Hey gang. This is an open letter to the management & members of the Alembic Club. This letter comes at the explicit request of more than one current or ex Club member.
I?m sure many of you will remember me as the ?8 String King?? I used to be a member here, but since terminating my membership have maintained contact with several past and/or current Club members ?some of whom I?ve contacted, some of whom (have) contacted me. Discussions with these individuals have repeatedly resulted in some suggesting I share some thoughts here; until now, I?ve chosen not to make the effort to do so.
What I have to say is entirely well-intentioned, with no malicious intent, and with no intentions other than constructive. I wish to share thoughts which pertain to the topic of this thread, and which are of great relevance and importance to the topic.
After several drafts, I?m just going to try and ramble through and present my thoughts and points in a linear way. I?ll try to get to the point as soon as I can. But one last comment is to make clear in advance that I fully respect the rights of management to run their website however they choose and to allow/not allow whatever they wish, good or bad, rational or irrational. I do not take issue with that, and what I?m about to say isn?t directed at that angle.
HERE WE GO. I used to be a ?senior member? here, and posted/interacted here frequently/regularly. For the most part, I enjoyed the Forum and my interactions here ?although I certainly regularly saw things I didn?t like, including plenty of ?offensive? things. This never bothered me in the slightest. You see, ?offensiveness? is a necessary consequence of open/meaningful dialogue/communication. To be more precise, in order for a forum/medium to be capable of harboring meaningful discourse, it must not attempt to ?dis-allow ?offensive? speech?.
TO BE BLUNT, I hold/submit a/the two-fold argument that (1) the notion that we ?ought? to be protected from ?offense? is flawed to the point of absurdity, and (2) the notion that we ?can? be protected from offense is flawed to the point of absurdity. Both these notions are patently false, absurd, and, when implemented, harmful. And of course what we?re talking about here is CENSORSHIP? when someone decides that another person?s thoughts/words/communications will be deleted/modified to ?protect? some from being offended. Well, from my perspective, this is absurd ?and on several fronts. First of all, censorship is fundamentally flawed because it not only doesn?t solve the (alleged) ?problem? (and, I hold, can?t) but (instead) causes a bigger problem. From my perspective, censorship is infinitely more of a ?problem? than ?offensiveness?. NOTHING that anyone could say, even the most malicious, hate-filled, and profanity-ridden rantings could offend me as much as the mentality of anyone who advocates eliminating their words because they?re ?offensive?. So what?
You see, I take fundamental issue with the whole underlying mentality and suppositions (of censorship); I don?t see it as either possible or even desirable to ?eliminate offensiveness?. I submit that if one seriously attempts to defend the notion that it IS possible and/or desirable to do both, one will not be able to even present a credible position that isn?t absurd and laughable, much less defend it.
You CAN?T eliminate ?offensiveness? with censorship? you can only eliminate what the censor regards as ?offensive?. But the notion that one ?should? eliminate it is highly questionable at the least, and patently false at the most. Allowing all expressions ??offensive? AND ?not offensive? is essential, as the notion that there is a universally accepted standard? should be a self-evident absurdity.
This is a DEEP subject, and one worth of discussion which could go on for quite some length. I?m not inclined to go further, myself. I made the fundamental point. But I?ll add to it, and tell you the censorship policy and atmosphere here has achieved the opposite of the apparent intentions of management? its driven people away. There are at least a half dozen current or ex-members from this Club who?ve explicitly told me they either don?t come here at all now or do so less or just scan the postings but don?t interact here ?because of the policies of management here regarding censorship, and because of the atmosphere that this has created.
See, back when I was here, it was a lot less uptight, but still on a regular basis, individuals would post ?offensive? things. (Remember, from/under my paradigm, this is a given, and in fact there is no possibility it could be avoided.) Sometimes I would be offended by posts, often of a religious or political nature. So what? The question is, ?how did I respond?? And the answer is, ?by communicating?. And surely my responses might well likely be ?offensive? (at least, to ?some?)? how could they not be?
It was always in these situations that the inherent flaws of censorship would manifest themselves. Someone would start a thread of a ?sensitive? nature? something ?political? or ?religious?? something with a PHILOSOPHICAL underpinning (meaning: something of IMPORTANCE). Then responses would be lambasted and/or censored, often/usually with Dave Houck?s flower rainbow-scented ?press the button and hear the repetitious phrase on your talking action figure? ?company line?? I can?t even stand to partially quote it.
Then on one such occasion, Dave completely deletes an ?offensive? post of mine (but of course not the other posts which evidently were satisfactory to his enlightened and almighty self). To add further insult and injury to things, it was accompanied by his little generic ?I may not have meant what I wrote? blurb? no Censor Dave, I meant exactly what I wrote. AND THAT WAS IT FOR ME. I simply won?t spend any time in a forum that? lacks integrity? yeah, that?s it. When you exercise censorship, you eliminate intellectual honesty and integrity, and also invite/encourage self-censorship, and it becomes a much less desirable place.
I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE. I left quietly and quickly, my parting words being ?yeah right? in response to Dave?s BS about how I may not have meant what I wrote. What would be the point of responding in such an environment? Trying to ?prohibit offensiveness? creates an offensive and inhospitable environment. Sure, if we want to sit around and stroke ourselves about how our Alembics are great, we can do that. And it certainly it appropriate to do so. But there?s a lot more to life than that.
We?re in a pretty screwed-up world with a lot of big problems. I submit a large part of that comes from us NOT discussing a bunch of frankly potentially ?highly offensive? subject matter. I would submit that much of the most important things in life involve discussing differing ideas and positions that are almost certainly ?highly offensive?? it?s really just a question of ?to who? and ?why?.
How do we handle offensiveness? Well, not all the same way, that?s for sure. I respond to it, intellectually? that?s what I do. On the other hand, I?ve repeatedly experienced the phenomenon of others ?taking offense? at my communications, and then going off and sniveling to someone (Susan, in, she said, more than one case). Then I one day got a phone call from Susan ?a very polite and respectful but pointed call- regarding my ?problematic? (my word, not hers) conduct. Experience has taught me that those who, to be blunt, apparently lack the maturity, experience, and adult skills to respond to offense in a constructive, enlightened, and adult-like manner instead, like children, basically whine and cry until ?mommy? or ?daddy? or ?whoever?? the ?authority figure(s)?? the CENSOR(s)? respond(s). Yeah.
They bring us all down, these people. Those that can?t handle the inherently negative aspects of communication and honest adult interactions try and put shackles on those who can? and the sad thing is they only bring everyone and everything down ?while not really even achieving their own objectives. The best you can achieve is to eventually have a primarily homogenous group with a transient group of those who come and eventually leave when the underlying implicitly/explicitly monitored/censored environment becomes evident.
Our ability to communicate openly and honestly ?and therefore, OFFENSIVELY- in general, but most especially and particularly ON THE INTERNET, is one of the most important things in the world, literally. It?s actually, I would submit, the best chance our world and civilization has for survival. Most of the problems in the world exist not because there aren?t solutions, but because people are either unwilling or unable to say and/or hear them. Our survival as a planet, a race, and a civilization is a function of the extent to which those who know what is good and those who want to know what is good are able to speak and hear without interference. But this means that all viewpoints, the good and the bad, the ugly and the pretty, the offensive and the inoffensive? must be heard? because there is no way to separate them? other than permitting them all to be expressed and considered.
The whole recent ?problem? that led to all the new mods and the ?board policy changes? was both comical and tragic, and had resulted in even more unhappy Club members who have left altogether or come here less. That problem involved an individual with clear and extensive psychological problems? a ?classic troll?? who was just fed over and over and over by members who then got upset with the troll for doing what trolls do when they?re fed. The whole issue was dealt with poorly? the troll either should have stopped being fed and ignored?. OR, alternatively the troll could have been confronted and collectively given consistent and crushing criticism. Something could have been done? and if no one here had the skills, I can assure you there are others who used to come here who did? but who don?t because of the negative censorship policy here.
I could go on, but I think I?ve made my point. It can be denied, recognized, or downplayed, and that will be up to each individual who considers it.
I write this because the thread itself indicates that perhaps it?s dawning upon some that the idea of a ?free speech zone?? the idea of maybe being able to honestly communicate without fear of censorship here? might be a good idea.
It is. Censorship has degraded and devalued the Alembic website, and actively discouraged members from participating. Once upon a time, there were rich conversations here ?in addition to the back-slapping and stroking. It was a better place, much more fun.
I miss? most of you? and wish you the best. I?m not ?back?? I just re-registered to make this post. I?m not inclined to come back as long as Dave Houck is here in a censoring capacity, and don?t expect that condition to change. But I hope for your sake and the sake of those who don?t participate here (or do so less than they otherwise would) and for the sake of future board members that this horrible policy change is corrected.
Having a ?censorship free? ?free speech zone? in the ?Misc? section should be an absolute minimum for this or any website. To not have such an area is to be part of what causes/perpetuates problems in the world.
One other thing. I submit the idea of some other off-board medium in which members can FREELY and OPENLY discuss things is a bad idea... it's passing the buck. The question is, can members here on this site have honest and uncensored communication HERE? I submit they SHOULD be able to have that. Those who aren't up for it should exercise the discipline to not participate. If you can't deal with reading things you don't like and interacting with others whom you disagree with... don't. But don't try and stop me and others from having this option, and if you choose to, don't play dumb and wonder why it's a less fun place to be.
Sorry for such a long post, I had a lot to say. Hope it means something, 'cause I sure wasn't interested in writing it to hear myself talk. I hope it matters to those here... even and perhaps especially those who disagree with and/or are offended by it.
Later, gang.
(Message edited by masterofmanystrings on May 08, 2010)