Re: Something I've noticed: A Mad-Hamlet Rant (OT)

[Kris <krismpy@xxxxxxxxx>]

danspector@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> {Moderator note:
> The beginning of this post was a complaint that
> people who have not experienced girl-girl sex
> shouldn't write NC-17, because [in the poster's
> opinion] they can't write it convincingly. I've
> edited because the tone seemed a tad harsh, IMO. 
> 
> I also edited the subject line. The use of all-caps
> is "yelling" and not necessary here.

And in another post he also wrote:

>enjoying the heck out of this thread (but reminding
>everyone to play nice)

According to what you wrote above Dan, I'd like to
know why Maria's original post warranted an edit, and
Mad-Hamlet's didn't? While I obviously don't know
what was edited out of Maria's first post, and yes, I
would probably take offense to the "yelling;" if I
were someone who didn't know Mad-Hamlet's nuances
better (and didn't think he was a writing God), I
think I would've construed his post as way beyond "a
tad harsh, not necessary," and "playing nice." After
all, it appears Maria thought the same at first when
she said this: 

>so...i can't see why the h*** you are so mad!

And sure, Mad-Hamlet clears things up with her by
saying things like:

>No. I jest. I'm not angry at all.

>I am, at best, amused and with that amusement comes
>the urge to add my own
>point of view. Having a decent mind, good vocabulary
>and mastered the fine art
>of 'Fierce Speaking'...others can, occasioly believe
>that I am for some reason
>infuriated when in truth I am, for the most part,
>smirking. 

>I am, at best, honest. True what I have to say is
>barbed with envenomed wit
>and induendo but there is no actual malice
>involved... 

But that was his second post, and like I said, his
first post probably feels very, very "harsh" to those
who don't know better - which may be a lot of people. 
How many newbies are there? How many people joined
after M-H left? How many are just plain not familiar
with his idiosyncrasies?

Therefore, in the spirit of this group, I feel either
Maria's first post shouldn't have been edited, or else
M-H's should've. Otherwise, it seems like posts are
reviewed and edited arbitrarily, or else favoritism is
employed. The latter is actually one reason I left
this list for a while - coupled with the fact that I
had a job for over a year that gave me absolutely no
frigging free time. And looking at which post got
edited and which didn't, a case of favoritism could be
made in this instance as well, though I'm assuming you
let M-H's through because you're also familiar with
his psyche. 

Personally, I loved M-H's rant (I had even considered
posting something about JK Rowlings flying around on a
broomstick before his post so articulately did), and
totally agreed with it; BUT, I also wholeheartedly
believe in some semblance of temperance, or as you put
it, "playing nice," when it comes to posting - so I
really don't know which post I would've advocated
changing. I sort of lean toward the First Amendment
in this instance, though. However, I realize things
like these are judgement calls, and hindsight is 20/20
- not to mention Maria's unedited post may have
elicited more flames than discussion - so all I'm
asking is that you try to exercise more consistency
from here on out.

Kris

P.S. Yes, Mad-Hamlet, I know you don't care that I
cared what connotation your post may have had to
others (though maybe you did subconsciously care what
Maria thought), so I don't care that you don't care. 
Indifference begets indifference! ;) 

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com