[B5JMS] Where is JMS? In the past he defended Sins Past

[b5jms at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Aaron  Malchow" <aemalchow at earthlink.net>
Lines: 42
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 05:40:13 GMT

Jim Wilkerson wrote:
"What he's doing is taking the cowards way out and not addressing the issue.
Instead he's skirting around the issue and treating the fanbase with distain
by answering with flippant remarks.  I bet he thinks he's being clever but
the fact is he's not which is itself quite sad..."

If JMS doesn't respond, then posters unhappy with the current storyline
state that he concurs with the criticism.

If JMS does respond and explains why he prefers not to weigh in on the
debate in order that it will continue unimpeded, then posters unhappy with
the current storyline state that he's ducking the debate.

If JMS does respond and makes some jokes, then posters unhappy with the
current storyline state he's mocking them.

Apparently, nothing JMS does can be remotely positive as far as those
posters are concerned.

>From this, I tend to assume the following:

1) Those posters are only interested in trying to intimidate JMS online
thorough constantly attempting to misinterpret his posts.

2) Those posters apparently are incapable of having a healthy discussion
with people they disagree with.

3) Those posters have no faith in their ability to offer criticism that
doesn't rely upon a personal attack.

4) Those posters might be eager to start insulting anyone who sides with JMS
since they can't provoke him.

It would be nice if they could simply get back to debating the story with
other posters in a reasonable manner.

Sincerely,
Aaron Malchow





=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lines: 83
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 10 Oct 2004 08:19:28 GMT

You say:

>If JMS doesn't respond, then posters unhappy with the current storyline
>state that he concurs with the criticism.
>
>If JMS does respond and explains why he prefers not to weigh in on the
>debate in order that it will continue unimpeded, then posters unhappy with
>the current storyline state that he's ducking the debate.
>
>If JMS does respond and makes some jokes, then posters unhappy with the
>current storyline state he's mocking them.
>
>Apparently, nothing JMS does can be remotely positive as far as those
>posters are concerned.

To which I would add:

If I am called to task on something and counter it, I'm criticized for being
defensive and told that I'm attacking fans for their opinions.

If I am called to task on something and don't counter it, I'm either agreeing
that it's true or being rude to fans for not answering every single question
posed.

I have to obey the Marquis of Queensbury rules of fighting, because if I show
even a flicker of annoyance I'm being rude to fans, but it's okay to call me a
"fucking brain dead idiot."

If I try to inject some humor into a heated issue, I'm being rude.  

If someone attacks, that's good, but if someone defends, that person is an
"apologist" or a "so-and-so worshipper" and beaten down and insulted for
expressing the same right to hold an opinion as the one who attacked in the
first place.  

If someone insults me and I respond forcefully, I'm gigged for being
combative...if I don't respond forcefully andI just point out that this is what
they do, I'm gigged for playing the victim.  (Because that's how people who
like to insult other people get away with it...when called on their behavior,
they say the other person is playing victim, therefore making their poor
behavior somebody else's problem...but perish the thought if you go after them,
because they'll scream bloody murder about what a meanie you are.)

Let us all recall, folks and folkettes, that this thread began with somebody
asking where I was.  I responded, very gently and informatively...and
throughout this entire debate have not resorted to an angry response or
namecalling...and ironically because I didn't do this, I was accused of not
taking the debate seriously.  

I think we just answered the original question about why I was letting the
debate continue without me...and why there are so few pros who *do* hang around
here.

The moment you walk in the door, you're in a no-win scenario.

The sad thing is that I know that a lot of them would *like* to do so...when we
get together, invariably the boards come up, and I get a real sense that more
of them would like to hang out with the fans, they (and I) enjoy hanging with
fans...the problem is the 10% of fans who are, shall we say, socially
maladroit, combative, vicious, insulting, and mutually reinforcing who render
these groups toxic, making it hard on the 90% of fans who are nifty, generous,
intelligent, healthy, altogether terrific people

I've seen it now for over fifteen years online.  The song never changes.

And as for those who puff themselves up like pouter-pigeons and say they speak
for ALL fandom, for ALL readers...I'm from New Jersey.  I was born in New
Jersey.  I may even speak for some New Jerseyans.

But I am NOT New Jersey.

Learn the difference.


 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2004 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)