Comments on: Michael Jackson belongs in jail

Michael Jackson belongs in jail

MiguelCardoso — Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:50:20 -0800

I have mixed feelings about hoopyfrood's Michael Jackson belongs in jail post. On the one hand, I agree with the general "don't editorialize" philosophy and its corollary "save it for a comment in the thread." On the other, this isn't exactly the New York Times and a poster's take on their subject is arguably an integral part of the post. "Letting the link speak for itself", when it involves a news item, is all very well - but perhaps keeping one's opinion out of the front page text is also an exercise in obfuscation and even dishonesty. Has current policy on editorializing changed? ( I speak as a frequent editorializer, I should add. Even though I agree "pedophile of pop", with its dubious inverted commas, and all-capitals IN JAIL!, as well as the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty except Michael Jackson, are way too extreme a way of going about it.)

By: mischief

mischief — Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:58:19 -0800

At least it's done. We shouldn't have another MJ FPP until the verdict.

By: dhoyt

dhoyt — Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:08:40 -0800

How do you know when it's midnight at Michael Jackson's house?

When the big hand touches the little hand.

/admittedly not very funny, just didn't want Miguel to obsess if there weren't many comments to this thread

By: taz

taz — Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:38:05 -0800

I'm pretty sure the post was not intended for Metafilter. I think that hoopyfrood was tossing off a quick email at the same time as he was writing a post for MeFi, and something went terribly, terribly wrong. Somewhere in the world hoopyfrood's Mom is reading a very interesting email about The Hair Club for Scientists.

By: eddydamascene

eddydamascene — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:24:17 -0800

but perhaps keeping one's opinion out of the front page text is also an exercise in obfuscation and even dishonesty

From the posting page:

the point of MetaFilter is to find the best and most interesting of the web to share with others, not: "Because of [link], [link] and [link], I think [personal opinion that may or may not be substantiated by the link]".

It's still a solid suggestion, in my opinion.

By: boneybaloney

boneybaloney — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 04:03:29 -0800

As long as it is clear that an assertion is contingent, I don't see a problem with opinion being cited on the FPP.

By: taz

taz — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 04:13:16 -0800

Could you rephrase that "assertion is contingent" part, boneybaloney? Because I don't understand.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 04:17:52 -0800

We shouldn't have another MJ FPP until the verdict.

I'll start boiling the oil, you man the watcfh post.

By: carter

carter — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:14:19 -0800

Oh, that is funny, dhoyt.

P.S. I don't think official policy on editorialising has changed. What people feel they can post, maybe that is changing.

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:41:42 -0800

Five past one; ten past two; quarter past three...

By: jpoulos

jpoulos — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:56:09 -0800

At Mefi, attacking Michael Jackson is like attacking fat people. People feel entitled to pull no punches, because they have no sympathy for the subject. Personally, I think it's disgusting. Opinions are fine on the FP, but I think this post is over the top.

I agree with mischief that we really shouldn't have another MJ thread until there's a resolution to the issue.

By: tr33hggr

tr33hggr — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:10:16 -0800

I agree with jpoulos - I had to back away from that thread because I simply feel sad about the whole thing, sad for everyone involved, and wasn't about to take part in it.

By: Skot

Skot — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:06:25 -0800

I have relatively unmixed feelings about threadbare, manufactured MetaTalk topics.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:44:51 -0800

At Mefi, attacking Michael Jackson is like attacking fat people. People feel entitled to pull no punches, because they have no sympathy for the subject.

We pull no punches on just about everybody here, if we feel strongly about the subject. We should treat Michael Jackson differently? Why?

By: clavdivs

clavdivs — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:54:10 -0800

People feel entitled to pull no punches, because they have no sympathy for the subject.

Yes, but do they consult Witch doctors.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:01:24 -0800

yes, clav, and he said:

ooh eee ooh ah ah
ting tang walla walla
bing bang

ooh eee ooh ah ah
ting tang walla walla
bing bang

By: elwoodwiles

elwoodwiles — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:24:31 -0800

At Mefi, attacking Michael Jackson is like attacking fat people. People feel entitled to pull no punches, because they have no sympathy for the subject.

Oh, C'mon. Jackson is a CHILD MOLESTER! A ChiMo! A sick, sick freak who has been long hidden away behind his wealth and fame. People are attacking him for his behavior - it's not like he has to be a pedophile.

insensitive? Yes. Am I jumping to conclusions? Possibly. But after 10+ years of rumors and allegations, I think it's pretty likely that something smells fishy in NeverLand - and I don't mean Bubbles.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:31:35 -0800

Thanks for settling the issue, judgedrelwoodwiles.

Take him down, guard!

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:53:18 -0800

insensitive? Yes. Am I jumping to conclusions? Possibly. But after 10+ years of rumors and allegations, I think it's pretty likely that something smells fishy in NeverLand

Is it possible that after the first allegation everyone saw an easy target for money because of the guilty-until-innocent reaction of people like you? Yes. Is it possible he's not guilty and? Yes. Do I care if people make jokes about it anyway? No. Do I hate it when people ask questions and answer them? Yes, unless I do it.

Earlier today, Lakers start Kobe Bryant was arrested on suspicions of rape. Later that day, in the court of public opinion, he was tried and convicted of being a black man.

By: wendell

wendell — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:01:25 -0800

I tend to feel that the "you can't say that a person has committed X crime until he/she is convicted in a court of law" is one of the worst forms of Politically Correct Restraint of Free Speech. I once sat on a jury in a Murder Case, and that experience really solidified my belief that the American Legal System is a terribly crappy way to determine the truth of anything. It's made mistakes, including some doozies. And somewhere between 1-in-500 and 1-in-20 imprisoned convicts who claim "I'm Innocent" are definitely telling the truth.

Nobody on MetaFilter can say with absolute certainty whether Jacko is a child molester (unless one of us works at Neverland Ranch monitoring the security camera in his bedroom), but each of us is allowed to believe deeply one way or the other. The use of phrases like "I know he is" are rhetorical overkill, but I'd rather see a little rhetorical collateral damage than have Matt program an editing device that inserts "alleged" in the appropriate places.

IMTIO (In My Totally Irrelevant Opinion), "alleged" and "incident" are two of the awfullest words in the English language (along with "fuckwit", for personal reasons).

good non-typical MetaTalk topic, Migs... We'll get those trainwrecks off the front page yet...

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:45:50 -0800

wendell, I said the same thing inside the thread itself. This isn't a court of law, it's a website, the digital equivalent of a buncha guys talking over coffee. Since we're not the ones passing sentence, we're free to conjecture away, as far as I'm concerned.

By: i_am_joe's_spleen

i_am_joe's_spleen — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:33:05 -0800

I just thought it was boring, Newsfilter gossip shit.

By: dgaicun

dgaicun — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:42:38 -0800

But after 10+ years of rumors and allegations, I think it's pretty likely

. . . That's a pretty dubious reason to believe something.

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:23:20 -0800

I just thought it was boring, Newsfilter gossip shit.

Exactly. Why the hell was it posted on MeFi anyways? It's not something most people haven't seen before, it's interest is debatable, and it's only going to encourage discussion that makes Access Hollywood look like Masterpiece Theater. It's the crust at the bottom of the shit pile at MeFi.

By: thomcatspike

thomcatspike — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:34:18 -0800

A least no one was smirking like the Santa Barbara sheriffs:P

By: wendell

wendell — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:38:46 -0800

I once got a speeding ticket outside Santa Barbara. The sheriffs there are absolute masters at smirking.

By: rcade

rcade — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:27:01 -0800

I have no problems with a little front page editorializing. It's not the way I would present a link, but sometimes the personal commentary makes MetaFilter stand out from other news sites.

Besides, when Michael Jackson was accused of molestation in 1993, he withdrew accusations that it was extortion and paid between $15 and $23 million to his accuser's family.

As far as I'm concerned, when an accused celebrity molester makes a huge settlement that includes a shut-up clause to his victims, that's an implicit admission of guilt.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:55:00 -0800

Except, rcade, that we're not given any real information except for the plain and obvious facts. We don't know what really happened, we don't know if a smear campaign against the defendants was used as leverage, etc.

As a hypothetical example, Howard Dean is being sued for slander against me. In the course of my investigation I find out that Howard Dean is cheating on his wife. I threaten to expose Dean's information to the media unless Dean settles. I get $500,000 and keep my mouth shut. Dean was innocent, but he settled...

I know...it's a rather weird example, but the press isn't interested in the investigation. They want quick and easily accessed facts.

By: WolfDaddy

WolfDaddy — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:17:59 -0800

Personally, I'm paranoid enough to believe that this 'coincidental timing' issue isn't that Jackson's releasing a new album in Vegas, but that Bush and Blair are releasing noxious gas in London.

Which shows to go us: wethemedia don't have any real information, so wethemedia is making shit up.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:22:06 -0800

sometimes the personal commentary makes MetaFilter stand out from other news sites.

I thought it stood out by not being a news site.

By: wendell

wendell — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:27:01 -0800

But without MetaFilter, where would you ever learn about the smirking sheriffs of Santa Barbara?

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:31:32 -0800

Are they as vicious as the Shrieking Eels?

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:13:25 -0800

IN JAIL!!!

By: rushmc

rushmc — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:21:41 -0800

The Smirking Sheriffs of Santa Barbara, Tuesdays following the all-new Family Guy...only on Fox!

By: wendell

wendell — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:11:48 -0800

Oh, great, now I just got sued for plagiarism by "The Lisping Lawmen of Lakewood" (Thursday Night on UPN)

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:56:14 -0800

In the grand tradition...

I've had it. See y'all around.

By: wendell

wendell — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:56:30 -0800

UncleFes, if you're still within shouting distance:

jesus christ five fresh fish, get a fucking grip and calm the hell down before you post.
posted by mathowie at 9:13 PM PST on November 20

When Matt reacts like that, you know somebody's way out of line, and it's not you.
Now, please come home.
I've made a nice cup of Hot Cocoa for you... with the marshmallows...

By: y2karl

y2karl — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:53:49 -0800

fff's side.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:07:59 -0800

Where UncleFes goes, I go.

five fresh fish is truly temporarily bonkers!

By: quonsar

quonsar — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:08:44 -0800

where IS fishfucker when you need him?

By: mathowie

mathowie — Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:42:49 -0800

The original post was crap, and I hate to see these sorts of things turn into flamewars, and doubly sad to see good posters hang it up because of it.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:06:48 -0800

five fresh fish deconstructed
courtesy of wobh

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:05:17 -0800

You are such an ignorant fuck of a prick, Fes.(...) I hope you never, ever become a father. That's some sick and twisted shit you've got going.(...)Fes, you have me so pissed off I'm damn near beyond speech. I hope you are nowhere near such an ignorant, judgement asshole to any of the single mothers you've met in real life. You've been a real nasty piece of shit in this thread. Once again, fuck you you fucking fucked fucker.

five fresh fish: being beyond speech sounded like such a good game-plan for you. Pity you had to go and ruin it all by actually "speaking" (if the word isn't too strong). How depressingly disappointing, fff! I'm led to suppose you can't help it - and that's about as depressing as it gets. :(

By: Dagobert

Dagobert — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:44:43 -0800

Yet another example of a interesting point wonderfully destroyed by emotional override.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 02:31:42 -0800

The original post was crap, and I hate to see these sorts of things turn into flamewars, and doubly sad to see good posters hang it up because of it.

Is it too late to flush the whole thing now?

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:01:08 -0800

<marge simpson>
no, there's no need to flush it.
we can all just smile and pretend it's not there,
like good little boys and girls.
hrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
</marge simpson>

By: attackthetaxi

attackthetaxi — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:29:57 -0800

We've got all the violence you need right here on MetaFilter, apparently. That was.....ugghhhh.

By: taz

taz — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:58:07 -0800

doubleplusugghhhh.

By: matteo

matteo — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:26:19 -0800

I think fff is a decent man (or decent fish, or whatever) who got very emotional because of a topic he obviously cares about deeply. the usual MeFi snarkiness rubbed him totally the wrong way and he momentarily lost his shit. I wish he hadn't, but things like these can happen. I appreciated the "background info" comment fff posted (and that y2karl, helpful as always, already linked above). sometimes flamewars can start -- and ruin already difficult threads -- for honorable reasons. it's an inherent flaw of online conversation that it's very hard imo to resolve

By: PrinceValium

PrinceValium — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:27:43 -0800

oh come on, I've been called worse.
If I make an uninformed personal attack on someone's close friend, should I expect a "Jolly good, I guess you're right?"

By: taz

taz — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 06:33:19 -0800

I hate to get involved in these conversations because it just seems so futile, but, really, these kinds of attacks are beyond the pale and hugely depressing. It's not all right. It's not "just the way it goes here on MetaFilter", because if this is the way it goes, pretty soon there will be no reason at all to come here unless you really like blood sports.

Please! If you can't control yourself, don't post in these sorts of threads. There are so many great posts here that worthy of some conversation, but these emotional hot-key posts are like the black holes of MeFi, sucking in everything around them and returning nothing.

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:10:24 -0800

Too much emotional interest in a topic is a good reason to stay out of a thread on that topic. The web is not a good place to discuss things of that nature unless you can be sure you're going to be in a positive group of people that have similar experiences. When there's too much vested interest, anything can be taken the wrong way and the shit can hit the fan. There are many topics with which I've got a lot to say (the recent date-rape thread is a biggie for me). The more I've got to say and the more emotional I am about it, the less likely I am to even enter that thread. Enough time on MeFi has taught me better.

I hope Fessy doesn't leave for good, though.

By: rushmc

rushmc — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:28:40 -0800

Thank goodness I had the good sense to avoid that thread from the start. Looking it over now, I see it's more of the same old same old. Someone who chooses to express their disagreement not with argument but with ranting and personal attack. As ever, this is utterly inexcusable, whatever the motivation behind it.

Shrug it off, UncleFes. If you give one jerk the power to chase you off...well, the site will always provide at least one. No sane member questions your sanity, your decency, or your fair-mindedness—you have shown yourself to rate as high on these measures as anyone here, and higher than most.

but these emotional hot-key posts are like the black holes of MeFi, sucking in everything around them and returning nothing.

As I've stated before, it is preposterous to blame the posts. When Threads Go Bad, it is ALWAYS because of the choice of one or more users to transgress the lines of respect and civility.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:20:14 -0800

rushmc is quite right. And matteo, I can understand fff's getting emotional under the circumstances, but once he was called on his unacceptable behavior—by mathowie!—he should have had the grace to apologize instead of going on and on and on about why he felt so strongly.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:27 -0800

I'll apologize to Matt for my role in that thread, sure. "Sorry, Matt."

I request that others recognize the fact that UncleFes was short on facts yet all too quick to pass judgement on a person he does not know, and the first to express disrespectful and uncivil opinion. "Shitty parents," indeed: what a thing to say. Appalling.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:43:15 -0800

Such a touchingly sincere apology. What a gentlefish!

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:49:25 -0800

You don't seem to be capable of comprehending atheism is. You don't understand that the bible is just a story. It's fiction. It has some good ideas in it, yes, but so do Aesop's fables.

You're the one who just doesn't get it.

It makes me sad that you live in such a tiny box. - five fresh fish

Hypocrisy is a flaw that consumes each and every one of us. Don't rationalize your incredibly tasteless outburst by suggesting that UncleFes was disrespectful. You aren't in any position to argue respectfulness.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:52:54 -0800

I have decided that this topic is one which I shall have to build a wall around. My involvement in helping raise these children is the most important thing I shall accomplish in my lifetime. It is an atypical situation and without intimate knowledge of its history and the people involved, likely beyond most people's ability to understand. As such, it is unlikely that a common ground communication can be had.

The closest parallel that I can imagine will communicate some amount of its importance and emotional energy is to say that I am effectively a parent in this family, and the judgements are a slight against my family and my family relationships.

I sincerely apologize to Matt for not having built this wall earlier. Consider it now closed.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:37:01 -0800

That thread has spoilt the last two evenings for me. The great principle of free speech has been misused to call Mefites full of shit, mad, possible abusers, sick fuckers, fear mongers, perhaps doing harm to [my] community, holding men guilty without charge [!], a man hater, prejudiced...etc.

The ignorance and bile calmly pointed out is there for all to see. It's not MeFi's proudest moment.

FFF, your apology above is directed at the wrong person [who may indeed not be reading any more, but his email is still on his user page]. Never mind, it took some guts to write it in the first place, I guess.

I am surprised to find us on opposite sides of a dispute, as we usually agree on politics [something I cannot say about UncleFes, usually...]. I find your involvement in those kids' life remarkable: you are, as you describe it, de facto family. You could have explained how the precautions I believe are necessary have possible exceptions [I try to keep an open mind] - well, I know now. I think that your case is rare, but that's imho.

I am very sorry to see UncleFes, yet another conservative lost to hysterical hounding, go. But I can easily understand why.

By: timeistight

timeistight — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:57:40 -0800

I have decided that this topic is one which I shall have to build a wall around.

That seems like a good idea. We all need to stay away from things that make us angry here.

I apologize for making fun of your earlier apology.

By: scarabic

scarabic — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:34:53 -0800

dash_slot-

I think you were unprepared for how unpopular your opinion would be, but I don't think everyone who disagreed with you did so out of malice or a mere desire to defame you. I think you're exaggerating when you say you were demonized. I for one violently disagreed with you, but I did my best to contain the ad hominems and tell you why I thought you were wrong.

If you want to hold an unpopular belief because you think it will make your kids that much safer, that's your prerogative. Doing so without complaining that everyone's out to get you, THAT's "sticking to your guns."

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:01:33 -0800

I feel like just saying fuck off, and seeing if I feel better about your smug, inconsistent and superior attitude.

By: matteo

matteo — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:01:55 -0800

My involvement in helping raise these children is the most important thing I shall accomplish in my lifetime.

yeah, I really wonder why fff got mad because of the "shitty parents" snark, huh?

heh.

I mean, we all like to hear that the most important thing we'll accomplish in our lifetime is shit

People Around Here (Myself Included) Fly Off The Handle For The Most Trivial Crap (come to think of it, that would be a nice tagline for MetaFilter). he just got angry because of a very personal, sensitive issue, for a change

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:03:22 -0800

Well, it was sotto voce, so you may have missed it.

And it made no difference.

By: scarabic

scarabic — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:37:50 -0800

Great. And there you have it.

[fucks off]

By: justgary

justgary — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:50:52 -0800

he just got angry because of a very personal, sensitive issue, for a change

Perhaps the perfect reason to stay out of the topic at hand.

Really, it seems as if we now make an excuse for anyone's behavior.

By: alicesshoe

alicesshoe — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:56:17 -0800

Some are behaving as if fresh fish five just shot you. If you can't take the heat when you [UncleFes] criticize with absolutely no proof, simply stereotyping his SO, I'm not surprised it twigged a nerve.

So he lost it and slagged you in reponse. That should come as a surprise to you? You turn around and say you're going to leave? No apologies eh? Pretty thin skin after such a slag.

When dealing with sex, religion and politics, those are always sensitive subjects. Beware criticising if you can't take the fallout.

I think UncleFes put his foot in his mouth [initial criticism], then exchanged it for the other foot [saying he's outta here].

By: Wulfgar!

Wulfgar! — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:49:18 -0800

Excuse me, but didn't the great lefty cabal of Mefi take Midas Mulligan to task for his claims of personal attribute and inside knowledge? So why are there those who are willing to cut fff slack because he got his nose bent out of shape, presumably because of personal circumstances that no one here knows to be the truth?

I become quite angry at some of the things written here because of circumstances in my own life. I do not, however, expect an online forum to care about that, or cut me slack because of it. Be understanding all you want, but please accept that what fff wrote to Uncle Fes was pretty beyond the standards for MetaFilter.

By: justgary

justgary — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:15:37 -0800

I become quite angry at some of the things written here because of circumstances in my own life. I do not, however, expect an online forum to care about that, or cut me slack because of it. Be understanding all you want, but please accept that what fff wrote to Uncle Fes was pretty beyond the standards for MetaFilter.

What I wanted to write, but did not. I understand anger, and there have been numerous times things were written that personally offended me (and I don't offend very easily). But with all that nonsense its uncle fes who put his foot in his mouth?

I must have read a different thread.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:08:19 -0800

If Fes is going (I don't see him saying this anywhere, but I've just woken up) you've lost one of the last of the handful of consistently intelligent, eminently reasonable, bighearted and unstupid people left to grace this place, where once they were much thicker on the ground. The abasement of the discourse grinds down another notch.

I say 'you' advisedly.

I have nothing but respect for Fes and little but resentment towards five fresh fish at the moment. If it were up to me (and of course there are many who say 'well thank christ it's not up to you!'), you'd be banned, if not permanently, at least until you got some perspective, fishie.

I am very sorry to see UncleFes, yet another conservative lost to hysterical hounding, go.

That's bullshit, dash_slot-, and you know it, I hope. Don't confuse the issue. Fes was never (and it's an entirely other unsubstantiated argument if anyone else ever has been) a victim of politically-motivated hounding. He was shat on and abused, without what I can see as any reasonable justification, by another member with too much emotional investment in a discussion, and the scat flung had nothing to do with politics.

(Also : screw the children, just not literally.)

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:55:41 -0800

I think FFF crossed the line, but I never understand the logic behind leaving if one person does something that offends or angers you. Of course, the reason for it would probably be personal emotions that came into play when the person attacked you, which, interestingly, is what FFF is being chided for--I think correctly. Still, I wouldn't ban him, as Stav suggested, because he's admitted to an overly emotional outburst. I think it would be in good form to apologize to Fes (a personal e-mail has a much nicer touch than could be found here), even if he doesn't agree with him.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:05:03 -0800

As one who has witnessed somewhat extreme family clashes later healed in mutual reconciliation, and as someone whose parents have made it to a 50th wedding anniversary, I'd say:

I like both UncleFes and FiveFreshFish, and would be sorry to see either go. Remember - humans lose their tempers often but also have great ability to forgive and forget, especially within the context of a "tribe" - and this might be a little like a tribe.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:08:10 -0800

I've been in contact with UncleFes, and it seems he has left. Who knows if he'll come back? I don't. I do know that we disagreed on many things, but I looked forward to his posts - not unlike I look forward to many posters in this thread, like FFF.

I do think he was hysterically hounded by one user, but I didnt say, nor do I believe, that it was for political reasons, stav. No-one would call me a conservative, but I do think we need a fair and balanced membership, not a monoculture.

None of that is to say that Fes was without error. I try really hard not to use abusive language on this site, cos I am aware of how often I've jumped to wrong conclusions, misunderstood comments, let my anger get in the way of reason. Also, I don't like being on the receiving end of abusive language (described above).

Having said that, Fes said "shitty parents" about a non-user of MetaFilter: that's not usually a grave offence. It was not declared, at that time, how much a part of that woman's life that FFF is. He's a virtual father. I applaud him. And I'm not gonna say any more about it.

I general, I worry that abuse of members by members doesnt have any visible consequences for the offender. So the same will happen again, to someone else, soon - cos they can get waway with it. That's what stinks.

By: rushmc

rushmc — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:44:05 -0800

Having said that, Fes said "shitty parents" about a non-user of MetaFilter

It is perfectly appropriate for a member to both have and express an opinion—and in this case, UncleFes was not without basis for his. I'm sure that if he'd known of fff's personal connection he would have couched his opinion more diplomatically, but no one can expect him (or any of us) to assume that any comment we make about a post might have personal relevance to one of the many Mefi members, even though it very well might. I could be Liz Taylor in reality and take great exception to many of the comments about Michael Jackson, but that doesn't mean that everyone should impose the silence of self-censorship upon themselves.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:57:16 -0800

It is perfectly appropriate for a member to both have and express an opinion—and in this case, UncleFes was not without basis for his.

Really? It's perfectly okay for me to suggest offensive stereotypes and pass it off as "free speech"? I always thought that you were in favor of civil discussions, not verbal abuse.

Fes went too far. But many people do these days. Fes wasn't trying to be personal, though. As for five fresh fish, he's shown his refusal to apologize to anyone, but Matt. I find that disclaimer to be dismissive of the rest of us, most of all Fes.

By: languagehat

languagehat — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:37:41 -0800

I find that disclaimer to be dismissive of the rest of us

Not to mention the entire idea of civility. Grow up, fff. You can't expect everyone to tiptoe around your (or anyone's) touchy areas, especially before you've revealed how touchy they are. Your hurt feelings explain your outburst but don't excuse it. Apologize like a ~~man~~ flounder.

And like stavros, I'm going to be really pissed if Fes is actually gone.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 09:56:38 -0800

I have had a few days to calm down. I've spent a few restless nights thinking about all this.

I've concluded that Fes was probably not being deliberately malicious, and likely did not read the source post carefully nor thought carefully about the implications of his statement.

I've concluded that if a single post from a clearly over-emotional person he doesn't even know is enough to drive him away, he must have a plateful of other issues with MeFi.

And I've concluded that if all it took was a single stupid judgement from a guy I don't know is enough to push me over the edge, then it may be time for me to examine my role in supporting the sorts of change in society that will reduce the judgements made against single mothers. I know the world is filled with bigots; I just have never encountered it personally before.

Having calmed down a lot, I am now prepared to email Fes and see if he will come back. And, yes, I will eat humble pie in that missive.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:11:13 -0800

"like grains of sand through the hourglass of time, these are the days of our lives..."

[cue organ]

By: languagehat

languagehat — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 12:47:15 -0800

*waits impatiently for Fes to return so we can have the traditional MeTa group hug*

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:45:46 -0800

Impatiently is right, languagehat.

I hope Fes returns, when he's good and ready, because his intelligence, sophistication and wisdom are always a joy to read and learn. And he just kept getting better and better with every post. He's probably my favourite poster and I miss him tremendously already. He's also a gentleman and very, very funny and generous. I know tributes like this are somewhat embarrassing, but they need to be fully paid when they're as true as this one.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:53:49 -0800

If any of you have an alternate email address for him, you might want to prompt him to check the hotmail account.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:23:13 -0800

Will do, fff. Thanks.

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:50:45 -0800

[cue organ]

*unzips*

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:45:03 -0800

Fes has asked me via email to pass on his best wishes to everyone here, but he is hanging up his meta-hat, it seems.

He didn't receive the mail that fff mentions - caught by his spam catcher he assumes - but he'd like say that he accepts any apology offered, without reservation, and extend his most sincere apologies for his comments in return.

I'll miss him, but there are other bars on the strip that we both frequent, and sometimes I feel like this one has gotten a bit too rowdy and sophomoric (my words, not Fes's) too, so I understand his decision, while holding out hope that it's not final.

By: Wulfgar!

Wulfgar! — Sun, 23 Nov 2003 22:45:20 -0800

A fellow Jethro Tull fan hangs it up on Mefi. Please excuse my quiet crying from the corner ...