RoR: Forum

Michael goes:

Nathan to Barbara:

A man is measured by those he pisses off, not those [he] pisses on.
...

Makes you wonder what his real reason for all this is, including the dirty language to her.

What? Are you calling SOLO a cesspool of filthy language?

Oh yes, I keep saying that. Some think I am being sarcastic. Apparently they find value in this kind of thing.

But I'm not being sarcastic at all.

I really do wonder.

You apparently "wonder" about the motives of everyone who crosses you, and make sure to voice that at every opportunity. That makes me wonder "what the real reason" for incessantly questioning the motives of others is. Do you think SOLO oozes malevolence, or just everyone who disagees with you?

Many wonder about you too. But they have the decency and benevolence not to smack you in the face with it at every turn.

Robert Bidinotto suggested you drop the motive-baiting tactics. I agree. On the other hand, maybe you WANT some of us to start ignoring your posts.

NH

Post 21

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 6:52pm

Robert B:

I agree with every word - even if that plumb line of yours is a bit frayed and fuzzy, it's trying to be fair. LOL

I would welcome a return to a more positive atmosphere.

The way to begin, I think, is to cease pointing fingers at other people.

Questioning the motives of others is not a mere rhetorical tool - it is the initiation of psychological violence.

We can claim it's irrelevant and 'words can never hurt you.' We can claim that... if we wish to deny psychological reality. In the real world we care what others say about us - we don't even like having our name misspelled. Calling ad hominem remarks and motives-baiting "psychological violence" is hardly melodrama.

The adults among us can stand up to that, can take it, but should we have to? I think not. I'm not here for slappy fights with name-calling, finger-pointing babies.

Nathan

.

(Edited by Nathan Hawking on 6/23, 7:41pm)

Post 22

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 7:54pm

The essential point of Robert's very thoughtful comment is covered in Barbara's article. She, in no way, glosses over errors of judgment made by Linz. What she does magnificently, and succinctly, as great writers and thinkers are able to do, is put things back into perspective.

This has been a difficult time for Solo, but we will not only survive- we will thrive. We will thrive because we are a rather amazing collection of intelligent, energetic and passionate people - Lindsay Perigo and Barbara Branden are the best proof of that.

Post 23

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 8:19pm

Robert B, we don't disagree at all. But my focus in what I wrote was on the injustice with which Linz has recently been treated.

Barbara

Post 24

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 8:58pm

Linz rocks and so does Majesty!!!

Post 25

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 9:20pm

Barbara: Thanks for expressing in this statement what so many of us here feel about SOLO:

I have been, and remain, filled with admiration for what the founders have created: by far the sunniest, happiest, and most interesting place on the Web, a place where all sane opinions (and some less than sane ones) are welcome.

It's also a place that tolerates posts not only from the "less than sane," but outpourings of extraordinary malevolence as well. Take this 2004 statement from Robert Bisno on the subject of animals:

I say, harvest them all, grind up their bodies, let them suffer any hell that serves my ends and my life: I will not feel a moment of remorse.

This was written in full knowledge of the fact that Linz had once owned a beloved dog. But was Mr. Bisno banned for his malevolence? Not for a second. He remains here today, free to post whenever he feels like it - free, in fact, to snipe away at Linz in post #9 of this very thread. Were this my site, I would have shown him the door long ago. For, if anything, I 'd argue that Linz, Jeff, and Joe have been too tolerant at times. Of course, you'd never know that from the squawks of indignation during the last week over the Elmore-Jennifer situation - which, incidentally, I believe that Linz did handle appropriately.

(Edited by Derek McGovern on 6/24, 5:03am)

Post 26

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 9:54pm

Barbara, I enjoyed the spirit of your post and I would like to add a thought or two.

I kept thinking about how does respect work especially in fields of art, intellectual pursuits, and cultural change? It�s not like in tennis where you can prove you�re the best for that day or year.

Careers and egos in these fields are particularly fragile even more so when all the time, energy, and goodwill have, more often than not, little in terms of acknowledgment or financial gain. There are so many wonderful, hardworking, intelligent people here and quite a few who have spent quite a bit of love working to supply values to themselves, others, and the culture.

Crossing people who have done nothing but bring out their best is only going to tweak their self-esteem and then it is only a matter of time before they pop. Sometimes when I receive a queer reply I think �what the hell am I doing here?� And it is amazing how a truly insignificant and thoughtless comment can throttle your mind for longer than one would wish.

I often think then about history and what are the actions and the works that will cut through the crap of pettiness and have long term value.

For example I think that Lindsay is a great activist and I am sure that he will be an historical figure. And, yes, I understand that he is fighting for passion and beauty in the arts.

I don�t know how one gets the full concretized feeling of respect in other fields�I know I have a wonderful profound feeling when I experience one of my works living in someone�s home or environment.

Perhaps that is question that should be asked by many here: what is the form of respect, and by whom, are you looking for? I think then it makes one think twice about who is rubbing them wrong and, perhaps, encourage them to seek out the wonderful people that make them feel visible.

Michael

Post 27

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 9:56pm

I have been away from organised Objectivist organisations for some years - group think isn't my thing...Bisno said:

The leader sets the example that the followers follow.

In my absense it seems Mr Perigo has morphed into a deity. I'm sure the man never asked for "followers" or for anyone to put him on a pedestal. Jesus is dead people. Leave the man alone - go find another pair of feet to wash, if that is your style.

Last time I looked Objectivists sought to exalt self-esteem.

Post 28

Thursday, June 23, 2005 - 10:58pm

Ruth,

How do you go from "leader" to "deity"? People like Linsay Perigo do have a great influence on how people think and how they behave. He leads the behavior on this site through many means including moderation and article selection. I would think that he would attract people who like the way he runs it and like the way he talks. Surely this is more near what Robert Bisno was trying to say.

Have a good night.

-Dean

Post 29

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 12:43am

Derek McGovern,

I'm afraid I have to call you out on your unfair smear attempt on Robert Bisno. First off, it wasn't made clear until after the Bisno quote in question that Linz once had a dog. Read for yourself. (If I'm unaware of a prior discussion involving the both of them that established this fact, then I stand corrected). But this point isn't even relevant in the big picture. The context of the discussion was an examination of animal rights issues from an Objectivist perspective. Read Robert's quote with that in mind. He was basically stating that:

- animals don't have rights (this should be an uncontroversial statement to an Objectivist audience)

- it's acceptable to use animals as a resource (also should be uncontroversial - last I checked Mr. Perigo was not a vegetarian. I'm guessing he wouldn't mind animal testing to help eliminate human diseases either.)

- he (Bisno) feels no remourse about animals being used as a resource

- he also stated that he loves cats ( I think he may have mentioned elsewhere that he has cats for pets)

The "grind up their bodies" quote was a reference to an actual process that happens daily as part of a multi billion dollar industry - have you ever heard of hamburgers, Derek? Are you aware of the systematic killing and bludgeoning that takes place at a slaughterhouse? Furthermore, did you know that when fish are pulled out of the sea in nets, that they suffocate to death in an atmosphere in which they can't breathe (it would be the equivalent of you or I drowning to death). These are just a few examples of activities that humans engage in the greater process of sustaining life. Mr. Bisno was saying that he's all for it. I am too, as a matter of fact.

And nowhere - NOWHERE - did he ever mention anything about violating someone else's property rights to steal their animal to be used as a resource. This was concoted out of thin air - a complete straw man.

Sorry to bring this thread off topic, but Derek's "selective re-creation of reality" was too egregious to let slide.

Post 30

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 1:31am

Derek M. wrote:

... Mr. Bisno [is] free, in fact, to snipe away at Linz in post #8 of this very thread. Were this my site, I would have shown him the door long ago.

I presume you mean post #9.

Some are calling virtually anything which mentions Linz's name "sniping." Come on!

This is EXACTLY the thing I described in post #11.

First, Robert Bisno QUOTES BARBARA BRANDEN'S comments on Linz. Yet we see nobody accuse Ms. Branden of "sniping" at Linz.

All Robert does is add "his own rhetoric of a very similar nature makes it much easier to rationalize this sort of [strident] behavior." For this he's accused of "sniping"?

I repeat: Come on!

This double standard is unjust nonsense. It is just more accusatory finger-pointing with little or no basis in fact. I have no idea what Mr. Bisno has written elsewhere, but what he wrote here hardly rises to the level of "bashing."

Stop the "Linz and SOLO bashing"? I say, to all:

Stop the finger-pointing accusations, period.

Nathan Hawking

Post 31

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 2:57am

"Stop the finger-pointing accusations, period. "

Okay, okay everyone has got your point. So why not just start saying something substantive, and stop making a scene. Everybody's noticed you, okay.

You're here for a reason, right? The total passion for the total height, right? So why does this stuff spin your wheels so much?

Why not tell us what really does spin your wheels, and stop the tedious sniping. There's better things to do.

Post 32

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 4:27am

Pete wrote:

I'm afraid I have to call you out on your unfair smear attempt on Robert Bisno. First off, it wasn't made clear until after the Bisno quote in question that Linz once had a dog.

Yes, I just checked that thread, and you're right. But here's a strange thing - I noticed in your latest post that you make virtually the same points, using almost the same examples and vocabulary choices (right down to the term "straw man"), as Bisno himself made in the Animal Rights thread. Very curious. You're not by any chance related, are you?

But irrespective of whether Bisno knew that Linz had owned a dog when he penned that post, I stand by my condemnation of what he wrote. You say I smeared him; I say he smeared himself with one of the sickest utterances I've ever read on this site. And since you somehow overlooked the worst part of his statement in your reply to me, I'll remind you of it again: "Let them suffer any hell that serves my ends and my life: I will not feel a moment of remorse." [Italics mine.]

But enough of this Bisno business, which I have no wish to discuss any further - especially with a man who won't even reveal his surname.

(Edited by Derek McGovern on 6/24, 6:15am)

Post 33

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 5:45am

This has evolved into such a strange place. My 'bullshit' detector goes into overdrive when I see people falling all over themselves to thank Barbara in the most effusive of praise, even though her article is spot on. There is something unsettling in it. Or those who come on, confrontational and almost thug-like when others present their views (which seem to be that some criticism is warranted, which would essentially AGREE with Barbara's article). Again, unsettling.

Too tolerant of crackpots, too harsh on those it should love? SOLO is still, by far, the best thing going. But I am finding myself shaking my head silently at the screen more and more.

Post 34

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 7:28am

One thought on name-calling and strong language:

Don't use it on the internet. This is a simple role and it works, because of 2 reasons.
First, rude language and name-calling always angers people and second, you can better do this in real-life. The latter part means that you have no way to interact with the others beyond the spoken word. In the real world, Mr. Perigos words (which seem sort of hurting from time to time) can be interpreted by his behaviour and his expressions, softening the harsh style.
On the internet, we don't have facial expressions and often take things a lot more serious, especially in a sometimes very serious discussion. Also, we don't have a feedback, whether the other person is sensitive to such remarks or just let's them go through and you have no way to correct yourself in such a case of misunderstanding.

I think jokes and foul language is appropriate when the topic is not too serious (jokes are good environment), but when it comes to substantive discussions it is better to stick with reasoned words.
But that's just my opinion and that's the way I act :)

Post 35

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 7:43am

I agree with Max, try to be civil, but as I have noted elsewhere we are responsible for our own emotions. No one makes us feel bad, we choose to feel bad.

There is also the question of not knowing what will offend. Someone called prosaic can react like you've set their hair ablaze, and overlook being called an idiot. Go figure.

I am all for civility. The founders of this site deserve respect, not for what their altruism has provided, but because of their achievements.

Post 36

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 8:49am

Nathan,

First, Robert Bisno QUOTES BARBARA BRANDEN'S comments on Linz. Yet we see nobody accuse Ms. Branden of "sniping" at Linz.

There is a difference between those who recognise Linz's greatness offering constructive criticism on the one hand, and those who don't recognise his achievements jumping at the opportunity to engage in Linz bashing on the other.

MH

Post 37

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 10:46am

"You say I smeared him; I say he smeared himself with one of the sickest utterances I've ever read on this site."

If you've ever eaten a hamburger in your life, you have tacitly affirmed my "sick" utterances.

Post 38

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 10:52am

And funny it is, that I am accused of "Linz Bashing" for making a point that, had it been made by someone else, would have been uncontroversially accepted. Linz's rudeness encourages rudeness back, is this really so bizarre a concept? But instead, what do people do? They bring in argumenta ad hominem about how I am a "sicko" because Linz's lead handed distortion of my position (as opposed to the actual substance of my argument) paints me out to be, well, some kind of wanton sadist. Never mind the numerous references in the thread to me being a cat lover. And also never mind that this thread, and my identity, are totally irrelevant to this particular issue or my points on such, and are only brought up to transform what I had hoped could stand as a civil criticism into "Linz Bashing." So much for civility.

*Meow*

Robert Bisno

(Edited by Robert Bisno on 6/24, 10:55am)

Post 39

Friday, June 24, 2005 - 11:11am