Whistler wrote:Marduk, for some reason, you telling everyone they're not being Christlike enough is really ticking me off.
If you feel that what I said doesn't apply to you, then don't listen to it. It is as simple as that. That was the point of toning my response the way I did; it was intended to give everyone a second look at how they've responded. If after a second look then you are satisfied with what you've said, then so be it.
As to me acting differently, I think you can see the tenor of the response between the two has been different. (Or maybe you're still feeling too attacked by the one, I don't know.) In fact, I think that everyone who has responded here has bias, and ought to acknowledge that, if I'm to acknowledge my bias. Obviously a comment that someone feels is attacking them directly is going to be perceived more harshly than one that doesn't, regardless of the actual tone of either response. But let's take a look at the different comments.
Bob said "the majority of your applicants a) are freshman or otherwise immature and b) think the Board is just the coolest thing and are really looking forward to the prestige." I can see how someone would be offended by this, not because it isn't true, but because she fails to acknowledge the many applicants who successfully break this mould. Then she suggested that BYU breeds a follow-the-crowd type mentality, or at least, students at BYU tend to be fairly homogenous and one could get more opinions on a wide variety of things by going outside that pool. Again, I can see how someone would be offended by this, however, it is true that BYU is much more homogenous than other university environments, and this affects the quality of the writing there.
Now let's look at the responses. Optimus said "Let me start by saying that I am not at all offended, rather amused that someone who is obviously still in the formative stages of finding her own meaning and direction in life, and at a rather late age for it, in my opinion, is calling others immature. (But you're very mature, so I'm sure this won't offend you.)" So he starts off with the intent to offend, insults Bob's maturity directly (note, Bob said nothing about Optimus specifically) says that she's too old for the state in life she is in, and says she has no position to call anyone else immature. This is all phrased in an entirely passive-aggressive way, meaning any response Bob has to call him out on this is taken away from her, lest she be called immature. I admit, here I ought to have stepped in and messaged Optimus, and told him these sort of personal attacks were not ok, but I thought if I let him cool down, as he felt initially attacked, he might see this for himself and take care of it.
No such luck. Bob tries to clarify what she said, even saying that Optimus, the person who just attacked her directly, had some good points. She admits the board has had many fantastic writers, and even admits it still does have many fantastic writers. She then clumsily tries to clarify what she meant: that choosing from a homogenous and fairly young group, and one from a group that tends to think the same way about things, will engender a sort of "group-think" mentality. However, again I can see how people would be offended, as this is the homogenous group they call home. She then points out Optimus's direct attack (perhaps even antagonizing him a little further, but certainly not without cause.)
Gio calls Bob's point of view "ironic" not acknowledging that this message board is an entity unto itself, and certainly not even the majority of what is housed here is directly board related. Again, belittling her opinion without acknowledging that there could be any truth to it.
Tally points out how much Bob generalized (which again, is true, so I don't have a problem with her response.) She also points out why she personally finds this offensive. Although she does this fairly forcefully, for the most part, she does it without attacking Bob directly. So good on her for that. Zed follows up with a good response, which disagrees strongly with Bob (which again, is totally fine. I have no problems with people disagreeing on here.) But she points out that she is giving her opinion, and that is that the board is a place for primarily undergraduates, so it ought to continue to cater to that crowd.
As the responses continued on, it looked like we were out of the woods (except Gumby calling me out of my mind, but I'm tougher skinned than most, so I didn't really care. If he had said it to someone else, I might've said something.) But then Optimus responded again. He brought up two writers who have absolutely nothing to do with the conversation (I'm sure Bob would have put them in the "fantastic" group) pointed out many things that they had done since their retirement (again, absolutely irrelevant) and used this as evidence why Bob's argument had no weight. He then calls everything, not as Bob had done "a majority" but everything on this board "puerile drivel." And here I stepped in verbally. This was an unwarranted attack on her, a fallacious argument, and an unwarranted attack on everything that exists on this board. Certainly in the arms race of things, one side escalated the insults and attacks much faster than the other, and it wasn't Bob.
