message of peace and understanding in my
> work, I also came to know
> that there are some people who are inherently aggressive. You simply
> cannot reach such people
> with a message of peace and understanding. It doesn't register. So what
> should we do?
>
> The answer is what societies throughout history have done with such
> people. Channel the aggression
> toward productive or at least harmless activities. Sports and other
> competitions are a good
> example.
>
> So, I hope you can see what I'm saying. For some people, preaching the use
> of respectful, considerate
> language here is a lost cause. Instead, embrace the conflict. Encourage
> the expression of hostility
> in a place like this instead of in the real world. Not only does the
> energy of competition drive
> some people to do intense scholastic research they might not otherwise do;
> it just might be making
> the real world a more peaceful place by reducing domestic violence, pub
> fights and perhaps even war.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111216/f0bc569f/attachment-0004.htm>