Quoting
Dead & Messed Up (view post)
Personally, I guess I don't know how these extensive responses have improved on a simple, "Her age shouldn't be a factor. If she has something worth reading, it's worth reading."
In my first post, I felt inclined to not simply pithily state my criticism, but to locate it within a broader situation, which, as the post shows, includes
notable factors like: the negativity Duca has received online, the gender specific hurdles of her elected profession, the cruel condescension of the term of address used, its placement in wider communicative gradations on this forum, and so on. As you can tell, I'm not someone who easily tends toward brevity when I think there are multiple facets worth indicating (in the hopes that problems might be corrected or ameliorated; silence isn't always helpful).
This same approach drew me back here to substantially nod toward the context and worth that informs Irish in toto, as did a nagging refusal to condemn a user whose contributions have sometimes been very valuable and have suggested bona fide kindness and insight.
If you're arguing that everything
after my first post was unnecessary, then, in hindsight, I do see your point in
certain respects. In other words, I stand by my criticisms of his writing style and shitty behaviour, but not necessarily every aspect of my transmission of those criticisms. I was provoked and met dismissal with detail but, regrettably, some petulance, too. Also, as I just wrote in my previous post: "
But if it meant getting a better response to the principal criticism — his gross remarks about Duca and Teen Vogue — I would have been happy to table the stuff about his writing style for a later date and a more appropriate circumstance."
I'll now move on to other sections of your post — in this next case, I'll ignore the vaguely mocking bent of "pounding away at your keyboard," and address your fundamental question:
Quoting
Dead & Messed Up (view post)
I don't understand why this matters enough to you to spend so much time pounding away at your keyboard.
Because (and what follows over the next few sentences is randomly ordered, not a ranking of concerns) I care about what my experience at this forum is like. I care about the dignity of a human being/earnest writer — and some encouraging developments at a magazine with a sizeable, young readership — being unjustifiably and cavalierly demeaned (and I don't welcome uses of "SJW," "white knight," "virtue signalling," etc., which so often seem facile and indiscriminately used in order to stifle valid criticisms). I also care about the way the excesses of someone's communicative style can become problematic when it involves coarse language, obnoxious condescension, unjustifiably derisive remarks about the livelihood or intelligence of other users, etc.
I hope that provides you with more understanding because I am not going further into this beyond that. My last post was meant to lighten the overemphatic weight of the negativity found in my posts in this thread, and I'm not interested in compounding my errors by once again advancing a regrettably one-note, negative portrait of a user who is not without good qualities. This is what my previous post was meant to address.
And, yes, actually, some of my responses
are about improvement. Again, my previous post exists because a more considered look at the situation made me feel that I was giving a user — with a complicated but absolutely valuable history at this forum — short shrift. For instance,
I discovered his admirably detailed take on Collateral recently, which, even if I'm not persuaded by everything therein and don't fully agree, speaks volumes about why Irish can sometimes emerge as one of this forum's best assets (please note that I'm applauding
that post in particular and am not praising or commenting on any follow-up remarks or anything else in that thread). This is not news to me, but it was neglected in my haste to criticize (even though I was
trying to be charitable, but not carefully enough). Irish welcomed me to the forum early on. That's a gesture that demonstrates not only friendliness, but an interest in keeping this forum active. He was regularly generous with his rep and went out of his way to applaud even the posts that, looking back, probably weren't his cup of tea (in terms of the stated opinions or the florid style). For these and other reasons, I felt that I couldn't allow my criticisms to stand as is and consequently risk a monotonous and
unfair emphasis on negativity.
Quoting
Dead & Messed Up (view post)
So, don't read his posts.
I do see your point, but I think this is too simplistic/shortsighted a solution, for a few reasons. I'll point to at least one of those reasons by deferring to our erstwhile admin:
Quoting
Raiders (view post)
The problem with a small, insular community like this (as opposed to the sprawl of RT) is that you can't really ignore certain people or post only certain places. It's too narrow. I always wished we would expand, but it has never happened. I said it a few days ago, but the site clearly has a limited lifespan with the lack of new membership. Eventually enough will move on that we'll close up.
But my departure from this forum now
isn't just because of Irish — that's too simplistic an idea, as the problem is broader and partly has to do with my own approach. The truth is I still would have enjoyed reading and even civilly responding to his unproblematic contributions, even if I'd prefer some adjustments in his overall approach. I could keep posting here, but I'm not sure I would feel comfortable being an active member and at the same time ignoring any other notable missteps or blatantly offensive posts (made by Irish or anyone else) that might occur. Of course, there are clearly ways I need to adjust my own relentlessly longwinded approach so as to avoid, among other things, charges of sanctimony or rabble-rousing (neither of those two things are my intention). I'm trying to address that by leaving the forum now. I'm departing partly because I've earnestly assumed this critical role before (in response to offensive behaviour) and have consequently received somewhat negative results one too many times. I get the sense that my approach to these situations is unwelcome and, in its own excesses, can be somewhat unproductive.
I'm clearly approaching match-cut from a very sensitive and voluble mindset that I don't think pairs well with how some other folks want discussion to flow. To be clear, this doesn't mean that I think the silence of others is a tacit endorsement of the things I criticize. I've received rep for some of my posts in this thread from those who have understandably not involved themselves in the matter. Even those who haven't repped are entitled to opt out, obviously, and that's fine and does not say anything about their views on this. Some people are rightfully not comfortable arguing online. Or they can't or won't — probably for understandable reasons — budget potentially argument-begetting criticisms like these into their lives. My goal here is not to put myself on a sanctimonious pedestal above others.
Anyway, I don't want to interrupt the proceedings again and create more unwanted conflict due to my strongly held opinions. This decision to leave is therefore informed by these recent events, but it precedes it as well. I've been thinking for a while that this is just another place where I'm not a good fit.
P.S. — DaMU, if you are harbouring any understandable irritation or offence over anything, like the fact that I once called you out (in an unwelcome style?) for politically incorrect words, then I sincerely apologize for any severe approach(es), or any other legitimate missteps that may have offended you. I apologize if there were any flaws in my approach. While I can't maintain my health and responsibilities while calling out everything under the sun, I was able to address your words in that particular moment, and I think you agree with me that my criticism was justified (but if my
approach was flawed, then I'm sorry). I wish we could have positively discussed stuff more often on this forum, beyond briefly chatting about the Sega Genesis and SNES versions of
Aladdin, and sharing our appreciation of David Wise.
*P.P.S. — Given DaMU's response, I'll offer another statement, just in case my previous apologies were imperfectly conveyed: I'm sorry, Irish, for the unwelcome and unkind elements of my argument, and for the overemphatic harshness/negativity that I employed while trying to raise valid concerns regarding your comments about Duca and Teen Vogue and regarding some of the flaws of your communicative approach. I'm sorry, everyone at match-cut, for interrupting this thread so frequently, and for using more space than was necessary, and for the times that I conveyed my points in a dislikable way. Lastly, please forgive the "intermittent bolding, chunky paragraphs, and reams of qualifiers," which may be excessive, but are also symptomatic of my earnest aspiration toward depth and accuracy and fairness, as well as my worries about losing crucial detail through brevity. I do think that some of the lengthiness in my contributions to this thread was warranted at times (as I already explained, there were very good reasons why my first post was not pithily stated, and there are also valid reasons why my previous post wasn't terribly brief), but I agree that more concision would have helped in this situation.
P.P.P.S. - Thanks to he members that have enriched my time here.
) --- but I take your point.
Posting Permissions
forum
Reply With Quote
