Re: Magic 111 high-flame-lights

[vickie@pilot.njin.net (Vickie Mapes)]

jorn@chinet.chi.il.us (Jorn Barger) writes:

>Steve Williams winces "So shoot me":
>> About a year ago, give or take 6 months, Jorn became tired of
>> what he saw as the then-ubiquitous tendency amongst Love-Hounds
>> for constant knee-jerk flaming, personal attacks, and
>> unresponsiveness toward submissions that expressed "feeling".
>> He wrote a few emotional, but generally accepted articles
>> deploring that state of affairs (which didn't necessarily bother
>> all of us), and then he started the "WarmRoom" mailing list and
>> more or less withdrew from everyday Love-Hounds participation.

>It was a lot more complicated than that, Steve, because I was *intensely* 
>abused for declaring that *if anyone on Warmroom insisted on being rude, I'd 
>kick them out*.  (I don't have these posts, but welcome anyone to dig them 
>out.)

At the time of this old flame war, I defended you and joined in lamenting
the rudeness. Within the course of this flame war (and others like it) I
ended up saying things that were rude and which I regretted later. In my
mind my rudeness made me into the worst kind of hypocrite. My *feelings*
about hating other people's rudeness remained the same and most of what 
I wrote was sincerely from the heart. However, I realized that by being
rude myself, it made the sincere parts null and void, it defeated everything
else I was saying, defeated the point of my arguments. It made me look
like a fool. A nasty fool at that. 

In the same way, IMHO, your rudeness, Jorn, is undermining the underlying
beauty of what your experience was to you. No, I don't agree with your
basic theory, that one can literally imprint emotions onto magnetic tape
(I think it all lies in the music itself and the deja vu factor that 
brings up memories and emotions while listening to well-loved music, or
music that just happened to "be there" at a specific emotional moment)
but I understand what you *think* happened and what a magical moment
it was for you. However you choose to explain what happened is your
business and I wouldn't dream of trying to change your mind. It's a 
fascinating subject and a lot of people have answered you with interesting
questions and their own take on the subject. I think you saw flames
that weren't there and started in with the abusive follow-ups which
of course generated some flames. Even so, people are still trying to
be rational with you and you're not accepting it. Your abuse is far,
far worse than anything I've seen by anybody else.

It's not just sad, it's downright scary. I'm sorry Jorn, but you simply
have to try and get some sort of grip. How many people are still taking
you seriously after lines like "you're a worm" and all the other name-
calling *you've* done? If you *think* you have some sort of high moral
ground to stand on, you'd better start acting like it. There are always
going to be people who disagree with you about lots of things. Simple
disagreement does not mean that people are "evil" or even "in denial."
Hey, maybe you're right, and maybe someday there will be proof. Then
some of us might be sorry we didn't take you more seriously. Maybe
you're wrong, and maybe you'll realize that you're wrong, and then
maybe *you'll* be sorry you were so abusive to people who were only
adding their own thoughts, and/or asking legitimate questions, or, like
Drukman's original post, being humourous instead of immediately firing
his well-used flame thrower at you.

Your experience with the Mary Coughlin tape was *your* experience and
no one can take that away from you. It was beautiful. However, you
simply can't throw out your theory as to *why* it happened and then
expect everybody to immediately agree with you and not question it.
Well, you can. Obviously you have. The abuse, the venom, the hate
that you have shown in your followups is sickening to see and is
*far* out of porportion to what's been said to you. I think you owe
some people apologies, that's MHO anyway. I sure felt a lot better
after apologising. If you choose not to apologise (*especially* to
Larry Spence) and continue this, I implore you to quit being
abusive to those you're responding to. Name-calling is beneath you.
You should stand up for what you believe in, but you should not 
take every disagreement and question as a flame, and you should
keep an eye on what your own high moral ground consists of, and 
how it affects others reading what you write. You've already lost
a lot of people because of the abuse you spewed. You have the
power to stop that ebb away from your posts and gaffa in general.

I *have* to respond to this, since you brought it up:

>The situation then was that Stev0 Berlin, who doesn't really seem like a bad 
>guy, made a joke about people who type in old interviews needing to "get a 
>life", and I objected that wasn't very nice, and the very same halfdozen 
>voices we're hearing again (in many cases) piped up that ***they thought 
>hurting peoples' feelings was okay***.   This seemed so blatantly insane 
>that I proposed we kick them off r.m.g. with a filter, so that people could 
>say warm cuddly things in relative safety.  This was taken, by new voices 
>now, too, as meaning I wanted to be r.m.g. Hitler ("I wanna decide who lives 
>and who dies!" as Crow Robot puts it ;^).  I wrote then:

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Subject: Free and Cruel and Proud

...some deleted, for space. Re your idea for a new kate mailing list.

>I'd like to see an agreement where if someone is rude, everybody notices, 
>nobody clogs the airwaves arguing that they have a right to do that, 
>somebody (anybody!) clues them in and if they keep it up, you figure they're 
>emotionally retarded and leave them high and dry to work it out with the 
>folks who can eyeball them face to face... YOU DON'T KISS YOUR COMMUNITY 
>GOODBYE AND HIDE OUT FOR THE REST OF FOREVER.

>You kick em off.  *Until they come clean*, is all.

>If people are hoplessly uncomfortable with that, I guess I want to hear from 
>people who'd subscribe to a new private Kate mailing list (I'd like to call 
>it Homeground, if Krys and Peter and Dave don't mind), along the lines of 
                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Ecto-- warm and fuzzy-- but with the upfront agreement that we won't suffer 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>fools, if any should try to subscribe.

>----------------------------------------------------------------------

>This may not have been obvious, but what really shocked me at this point 
>(Warmroom began at "Halfmas", Jan 30 1992) was that several of the main 
>contributors to *Ecto* united against me, and against Warmroom, and assumed 
>this intensely judgmental attitude, re-exemplified vividly by Angelos just 
>the other day:

>> don't try to *impose* your thoughts on others and flame them when they 
>> disagree

...more deleted...

>But the flamage then was *way* more intense against me than now (believe it 
>or not).  Meredith Tarr, especially (who never apologised, btw), but also 
>Jeffy and Angelos.  And I was devastated that supposedly warm-fuzzy folk 
>were so violent in their misjudgments, and that Ecto in general refused to 
>stand up and defend me.

First, this is how I saw the situation at the time. You were tired of
the flamers on gaffa, those who seemed to take pleasure at "stomping"
on other people's emotions (stomping was my word at the time, because
I agreed with Jorn) and you were very impressed by Ecto, which was/is
"warm and fuzzy" and flame free. You were impressed by the fact that
anyone could say anthing in Ecto without fear of being jumped on. At
the same time, *discussion* is encouraged and we did/do discuss.
Ectophiles don't always agree with one another and when that happens
a lot of discussion goes on, but no flames. It seems to get to a point
most of the time where everybody knows where everybody else stands on
issues (those who post, anyway) yet noone ever comes in with an
electronic hammer to pound their ideas and opinions down other people's
throats. It's *nice* to discuss things without fear of flames and I 
believe, to this day, that that's what you wanted warmroom to become. 
You wanted a place like Ecto, for Kate talk.

"Supposedly warm-fuzzy folk"? Excuse me while I attest to the fact that
Meredith and Jeffy and Angelos (and Steve VanDevender, who also posted)
*ARE* warm-fuzzy folk, no "supposedly" about it. They've all given me
so much support and have been so kind to me when I was down, and I'll 
never forget that, and I'll always love them for it. Don't you be giving
newbies a distored impression of these people, because I *will* flame
you for that. And if you dare to get any more personal, I'll gladly
oblige with more details.

They *disagreed* with you. Some of it had to do with their having problems
with the notion of keeping people off, and kicking people off, a mailing
list. Some of it had to do with your espousing the idea, without asking
Ectophiles first, that Ecto and Warmroom tie in together, and that
there even be yet another group to handle non-strictly Happy and non-
strictly Kate posts. Ectophiles were happy with the way Ecto was (and
still is) and noone, not even me, wanted to change it to suit *you*. You
seemed to think that Ecto should only handle Happy-related posts, and that
Warmroom should only handle Kate-related posts and that the third group
be there for if someone wanted to talk about, say, Sarah McLachlan. Well,
Ectophiles *like* the fact that we can discuss anything that strikes our
fancy, musical and non-musical. Many Ectophiles were willing to, and did,
join warmroom, but *NO ONE* was interested in the third group. It hurt your
feelings, but you chose not to even *try* to understand why we wanted
to keep Ecto the way it was. The irony is, you wanted warmroom to be
like Ecto, yet you wanted to change Ecto. "I love the way you are, please
change for me" is basically what you said, in so many words.  The 3rd
part of the disagreement came with your notion that you could automatically
"create" a  warm, fuzzy and flame-free mailing list. You wanted it 
desperately, and I understand that, but you refused to see, even when it
was pointed out to you, that *it can't be forced*. The warmth and trust
on Ecto didn't happen overnight, it built up as people became comfortable
and began to get to know each other, and lower their "will I be flamed
for saying this" defenses and *talk*. Mike Mendelson said that Happy
Rhodes is a state of mind, well so is Ecto. It's not a "clique" it's an
*atmosphere* and even most newcomers are drawn to that (I think, I hope.
Newer Ectophiles might want to back me up on that, or disagree, if you've
felt differently.) The point is, you can't *force* a mailing list to
have good vibes, it has to come naturally. Again, you wanted warmroom to
*BOOM* be just like Ecto, just like <snap!> that, only with Kate as the main
focus. It didn't work, and I'm sorry it didn't work, but you can't fault
people for trying to explain *why* it might not work. You did the correct
thing, IMO, in that you started warmroom anyway. You never know until you
try, and you must follow your dreams and all that. The sad (to me) part
is that you held a grudge against Ecto itself because a few Ectophiles
happened to disagree with you. You unsubscribed to Ecto. You obviously
*still* hold a grudge against Ecto. That's your problem, not mine, but
it does make me sad. You turned away from that which you admired, because
you couldn't take the critisism of a few, not "several" btw, Ectophiles.

And Meredith doesn't owe you an apology. She wasn't abusive to you, she
just disagreed with you. Like Meredith, I would also like to see the
post you were referring to. If she called you a worm, or any other
abusive names, then *I'll* ask her to apologise to you. Otherwise,
leave her alone.

I also object to your belief that those Ectophiles who disagreed
with you were "violent..." (I don't think so. Heated, maybe, but not
violent) "...in their misjudgements" (the wording says that "I, Jorn,
was 100% right and everybody else was totally, 100% wrong." No comment.)
 
One last thing, I do believe that there were some positive reactions
in Ecto, to your basic idea of having warmroom as an alternative to
gaffa. That includes my own post on the matter. You never read any of 
them, because you unsubscribed before they appeared, so how would you
know that no Ectophiles "defended" you? And since when has anyone's
opinions, or even a group of opinions been held up as the opinions
of "Ecto in general"? We're not a bunch of zombies who all feel the
same way about everything. We're not all in agreement about Happy's
music all the time. Hey, plenty of Ectophiles haven't even *heard*
Happy's music, and *lots* were lurkers long before they picked some
CDs up. Considering you didn't wait, or pay attention to, the positive
responses, you have no right to say that "Ecto in general" did or didn't
do anything. *You* were the one who threw the "baby out with the bathwater"
wrt Ecto and Ectophiles.

That's all I have to say. I wasn't going to get involved, but you brought
up Ecto and Angelos, Jeffy and Meredith disagreeing with you in Ecto.
I'm going to plant my hands on my hips, stand up tall, and proclaim that
Ecto wouldn't exist if not for me (and angel Jessica) and I care very
deeply about it. You bet I'm going to defend it when it's talked about
in such a distorted way. And I'll defend Ectophiles as passionately as
I possibly can. These are people who *care* about me, and who were there
for me, are there for me, when I really, really need them. 

(If you come back at this post, fine, but if you call me "Vic" or distort
my name in any way, as you've been gleefully doing to Larry and Jon and
Lazlo, I will be *very* angry. *That* letter will go via e-mail though.)

>Seriously, who else is sharing Steve's distress?

*ME!*

Vickie

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
            Happy Rhodes-Equipoise, it's *WONDERFUL*! (imnsho)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Vickie                "Fight for your right     "My ears are lucky to hear
vickie@pilot.njin.net   to have a monster" TA     these glorious songs" HR
                                _________
"Imagination sets in, then     |_  _ | _   The Happy Rhodes mailing list
 all the voices begin" KB      |__|_ ||_|  ecto-request@ns1.rutgers.edu
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Searching for Happy Rhodes reviews, articles, interviews, mentions
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-