Text 4962, 225 rader
Skriven 2006-07-26 22:30:00 av Robert E Starr JR (5459.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: ATTN JMS: Please Don'
=================================
* * * This message was from Jaime M. de Castellvi to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m
* * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <on08c2hjnepn839nkbbjtcv0migu8nquut@4ax.com>
@REPLY: <200607190842.k6J8gQAR005154@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:29:37 -0400, Jaime M. de Castellvi
<3cjmd@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:06:54 +0000 (UTC), denebeim@deepthot.org (Jay
>Denebeim) wrote:
>
>>In article <qn1vb21md93483vnb8auee51otqr58hm1j@4ax.com>,
>>Richard Tibbetts  <richard@primepeace.ltd.uk> wrote:
>>>In message <20060720085007.93118.qmail@web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com>,
>>>Troy Heagy <electrictroy@yahoo.com> wrote on Thu, 20 Jul 2006 01:50:07
>>>-0700 (PDT):
>>>
>>>> Please don't allow this father-fing son of a
>>>> bitch ahole (Ford Thaxton?) to win.  
>>>
>>>Can someone nearer hit this guy with a clue-by-four?
>>
>>I've gotta apologize for that.  That message should absolutely not
>>have gotten onto the newsgroup.  New moderator.  And yes, she's been
>>smacked.
>>
>>Troy, who's been a clueless annoyance as long as he's been posting has
>>no idea what nettiquette is like.  This morning we bounced a message
>>where he was quoting an e-mail from Harper.
>>
>>Look, people, you know how to be polite, please do so.  I've got a
>>very sick parrot which is requiring me to drive all over the state for
>>treatment.  Work is blowing up.  And other suff.  So please, play
>>nicely for awhile, okay?
>
>Sorry to hear about your parrot.  Hope he gets well soon <waving "Hi"
>to Cheryl too>.
>
>I didn't realize that PH had become such a pest, but that shows how
>out of touch I've been, dropping by only every blue moon or so.
>
>My last exchange with Paul was somewhere around August 2001.  It was
>just after Gharlane's passing.  A lot of people were hurting from the
>loss, and some of the usual suspects came in and starting craping on
>his grave.  IIRC Paul was tangling with them and with just about
>everybody else.  Anyway, things were getting ugly so I tried to inject
>a little humor by using a couple of sock puppets to make fun of two or
>three jerks stirring things up.  I also pretended to be Paul by
>setting up a yahoo addy and then posting for Google, only then
>parodying to excess his British style.
>
>That was nearly six years ago and, other than being a little mercurial
>and perhaps having something to prove, Paul seemed like an OK bloke
>overall.  Mostly he seemed to do a lot of righteous bumbling, which
>was kind of funny to watch from afar.  I'm sorry to hear he's turned
>to the dark side.  My suggestion with people who troll maliciously (as
>opposed to those who troll playfully and in a fun way) is to ignore
>them.  This of course never works because they always end up getting
>under peoples's hides.  The other suggestion is not to take anything
>they say seriously.  Following up misinterpreting what they say in
>outrageous and hilarious ways works wonders; history documents
>extensively the subversive powers of laughter to confront anger and
>righteousness.
>
>The thing is that, without knowing any of this and after all these
>years since I used that fake Paul Harper handle, I used it again this
>spring to perpetrate my annual April Fools usenet prank.  I decided I
>could not post as myself this time since all the regulars are used to
>my yearly mischief and nobody believes me anymore.  So, even though I
>haven't traded posts with Paul in years, I decided to play a prank on
>him as well as everybody else.  I used the false PH handle to post a
>fake article in which Adam Baldwin was supposedly coming out of the
>closet a la George Takei.  While I did get some reaction to it in the
>Firefly, rast and moderated screenwriting group, I was disappointed
>that Paul never reacted indignantly to claim he hadn't written the
>sodding thing.  Perhaps he never saw it.  Anyway, somebody x-posted
>one of his posts to servo today so I asked him.  We'll see whether or
>not he replies.  As I said, I'm sorry he's gone all obsessive on
>y'all.  Were is the fun in that?
>
>As I said, laughter seems to me to be the best prevention/preemption.
>But of course, it is impossible to get eveybody in lockstep about
>this, or anything (which is a GOOD thing, ultimately).  And when
>somebody's obsession starts interfering with somebody else's
>creativity, the creative person has every right (and arguably a
>responsibility to himself, his craft, and his audience, for in the end
>the act of creation reflects and channels the creative forces of the
>universe, whereas obsession is a facing away from life itself and may
>become an act of destruction) to get out of that situation.
>
>On a slightly unrelated note, Cronan's name has been mentioned in the
>other thread.  I'm not exactly sure that introducing him there was
>necessary or productive at this point.  I do know that there are many
>people in this group who did not particularly care for him, and some
>who still don't, but I do feel (and other folks's mileage may vary)
>that a very talented young man who passed away very untimely is
>ultimately a reason for sadness.
>
>There is also a significant difference with PH's case.  Age.  A person
>who has lived and experienced and matured has less excuses not to know
>better.  If Cronan was a pain in the butt in this group, he did so at
>a fairly young age, between 16 and 18, before he passed away.
>Speaking for myself, I was an utter asshole at that age.  Seems to me
>that those of us who with the benefit of age, experience and quite a
>few hard knocks have managed to grow a little wiser (or perhaps a
>little less foolish) over time, should be a little more understanding
>with the follies of youth.  But I guess some folks can't quite make
>peace so easily with their own youthfull follies.  Out of enlightened
>self-interest then, if not out of introspection; nothing looks more
>ridiculous than a suppossedly mature person in her 30s or 40s that's
>still enraged about the pranks of a 17 year old well over half a
>decade after his tragic death.
>
>Cronan was very young, impetuous, angry in some ways, idealistic in
>others (but with the quick, uncompromising, and mercurial idealism of
>youth), and with much to prove to himself, I cannot find many teens
>who do not fit that bill, particularly when they come from a minority
>background such as Cronan's and from a set of particulars
>circumstances that make things like high school most traumatic and
>unpleasant.
>
>But unlike most who fit that bill, Cronan was incredibly gifted,
>intelligent.  He knew how to rile folks up and he delighted as those
>only so young can do in doing it.  But he also had an intuitive and
>growing gift for critical irony, incisive sarcasm, humor, parody...
>and writing.  And he *loved* reading.  As much as a lashing out, much
>of his posting was also a showing off of his prowess; again, a very
>understandable thing to do at that age, and given his circumstances.
>And there was an underlying gentleness budding in his writings; many
>people were too easily enraged by the surface of his trolls to be
>sensitive to this undercurrent.  Robert Hewitt Wolfe, another
>successfull writer/producer/screenwriter (particularly well known to
>genre and Trek fans) who had occasion to be trolled and flamed by
>Cronan and to playfully sparr with him over in rast, easily sensed
>this.  He grew fond of Cronan and was affected by his loss.  And in
>his pilot for _Andromeda_ he payed homage to Cronan Thompson naming
>one of the characters who die in the opening scene after him (Cronan's
>mother was deeply touched by this).
>
>For those of us who had some slight acquaintance with him online,
>there was evidence that, as he grew older, not only his powers and his
>gifts but his emotions matured too, including his humor, his
>compassion, his gentleness.  These were signs, mere seedlings, but
>they were there.  Who knows what a remarkable human being he might
>have matured into?  But he never had the chance.  He was taken very
>young, before he could live through and up to that incredible promise
>to leave many of us well behind.
>
>So I would ask of all out there, if you cannot remember him fondly or
>say anything nice about him, then please don't say anything (and if
>you are the kind afflicted with a customary big mouth and absolutely
>no sense of class, then do yourself a favor and zip it up for once).
>Silence is fine.  But the present discussion is about jms's departure
>and the apparently malicious stalking of a mediocre troll who, being
>far older, ought perhaps to know better.
>
>There was once a young of infinite promise who annoyed many with his
>trolls but had at least the justification and saving grace of his
>youth, humor and talent, and who --unlike this older troll--  showed
>the promise of being able to mature emotionally.  If you can't find it
>within you to say nothing positive about him, then just allow him to
>rest in silence.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Jaime

Having said all of the above, I strikes me that I should now clarify
something that I expressed poorly to start.

I stand by my statement that Cronan's case and PH's case (whatever
that case may be) are different due to the age difference, and that
the former should have been allowed to rest and not have been brought
up in this discussion.  In an ideal world.

But as to the current issue with PH, I own that I know nothing about
it nor was aware of it until today.  I stand about what I stated about
Paul's posts around 2001 since I am familiar with them.  They were
sometimes bumblingly mercurial, and that made Paul lovable at the time
for many of us for a number of reasons, not the least of which being
that it made him easy to bait and fun to *playfully* troll  <*grin*>.

But I pop here --and indeed around usenet-- rarely and infrequently,
and so I know nothing about his current posting habits (nor do I
really have the time to research them in detail -- this is usenet
after all, a tempest in a teapot, and I decided a while ago that RL
must take precedence or I'll end up whiling what lifespan I might have
away).  In short, I have no idea as to who is right and who is wrong
here, or if there is even a manichead divide.  There is one wise
saying that tells that where there is smoke, there is fire; even as
another no less wise one reminds us that there are usually two sides
to every issue.  I don't know much about either side here, therefore I
cannot responsibly form an opinion, leave alone express it.

I do have an opinion on jms leaving.  In many ways I think it is
profoundly sad.  He's been here for a long time, this has made this
place somewhat special, and many people have been both touched,
inspired and made to feel special by their interaction with him.  The
silver lining --or the flip side, as he might say-- is that this may
allow him to devote greater focus, energy and life-span to his
creativity, and if so all of us would benefit from this in the long
run.  Sometimes, sharing yourself too much with too many people can
leave you with little time for yourself, and for what may be important
to you.  And as all of us who still retain any semblance of an ego
know rather well, usenet is a cruel mistress, her enticements
--however addictive-- merely a gift of smoke and  illusion.  Not all
and not always, there are plenty of meaningful rewards and of
rewarding people.  But all too often, that is the case.

Nothings remains them but to wish Godspeed to all in their chosen
paths (even if they don't necessarily believe in God, it is the
wishing feeling that counts, as in the case of a blessing), and to say
thanks for the many things shared, a lifetime not being enough perhaps
for rendering proper thanks in some cases.  In an ideal world.  In the
real world, all too often everything that is the past is forgotten
tomorrow.  Almost.  But not by everyone.

Cheers,

Jaime
                     
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)