Re: TD - why do people keep responding? A query

On Mar 4, 10:36 am, "Floor" <floor.kernk...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In my total of now 4 years of exposure to rmcr there is this one
question that daily comes back into my mind.

What are the reasons for many of the esteemed contributors to this
newsgroup to keep trying to argue with Mr. Deacon or to respond to his
messages which are mostly coming in the form of decrees neither asking
for nor allowing for any answers or discussion.

In fact, I have yet to see any meaningful exchange of confliction
opinions with this member of this group.

I don't want to insult anybody, I just would like to know what makes
people keep trying.

Hope to break through the protection shield?
Anger and frustration?
Desire to get him to really share his knowledge?
Pleasure in Deacon-bashing?
Trying to keep his influence down (i.e. preventing unsuspicious people
from buying his statements)?

Well, personally I never had any exchange with him so far, and I have
to admit that I have developed some very very weird, a bit ironical
kind of sympathy for him. I have some perverse delight in reading what
he posts - but for my life I can't understand why people here keep
trying to have a meaningful conversation with him.

Remember, Moses didn't argue about the Ten Commandments either...

Now you know why I don't respond to his posts - please let me know
what drives those wo do!

F.

For me, it's a combination of things.

First, if I believed that ignoring the guy was a constructive course
of action - that it would really cause him to lose patience and go
away - I would do it. Four years of empirical evidence strongly
suggest that he's not going anywhere. Also, even if I ignored him
there is no way that he would be universally ignored. So I treat his
presence as a given, not as something that can in any material way be
influenced by my actions.

Of course, there's no convincing him, shaming him, opening his mind,
or influencing his behavior. His public humiliation resulting from
the Hatto Scandal would humble practically anyone with a conscience,
but it is clear he doesn't have one, at least as most people would
define one.

The principle reason I respond is my belief that it is actively wrong
to allow hateful, bigoted, mean-spirited attacks to go unanswered in
the vain hope that he will simply go away. I have never known that
approach to be successful in dealing with intolerance. Before anyone
invokes the phrase "passive resistance", neither Ghandi nor Dr. King
ignored hateful acts or pronouncements. Even though I know he won't
listen to my replies, I am not willing to let such vile thoughts stand
unanswered. My posts are more acts of solidarity with the victims of
his rebukes more than they are written for him to read. Detachedly
admiring him, in my opinion, is morally perverse. I find myself
getting angry at times with those in the group who engage him yet
somehow seem to remain conveniently silent when he posts something
particularly hateful. Many of these same posters are the first to
complain that those denouncing Deacon are vulgar, undignified, etc. I
just hope they know that I am equally disappointed with their enabling
behavior.

Sometimes, as in the recent Rubinstein Chopin thread, I will answer a
post of his if I catch him providing information that is either wrong
or ludicrous. He's as entitled as anyone to his opinions, just as I
am to agree or disagree with his or anyone elses. He just doesn't
understand the difference between an opinion and a pronouncement.
When he actually writes about music - which represents less than 10
percent of the volume of his posts - he is either shilling, speaking
in broad generalities, repeating stereotypes, commenting on recordings
he's admittedly never heard, or engaging in other such actions that
convey little or no aural or musical acuity. Many around here
frequently joke that he is deaf. I've sometimes wondered if there may
be a grain of truth to this. It would explain a lot, especially his
bitterness and rage.

And as for the "fun" part: for better or for worse, I am not a
creature of pure intellect. I have to admit getting a certain degree
of enjoyment from an occasional game of kick-the-can, especially
played at the expense of such a worthy target. This is a Usenet
group, after all - it ain't the Sorbonne. There are always going to
be trolls, and there is always going to be troll-chasing. Those who
get bent out of shape about the occasional "lack of dignity" on this
newsgroup need to check their zipcode.

And finally, as I was joking to some RMCR members the other day:

He started it.

DF


.

Loading