Striving For Charity

[Jaime]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='05 August 2010 - 01:29 AM' timestamp='1280986193' post='2152522']
Trid rawks.
[/quote]

So what's your opinion on this SMM ? You haven't offered one and I'm curious

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='05 August 2010 - 01:33 AM' timestamp='1280986422' post='2152525']
So what's your opinion on this SMM ? You haven't offered one and I'm curious
[/quote]
I gave my opinion.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='05 August 2010 - 01:44 AM' timestamp='1280987081' post='2152526']
I gave my opinion.
[/quote]

Well aside from "Way to go Hassan" "Amen" and Trid rawks" you haven't offered anything that even remotely resembles an opinion

I was wondering if you'd like to actually say something

[jeffpugh]

Want my opinion? A thread isn't going to make everyone happy. You can't marker smiley faces on people. What we see here are the symptoms, not the problem. A lot of us see it.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='05 August 2010 - 02:23 AM' timestamp='1280989415' post='2152533']
Want my opinion? A thread isn't going to make everyone happy. You can't marker smiley faces on people. What we see here are the symptoms, not the problem. A lot of us see it.
[/quote]

And what's the problem as you see it?

[jeffpugh]

This confrontational attitude, for one. Another, the persecution from people who have power here towards those who uphold the magesterium's words on liturgy and music, the pope's words on liturgy, especially the importance of the Usus Antiquitor (and no, one is not "Most loyal" to the Church by going to the NO). There is alienation of groups going on in this forum that is supposed to be friendly to Catholics of all walk. I'm open to talk, for sure. Let's use logic and history and continuity to talk it out. We need dialogue without the threat of a ban-hammer or whatever. That's the sickness that's around here.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='05 August 2010 - 02:36 AM' timestamp='1280990203' post='2152536']
This confrontational attitude, for one. Another, the persecution from people who have power here towards those who uphold the magesterium's words on liturgy and music, the pope's words on liturgy, especially the importance of the Usus Antiquitor (and no, one is not "Most loyal" to the Church by going to the NO). There is alienation of groups going on in this forum that is supposed to be friendly to Catholics of all walk. I'm open to talk, for sure. Let's use logic and history and continuity to talk it out. We need dialogue without the threat of a ban-hammer or whatever. That's the sickness that's around here.
[/quote]

This is confrontational?

Secondly, I don't think you can cite one incident where someone was "persecuted" for upholding the magisterium's teaching on liturgy or music. And I would like to see one quote where someone suggested that the NO was for the most loyal.

Who is getting alienated?

[jeffpugh]

Confrontational--you're policing every post here in this thread. I've seen you single-handedly respond to everyone that makes you go "oh?" What happened to the old days when you were chill?

Secondly, it's not just one incident. Have you noticed it's been quiet lately? It's because people aren't speaking their mind as of late. I'm the only dufus who is. Anywho, I'm bush. Peace out. Need rest. Maybe you do, too. Maybe not. Your call.

+

[Vincent Vega]

Interesting how personal opinions influence perception (e.g., I have been feeling like the N.O. was under siege, while SMM was feeling like the E.F. was under siege).

[Hassan]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='05 August 2010 - 02:42 AM' timestamp='1280990571' post='2152537']
This is confrontational?

Secondly, I don't think you can cite one incident where someone was "persecuted" for upholding the magisterium's teaching on liturgy or music. And I would like to see one quote where someone suggested that the NO was for the most loyal.

Who is getting alienated?
[/quote]


Here is how I see it, regarding where much of the tension has come from and why some phatmassers view this thread in a negative light. I didn't see everything that happened that night when a lot of phatmassers got suspended. I had to deal with a pair of enraged, drunken frat idiots who decided to start screaming "I will end you ****ing life" and other carious threats after I tried to get them to shut the hell up before they woke up my roommates. It seems, however, that a lot of the tensions between particular phatmassers were never resolved. That night stoked a lot of fires that had been mere embers before. Rather than allow the fire to burn out naturally, the mods clamped down. A lot of phatmassers were furious that they were suspended when you, who was seen as somebody the mods liked, were not. A lot of phatmassers were also furious about the letter. I didn't receive the letter, but I did read a copy that someone forwarded to me. The letter said that any complaints could result in a permaban or longer suspension. I think the letter was hurtful to many of them because 1-It ended with what seemed to be a somewhat snide remark about the 'fruits' of tinychat 2-The rather flippant way that the letter threatened permaban towards to phatmassers (it being a letter seemingly only adressed to one side of the argument, as it mentioned tinychat and hinted at a tinychat group) combined with the fact that the phatmassers one one side received week long suspensions and you received nothing, may give those phatmassers the impression that they are just not as valued as you, and other people who seem to them to be favored by the mods, around here. There was a sense of asymmetrical information. Most active members of the board seemed to know what happened to the tinychatters, but what happened to you, if there was any punishment at all, was a mystery.

So take all of those elements together. The asymmetrical information, the seeming favoritism, the sense that tinychatters really just aren't very valued here (because of the flippant way that threats of permabanning seemed to be thrown around), and the ban on discussing what happened and getting 'closure' on the issues, and then add this letter. A letter that starts off with you posting on it while the rest of us are still suspended (which came off as rubbing our faces in the fact that you seemed to get off lighter than us and generally insincere). That is bumped by some phatmassers with comments that the bumping was well timed (because it was the day we were coming back) which contributed to a sense that the letter was aimed at us. Now the letter is clearly a response to the events that happened that night, however we are not allowed to discuss the events that prompted the letter.

It seems like the letter is designed to force tinychatters to give their word that they will be well behaved. But not just that. It seems almost to be asking them to give their names to the fact that everything is just swell and that the grievances and issues that they have are not significant or don't exist. I think Apo broached this when he said that the thread was asking for kindness rather than charity. I'd say rather that the thread is demanding pleasantness. It is trying to make them announce peace, peace, when there is no peace. With this thread, not only are they not allowed to acknowledge the grievances that they have, they are being asked to sign away that they even exist.

This feeling of an inquisition is only exacerbated when you do things like this. Seeming to hound phatmassers who have not signed and asking why they haven't signed. I'm not trying to say that that is what you are trying to do. I just think that to some tinychatters that is the vibe they get. You keep bringing this thread back up, and wondering aloud why some active phatmassers haven't signed and it just makes it feel more like trap.

I'm not saying this view is valid or that I share it. I'm just trying to help you and others understand why I think some tinychatters are uncomfortable with this thread. And while I don't agree with it, I do understand it. Yes, when I saw this thread and you posting in it while I was still suspended, it felt like a slap in the face. I had always been grateful to phatmass because I really, truly had always felt that even though I am a non-Catholic, I still got a fair shake here. Yeah, I had gotten warning that I felt were unwarranted, but they balanced out the times I got away with pushing the envelope. In fact when I first got on tinychat, before I saw this, I was defending the decision of the mods. I assumed that everyone who had crossed the line had gotten a vacation, and said it was probably best that things had a chance to cool down. When I saw you posting again after a few days, and talking about how great you thought the thread was, I really felt that for the first time I had been unfairly treated here. A lot of people were angry about that. I also understand why the letter caused so much anger. I fell that a lot of the anger it provoked was misdirected, but I could see how someone could really feel like they were not 'really' part of the 'phamily' with the tone of the letter.

I also think that a lot of people have a harder time with this than I do. I never expect to be fully integrated. I'm not an orthodox Catholic. Combine that with the fact that I genuinely like all the mods and try to see where they are coming from, and just don't have as much invested in this place as some do, and I obviously would be able to get past some of these things faster than others. I think other phatmassers are much more concerned with being fully accepted and respected here and for them this was a much deeper wound and is still unable to heal because the grievances were never healed. for me, that night was much more personal, I had a problem with you. Not phatmass, just you. We have both apologized and said we would try to be better to each other in the future, so for me this issue is really over. But for other phatmassers, the 'flamewar' with you really was just symptomatic of much deeper issues of feeling mod favoritism, not being valued, et cetera. And this thread is just kind of a continued reminder and exacerbator of those issues.

Now, it is quite late I am quite tired, and I typed all this up pretty quickly and without re-reading it (which is actually normal) so if that was a giant, disorganized mess, I'm sorry. If I misrepresented any of my fellow tinychatters, I'm sorry. I just would like this to shed some light on things and help clear all this mess.

[Hilde]

OMGosh Hassan. You are win!

Am I an accomplice now?

[Hassan]

I just wanted to add one quick thing before I get to bed. I don't think Apo was trying to dump on genuine kindness and charity. I have butted heads with him in the past and said some things I really wish I could take back. But once I decided I wanted to try to get to know him, I came to see him as someone who truely does take both qualities to heart. That hardly abolishes the very substantive intellectual differences that we have, not to mention his crappy taste in tv shows . , but I given what a magnanamous person I have found him to be, I doubt he would deney the importance of true charity and kindness.

None of this means that I think that star trek doesn't really smell of elderberries

[Sojourner]

I have been around a long time, and I haven't signed this pledge for two reasons.

I felt the thread was poorly timed. I watched many of the events prior to this thread's inception from the sidelines, and this thread seemed like a one-sided, in-your-face, put-down to some of the participants in those events. That really rubbed me the wrong way, even though I was not one of the participants. This read of the thread was reinforced when it was bumped just as several people returned from their "vacations." I thought that was in particularly poor taste, even though my sarcastic comment to that effect probably didn't effectively communicate that.

I don't intend the previous sentences to be a criticism of the mod who started this thread; I don't want to be warned or banned any more than any other person does, and I also recognize that my read of the intention behind the thread may be wrong. This is why I haven't said anything more direct in the past, and have instead abstained from voting in the pledge or making any substantive comment about it.

Aside from my feelings on all the politics that may or may not be involved, I don't feel inclined to sign a pledge like this online because I feel "striving toward charity" is an integral part of every Christian's calling. I made the pledge to strive toward charity when I joined the Church, and I renew it every time I participate in the sacraments offered through the Church. To my way of thinking it is needlessly redundant to sign a pledge like this online, particularly when the pledge potentially carries with it emotionally charged political baggage.

[Tridenteen]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='05 August 2010 - 01:47 AM' timestamp='1280990829' post='2152538']
Confrontational--you're policing every post here in this thread. I've seen you single-handedly respond to everyone that makes you go "oh?" What happened to the old days when you were chill?

Secondly, it's not just one incident. Have you noticed it's been quiet lately? It's because people aren't speaking their mind as of late. I'm the only dufus who is. Anywho, I'm bush. Peace out. Need rest. Maybe you do, too. Maybe not. Your call.

+
[/quote]


JMJ
SMM<--- you are my hero.[img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Jaimie, to answer your question, I see the whole thing as childish. Kind of like when I went to to school for 4 hellish years. Everyone always had to be promise to bew "nice" to each other. So why was it that the kid who had red rash marks on her arms singled out for bullying whilst she was still trying to keep the promise? Why are you hammering people, albeit under the guise of "inquiring", why they haven't? You took it, and flipped out over a small word of latin? I use german and serb in my posts, and no one cares...so is that going against the pledge? And just because I'm curious, what about the pm'ers that use japanese? Well, of course I googled it to figure out what they were saying...but I called it "fun" , yeah

Filisofical
Understanding
New Words

And after all this? Well...SMM> you are still my hero!

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='05 August 2010 - 06:14 AM' timestamp='1281003272' post='2152553']
I felt the thread was poorly timed. I watched many of the events prior to this thread's inception from the sidelines, and this thread seemed like a one-sided, in-your-face, put-down to some of the participants in those events. That really rubbed me the wrong way, even though I was not one of the participants. This read of the thread was reinforced when it was bumped just as several people returned from their "vacations." I thought that was in particularly poor taste, even though my sarcastic comment to that effect probably didn't effectively communicate that.
[/quote]

Yep.