Posted by Sigismund on April 12, 2009, at 23:42:01
In reply to Re: an opportunity, posted by Sigismund on April 6, 2009, at 23:26:14
Perhaps you didn't get round to reading this post, Bob?
> I'd hazard a guess that Bob feels somewhat badly about the decline in attendance at Babble and that was part of why the blocking system changed for the better (with the exception of Zazenducke).
>
> I also think he has benign intentions.
>
> He's just a bloke with a website who gets his ideas about social control from places not terribly familiar to me, maybe the US justice system, or some Uni of Chicago paradigm.
>
> I think it would have been better for Babble as a whole if the question of blocks had not become an issue, which might have been achievable with blocks of around a month, maximum.
> But we shall never know.
>
> I don't think we should make demons of each other.
> Bob may have used a couple of phrases infelicitously.
> Jade and Verne became angry.
> No one is going to apologise freely if they are grabbed by the scruff of the neck and told to do so.which was my attempt to see things as charitably as I could.
People who read the boards and know us both know how I feel about Verne. There's no need to put on a performance about it here. Verne would (I imagine) be disgusted, as would I.
How is Verne good for Babble?
Just like Zazenducke was. They could show us all a thing or two about truthfulness and straightforwardness, civil or not. Is Babble good for them? Well, on the occasion of Verne's year long block and a similar one for zazenducke, he/she said 'But I've had enough. Verne makes me ashamed of all the twistedness I participate in on Babble. Bye.'
Or something like that.
So who am I to say.
>I do think sharing how you see things (if you see things more charitably) may help. And if you'd miss them, sharing that. Or, tell them how they're good for Babble? And how Babble may be good for them?
poster:Sigismund
thread:888433
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090302/msgs/890294.html