M wrote:

>> ...."*purely* because I'm getting sick of this thread", "purely because
>> *I'm* getting sick of this thread"....funny, every way that I look at
>> this, you come across as a complete and utter idiot.

> Oh God I simply don't believe this. The self-righteous rise again!
> What's the problem? You don't want your newsgroup comments to be quoted?
> Don't post to a public forum!!!

Er, did I say that I didn't want my comments quoted - can you point out *anywhere* in my post where I am saying that I don't want my comments quoted? I suggest if you're not actually going to read what people have said in a post, then it's you who shouldn't post to a public forum.

For your information, the first part of my response was to the line: "purely because I'm getting sick of this thread".

To me this looks like someone who thinks that now *he's* getting bored with the discussion, *he's* gonna knock it on the head....as if we're here to provide the entertainment. If you have a problem with my expressing that opinion, then that's tough.

> You are annoyed you got worked up for an experiment? Well, to be honest
> with you, most people I know with deeply held beliefs don't minding
> voicing them for anyone.

Well to be honest with *you*, being 'worked up' for an experiment in this manner to my mind, raises ethical questions as well as questions about the soundness of the 'results'(never mind the poster not having the decency to first ask whether anyone minds if their responses are used as part of someone's experiment as opposed to just announcing that that is what is going to happen). Having a problem with this has nothing to do with having deeply held beliefs and voicing them.

> As far as I'm concerned, AT has apologised with a post that showed
> humility. We all make mistakes!!

You are of course, entitled to your opinion.

> It just seems to me the big fat fish can't help but swim round and round
> in circles in the pond.

Sorry, you're being a bit subtle for me here - sounds like you have some other agenda here.

> And guess what? They also happen to be the fish that bit the worm in the
> first place ;-)

And guess what, I was voicing an opinion about what I perceived as a racist joke being posted on UMR (seeing as it was posted as being an "irish joke" and all). If I didn't bite the worm then I'd be guilty of complacency which would have been infinitely worse than my having ruffled your feathers.

R

R writes:

M wrote:

>> Oh God I simply don't believe this. The self-righteous rise again!
>> What's the problem? You don't want your newsgroup comments to be quoted?
>> Don't post to a public forum!!!
> 
> Er, did I say that I didn't want my comments quoted - can you point out
> *anywhere* in my post where I am saying that I don't want my comments
> quoted?
> I suggest if you're not actually going to read what people have said in a
> post, then it's you who shouldn't post to a public forum.

Cat fight!!! Please choose your weapon:

a) crocodiles b) brick in a sock c)assortment of rotten fruit and veg d) nuclear warhead e)onion breath. f) trance issue of WAX

> To me this looks like someone who thinks that now *he's* getting bored
> with the discussion, *he's* gonna knock it on the head....as if we're here
> to provide the entertainment. If you have a problem with my expressing
> that opinion, then that's tough.

Seriously though.. i believe you were pointing to the sleazy attitude.. which may have been unintentional (IMO i don't think the original poster meant to cause any grief, but it seems ill-advised) but that's how it comes across...

Sometimes people post about their hidden agenda because they don't want us to think they _actually_ are racist, fascist etc. so they need to qualify it...

> Well to be honest with *you*, being 'worked up' for an experiment in this
> manner to my mind, raises ethical questions as well as questions about the
> soundness of the 'results'(never mind the poster not having the decency to

Yes, R, but what I'm saying is that is this really an area for hot-headed accusations about ethics? I mean, it's hardly the crime of the century as far as psychology experiments are concerned. Perhaps now might be a good time to mention such subjects as BZ Experiments, Electric Shock Therapy, and the widespread use of the lobotomy. Hell, what about the deliberate infection of Afro Carribbeans in America with SyPCis. Now *theres* an unethical racist medical experiment.

Just imagine a scenario where this thesis became the foundation for a lifetime of brilliant work on race relations. I hardly think that anyone on this newsgroup has really had their rights substantially violated OR been subject to racist abuse. You can't go around levelling accusations such as racist at someone when they have made a comment/joke which has core assumptions that have proved to be ambiguous in accordance with the reader's presuppositions.

> If I didn't bite the worm then I'd be guilty of
> complacency which would have been infinitely worse than my having ruffled
> your feathers.

We are all guilty of complacency when it comes to racial issues otherwise we would donating a substantial part of our income to third world countries.

Attempting to argue that the joke is in some form racist is fine with me. I will object to attempting to describe this as a matter of 'ethics', railing against 'complacency', or any such lofty ideals you attempt to dress up your posts with.

The bottom line is that I certainly wasn't being complacent when I didn't get annoyed at the original post. It's just that I have a balanced sense of "racism" as a sliding scale which goes from jokes such as these through to extreme cases such as genocidal war. I too disagree with racism but I feel that considering the structure of global economic politics, unethical practices of multinationals, even something such as the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, there are far, far, more important areas into which probing anti-racist probosces could be poked.

Just for the record, I too am anti-racist, and I am of direct Irish descent.

M

>> As far as I'm concerned, AT has apologised with a post that showed
>> humility. We all make mistakes!!
> 
> You are of course, entitled to your opinion.
> 
>> It just seems to me the big fat fish can't help but swim round and round
>> in circles in the pond.
> 
> Sorry, you're being a bit subtle for me here - sounds like you have some
> other agenda here.
> 
>> And guess what? They also happen to be the fish that bit the worm in the
>> first place ;-)
> 
> And guess what, I was voicing an opinion about what I perceived as a
> racist joke being posted on UMR (seeing as it was posted as being an "irish
> joke" and all). If I didn't bite the worm then I'd be guilty of
> complacency which would have been infinitely worse than my having ruffled
> your feathers.
> 
> R
> 

M wrote:

>> Well to be honest with *you*, being 'worked up' for an experiment in this
>> manner to my mind, raises ethical questions as well as questions about the
>> soundness of the 'results'(never mind the poster not having the decency
> 
> Yes, R, but what I'm saying is that is this really an area for
> hot-headed accusations about ethics?

I don't think that questioning whether it's ethically sound to post something up to bait people into making a response as part of an 'experiment' is being particularly hot-headed.

> I mean, it's hardly the crime of the century as far as psychology
> experiments are concerned.

I didn't say that it was the crime of the century - why do you keep trying to put words into my mouth?

> Perhaps now might be a good time to mention
> such subjects as BZ Experiments, Electric Shock Therapy, and the
> widespread use of the lobotomy. Hell, what about the deliberate infection
> of Afro Carribbeans in America with SyPCis. Now *theres* an unethical
> racist medical experiment.

Yes, so is the compulsory sterilisation of those in mental hospitals, the experiments on jews in concentration camps, etc. You don't seriously believe that I'm comparing this to any of those events, do you?

> Just imagine a scenario where this thesis became the foundation for a
> lifetime of brilliant work on race relations. I hardly think that anyone
> on this newsgroup has really had their rights substantially violated OR
> been subject to racist abuse.

I didn't say that rights had been violated or that anyone had been subject to racist abuse in the manner in which you imply. What I did take exception to was the manner in which the poster 'came clean' and the fact that it didn't occur to him to ask whether anyone objected in retrospect, to having been an unwitting part of an 'experiment'.

> You can't go around levelling accusations
> such as racist at someone when they have made a comment/joke which has
> core assumptions that have proved to be ambiguous in accordance with the
> reader's presuppositions.

If someone posts something with the header 'irish joke' and I interpret it to be racist or think that it could be construed as being racist(mildly or otherwise, everyone has their own tolerance level, as we have already established) then I have every right to point this out.

>> If I didn't bite the worm then I'd be guilty of
>> complacency which would have been infinitely worse than my having ruffled
>> your feathers.

> We are all guilty of complacency when it comes to racial issues otherwise
> we would donating a substantial part of our income to third world
> countries.

BTW, I also find your original point about 'biting the worm' rather strange.....it seems to imply that because I took the 'bait' then somehow everything can be justified. Saying that we are all guilty of complacency doesn't really address the point does it? However true that may be.

> I will object to attempting to describe this as a matter of 'ethics',
> railing against 'complacency', or any such lofty ideals you attempt to
> dress up your posts with.

I don't need to dress my posts up with anything.

Let me re-iterate: I am saying that making a post entitled 'irish joke' could be seen as offensive by some.

Then posting to say that he was 'bored' and so would now let us into his little secret indicated to me that he'd got what he wanted, hence making a number of people feel (see other responses), as if we had been used (which of course we had been).

Then, not having the decency to ask whether anyone had any objections to being included in someone's 'experiment' but just telling us that this was what was going to happen put the icing on the cake.

You might notice that I have already said this before. Your response was that you felt that an apology had been made. You made no comment about the way in which the whole thing was handled. The only thing that you were able to come back with were some rather cryptic comments about fish, which you still haven't bothered to explain!

> The bottom line is that I certainly wasn't being complacent when I didn't
> get annoyed at the original post. It's just that I have a balanced sense
> of "racism" as a sliding scale which goes from jokes such as these through
> to extreme cases such as genocidal war. I too disagree with racism but I
> feel that considering the structure of global economic politics, unethical
> practices of multinationals, even something such as the Stephen Lawrence
> enquiry, there are far, far, more important areas into which probing
> anti-racist probosces could be poked.

Please read the posts. I didn't accuse *you* of being complacent. I said that if *I* hadn't responded to a post that I didn't see as being in, shall we say, good taste, then *I* would have been guilty of complacency.

R

>> Perhaps now might be a good time to mention
>> such subjects as BZ Experiments, Electric Shock Therapy, and the
>> widespread use of the lobotomy. Hell, what about the deliberate infection
>> of Afro Carribbeans in America with SyPCis. Now *theres* an unethical
>> racist medical experiment.
> Yes, so is the compulsory sterilisation of those in mental hospitals, the
> experiments on jews in concentration camps, etc. You don't seriously
> believe that I'm comparing this to any of those events, do you?

Of course not but I was just saying in the overall scheme of things this issue is hardly worth getting worked up about is it? I mean you've absolutely torn into this G (who apologized). He's sorry!!

Bloody hell I've made mistakes (frequently) on this newsgroup.... who hasn't ?

> BTW, I also find your original point about 'biting the worm' rather
> strange.....it seems to imply that because I took the 'bait' then somehow
> everything can be justified. Saying that we are all guilty of complacency
> doesn't really address the point does it? However true that may be.

My point was that people tend to overreact if they feel they have been taken for a ride.

> Let me re-iterate:
> I am saying that making a post entitled 'irish joke' could be seen as
> offensive by some.

I agree entirely, but calling him a racist for one debatable post is extreme.

Look, let's face it, we disagree on the principle issue. As such, it's just a case of us arguing over the technicalities of how to address a great societal wrong ie. racism. I felt that calling the joke racist was debatable, but not inconceivable. Calling the poster racist crossed my personal line. Ok, it was F that did that, but that was enough to make me decide to fight from AT's corner. Which I have.

---M

And now F (and let's face it, you're on the same team) has virtually called ME a racist.

M wrote:

>>> Perhaps now might be a good time to mention
>>> such subjects as BZ Experiments, Electric Shock Therapy, and the
>>> widespread <snipped irrelevant stuff>

>> Yes, so is the compulsory sterilisation of those in mental hospitals, the
>> experiments on jews in concentration camps, etc. You don't seriously
>> believe that I'm comparing this to any of those events, do you?

> Of course not but I was just saying in the overall scheme of things this
> issue is hardly worth getting worked up about is it?

Wouldn't you say that was a matter of opinion?

> I mean you've absolutely torn into this G (who apologized). He's sorry!!
> Bloody hell I've made mistakes (frequently) on this newsgroup.... who
> hasn't ?

I see that he hasn't bothered to respond since.....

>> BTW, I also find your original point about 'biting the worm' rather
>> strange.....it seems to imply that because I took the 'bait' then somehow
>> everything can be justified. Saying that we are all guilty of complacency
>> doesn't really address the point does it? However true that may be.

> My point was that people tend to overreact if they feel they have been
> taken for a ride.

Hmm........

"It just seems to me the big fat fish can't help but swim round and round in circles in the pond. And guess what? They also happen to be the fish that bit the worm in the first place ;-)" is the same as saying: "people tend to overreact if they feel they have been taken for a ride."

You're talking crap. Either that, or you have a very poor grasp of the english language.

>> Let me re-iterate:
>> I am saying that making a post entitled 'irish joke' could be seen as
>> offensive by some.

> I agree entirely, but calling him a racist for one debatable post is
> extreme.

> Look, let's face it, we disagree on the principle issue. As such, it's
> just a case of us arguing over the technicalities of how to address a
> great societal wrong ie. racism. I felt that calling the joke racist was
> debatable, but not inconceivable. Calling the poster racist crossed my
> personal line. Ok, it was F that did that, but that was enough to make
> me decide to fight from AT's corner. Which I have.

You_clearly_haven't_bothered_to_read_anything_I've_posted or you are incapable of responding to points I've made - IMO, a discussion is based on following ideas through not tossing in a load of irrelevant rubbish when you have nothing to say. My only regret is that I have wasted so much of my time responding to someone who was clearly attacking me personally for his own reasons under the guise of 'answering' the questions in hand.

I'd like to end this post on a fluffier note but you've dug your own hole and under the circumstances I'm not going to help dig you out.

Yours wearily

R

R wrote:

M wrote:

> "It just seems to me the big fat fish can't help but swim round and round
> in circles in the pond. And guess what? They also happen to be the fish
> that bit the worm in the first place ;-)" is the same as saying: "people
> tend to overreact if they feel they have been taken for a ride."
> 
> You're talking crap. Either that, or you have a very poor grasp of the
> english language.

No, no, no, he was talking carp :)

D

> I see that he hasn't bothered to respond since.....

He just has.........

> You_clearly_haven't_bothered_to_read_anything_I've_posted or you are
> incapable of responding to points I've made - IMO, a discussion is based
> on following ideas through not tossing in a load of irrelevant rubbish
> when you have nothing to say. My only regret is that I have wasted so much
> of my time responding to someone who was clearly attacking me personally
> for his own reasons under the guise of 'answering' the questions in hand.

My point about the inherent hypocrisy in attacking a minor case of stereotyping, while every day contributing to a political and economic system which is built upon a bedrock of post-imperialistic racial have and have-nots. is a bad one, then?

> You're talking crap. Either that, or you have a very poor grasp of the
> english language.

English has a capital E I think you'll find.

M

ps. It's funny how things which often seem the most colourful and fluffy often tend to be full of particularly virulent poison.

M wrote:

> My point about the inherent hypocrisy in attacking a minor case of
> stereotyping, while every day contributing to a political and economic
> system which is built upon a bedrock of post-imperialistic racial have and
> have-nots. is a bad one, then?

If you wish to enter into a debate about imperialism, capitalism and so on, do you want to start a new thread? I'm sure that there are qualified capitalists, imperialists, anarchists, freethinkers, philosophers and sociologists in this ng to make it an interesting discussion - there may even be a mathematical angle to that one. In the meantime, I do hope you won't try and justify your anti-anti-racist stance on the basis of 'fighting racism from within'. Or do, actually, it would be quite funny.

M:
> ps. It's funny how things which often seem the most colourful and fluffy
> often tend to be full of particularly virulent poison.

Isn't it just.

F