Ummm…sorry for the attention-whore-esque post, but I’m going to work and wont have time to scour the origin of this dramarama and produce examples of the behavior cited in my OP until much later today. I know the world doesn’t rotate around me (usually :P), but since I told people that’s what I was planning on doing, I thought my silence might seem odd. So umm… carry on?
Okay, I’m going to give you a brief answer and another one to Ruby as well and then let that do it as this thread is going in circles and even I am beginning to find it tiresome…
No particular post triggered my criticism; the overall tone and spirit of the threads themselves triggered it. It was the posters’ behavior in the aggregate and they way they were feeding off of each other to try to hurt, scare, wound MizGrand that I found so reprehensible, especially on a board such as this in which, regardless of the forum and/or number of paid subscribers, politically incorrect and/or insensitive posts are roundly and quickly criticized, and where openmindedness and nonjudgementalism by and large rules the day.
I won’t bother reiterating my criticisms again here as I’ve made them several times before in regard to this issue and if they haven’t sunk in by now it isn’t likely that they will with one more repetition. If you truly want to know what I’m critical of and what I had to say on the subject, I suggest you go to my screen name and select “Find all posts by this poster”. It shouldn’t take too long to find the ones that are germane and you won’t have to slog though large, multi-page threads to get to them.
And Ruby, at this point I don’t particularly want anything. For most of last night and for all of today, I’ve merely been answering criticisms and challenges thrown my way. I haven’t really evangelized anything of my own volition on this subject in quite some time. I’ve said my piece and offered my point of view and that’s really all I ever intended. My activity since that time has largely been spent responding to posts directed at me.
And now, given that at one point or another I’ve said virtually everything on this subject that I have to say, I shall bid you all adeiu. For now anyway. 
This board is full of people who dislike broad-brush hatred and generalizations. But calling people on their individual fuck ups? That is fine with me. If you indicate that you’ve done something wrong, I’m going to call you on it…not all conservative men. If you post something I think is stupid, I’m going to say that you said something stupid, not conservative men say stupid things.
Openmindedness and nonjudgementalism are for groups of people, situations where we don’t have any facts, and MPSIMS. These are not things to use when a particular person is doing something completely scummy and everyone knows it.
This thread is no fun anymore. Here, everyone put your faces over this paint can and inhale deeply.
Amen, bother.
::inhales deeply…goes glassly eyed…falls over::
You can hate it all you want, but the fact of the matter is that in the course of human discussion it is often appropriate to speak in generalities. Everyone does it and without the ability to do so, normal conversation would be nigh on impossible. Not to mention the fact that I’ve seen umpteen jillion posts around here denigrating this or that thing the ‘pubbies’, ‘tightie righties’, ‘conservative assholes’, ‘fundies’, et. al, allegedly do, but you don’t see me charging in attempting to derail the point by shouting for meaningless cites. This is because I understand context and I understand that generalities are necessary (and often perfectly appropriate) in the normal course of human…ahem…intercourse, and I like to think that I’m intellectually honest enough to see and address the point the other poster is making and address that point rather than trying to bog him or her down in meaningless cites that prove nothing in the long run and serve only to provide fodder for ‘what the meaning of is, is’ derailments. Don’t like my POV and/or my refusal to provide non-probative cites…then don’t read my posts. Simple as that. But I can tell you here and now that I fully intend to continue to post my comments in whatever fashion I feel is appropriate under the circumstances, including generalities where warranted, and I will continue to decline to attempt to provide cite demands that are either non-probative or, as in this case, serve as demands to prove or disprove points other than the one I’m making.
Now, where’s that paint can?
:: puts face over can, takes long, deep sniff ::
Ahhhh…blue! 
I don’t think cites in this case would be meaningless. What I think is meaningless is getting all hysterical over people behaving immorally but having no actual examples of immorality to show us so we can know what you mean. It’s a serious charge, one you ought to back up. You are saying that we shouldn’t get bogged down in the details of WHO was immoral, or how, just “you folks know who you are and you should feel very, very badly. The whole thread is just full of jackals, etc.” You can see why many participants in that thread would take issue with your characterization. I think most people in that thread were trying to be helpful, and I object to your attempt to make it sound otherwise.
Ruby, please. I wasn’t hysterical; actual examples exist but I chose not to go there for reasons I spent considerable time composing a post to explain; and I haven’t metaphorically wagged my finger at anyone and said ‘you know who you are and you should feel very, very badly’. I never said the ‘whole’ thread was full of jackals/sharks/or any other predatory animals. Indeed, many good and potentially helpful posts were made. However, the thread eventually devolved, IMO, into a disgusting feeding frenzy of cruel and intentionally mentally hurtful behavior (which nonetheless did continue to have helpful comments sprinkled about) and it was that which I was critical of.
I have come to believe you are sincere in your desire for me to…ahem…elucidate examples for you so as to highlight the type of behavior I’m talking about, but I think you know that if I were to attempt to do so the conversation would become nothing but a big free-for-all over who meant what by what they said, and how much or how little meaning/cruelty/evil it contained, how this or that secondary poster did or did not contribute to the overall cruelty being expressed, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Now like I said, I’ve become convinced that your motives are sincere, but I’m a little nonplussed as to your confusion given that many if not most of the posters that preceeded you not only in the original threads but in the spinoff threads and this one as well seemed to recognize it without any problem. It’s only since you began with the cite requests here that there seemed to be any question as to what that thread and its spinoffs had devolved into.
I think you have. Quiddity has, in this and other threads. Otherwise, what is the purpose of railing against the immorality? What is the purpose of your repeated expressions of disgust and outrage? If you’re not trying to reform behavior or change things for the better, then what are you doing, just bitching? Why do you think that’s worthwhile behavior?
Then we have to agree to disagree, because I do not think that’s what happened. That thread went to 10 pages because the Pittee kept contributing to it, feeding new (and in some case, increasingly harsh) responses. In no way would I refer to it as a “frenzy of cruel and intentionally mentally hurtful behavior.” That description sounds hysterical and hyperbolic to me, and I do not think it is accurate. There was no frenzy. There wasn’t a lot of flat-out deliberate intentional cruelty. That’s my opinion and no amount of your claming otherwise will change that without cites. If you can give me cites, I might change my mind and agree with you. Or I might be able to see where you’re coming from.
Now, you might be saying that the sheer volume of responses to MizGrand’s thread is itself excessive, like a gang standing around someone saying the same shit over and over. Then it’s not individuals being cruel, but the overwhelming amount of antipathy. In that case, I can see how it might seem like too much, but it’s not deliberate cruelty and it’s not actually even preventable. When you open a thread asking for commentary on your questionable behavior, you have to be able to take whatever you get. Again, my opinion, you might disagree, and that’s fine.
Ah, and now you see my point-- that most people at whom you would point a finger of accusation would probably say that they WEREN’T being jackalish, that their intentions were not malicious. You are attributing motives to a lot of people unfairly.
I don’t think a lot of people recognize it with no problem. I think the majority of people think that MizGrand got exactly what she deserved, with a few exceptions where people went too far. Clearly you and I just see that thread has having gone down differently. The difference is, I’m not trying to make people feel bad or act like I’m morally superior. You and QG are.
You’re both talking about the same things but from different angles. Rubystreak is saying it was all good, except for those few exceptions. **Starving Artist **is mainly talking about the few exceptions and not addressing the rest. Where is the disconnect?
He thinks there was a morally outrageous feeding frenzy of cruelty. I don’t.
No, he didn’t use the words morally outrageous. He said:
In other words, some people stepped over the line.
Starving Artist in post #246: " we mean they shouldn’t do it because we feel it’s **morally wrong ** and that by giving voice to this belief, perhaps people will examine more closely the things they say and maybe decide that the damage they might do outweighs whatever it is they think they accomplish with their vicious and/or hurtful behavior."
Behavior in the thread was morally wrong. We should examine our behavior more closely and change it if we want to stop being so morally wrong. That’s what he’s saying. I disagree with that characterization.
A couple. Most did not. No reason for telling an unspecified group people they’re morally in the wrong, committing acts of deliberate cruelty, are jackals, etc.
Well, yeah…just bitching primarily with little expectation of change. Posters such as Caridwen, however, do give me hope. 
If you are genuinely that desirous of determining whether or not to agree with me, why don’t you go reread the thread and decide for yourself. Or are you expecting me to turn your viewpoint around through sheer rhetorical genius? 
Yeah, the gang analogy is fairly apt, but not completely in the way you describe it. I believe it can easily contain deliberate cruelty. Whether it’s preventable or not is up to the readership of this board. Plenty of other types of behavior deemed deplorable around here gets sqelched quite effectively. This is pretty much central to my initial criticism. It seems to me that a board comprised of so many people espousing open-mindedness, tolerance, and non-judgmentalism (and occasionally assailing those of us on the right for the supposed absence of these qualities) would be quick to call foul when it comes to that type of behavior.
Yes, I’m quite sure that they and other of my adversaries around here would claim just that. Dispute over the veracity of their denials is exactly what would lead to the verbal free-for-all I foresee, and would accomplish absolutely nothing of substance.
And neither am I. Honestly. I simply saw a situation I found deplorable and castigated the people I viewed as being responsible. It never crossed my mind at the time that I might make someone feel bad (though IMO that wouldn’t be a bad thing if they were one of the miscreants), nor did I give a thought to whether or not I was morally superior. I simply saw behavior that I felt was outrageous, disgusting and exessively hurtful and expressed that observation pretty much out of reflex.
Perhaps. But maybe reason enough to let those couple people know what they think of them.
On the other hand, I would think that the people who were stepping over the line by your definition either don’t know and/or don’t care. And if that’s the case, telling them that doesn’t serve a useful purpose. Except that it’s an opinion like any other opinion around here. And sometimes saying things brings awareness. It has happened before.
No you didn’t. You condemned an ambiguous group of people without ever castigating the people responsible. And frankly, unless you do name names, I highly doubt anyone will say, “Oh, I’m the jackal! My bad!” So you’re just bitching, and nothing positive is gained from it except making you feel morally righteous. I find that a pointless activity and wonder why you continue to engage in it.
I didn’t see too much that was “outrageous, disgusting and exessively hurtful.” I’d like you to show me where it is. You won’t. Thus, I feel vindicated in my opnion that yours has no real substance to it. I hope that was clear enough to you.
No, it isn’t! In the first place, that quote was in response to after the fact posts to the effect that QG (and by inference, I) wanted to see some sort of offical change take place to enforce a kinder, gentler Pit. Also, much lies in how things are put. I wouldn’t say ‘change your behavior if you want to stop being so morally wrong’, but I might say ‘You people are acting like vicious assholes!’ and leave it up to them to decide what, if anything, to take away from that. Either way, though, the statement I made above wasn’t intended to describe my thoughts at the time of my original critique.
Why is it okay for you to hurt someone’s feelings, but others should be careful of what they post?
In the RSSGrand thread, people were expressing their belief that her behavior was “outrageous, disgusting and exessively hurtful and expressed that observation pretty much out of reflex.” They don’t get a pass, but you do. Nice double standard there, SA.
And I feel vindicated in my opinion that you are mentally simpatico with the offenders, and therefore see nothing or very little wrong with their behavior, and that is why you’re in such a snit now. I hope that was clear enough to you.
And now, since we’re just going around in circles, I will again attempt to bail from this thread.
Now you’re calling me a jackal. At LAST we have it! Don’t you feel better? I do, because I don’t think I did anything worthy of your condemnation except try to call you on your petty and pointless moralizing. But if I don’t agree with you that this amorphous group of people was morally outrageous, I must be a jackal just like them. Brilliant. You’ve finally shown yourself to be exactly what you are.
And now I will tell you to soundly go fuck yourself, since I think you’re completely full of shit.