Seeking Clarification: Responding to MPSIMS Requests for Help With Adverse Informati

[TwistofFate]

@Ferret Herder

Because apparently MM didn’t get the point - he received a polite E-mail from OxyMoron, not to mention at least a couple other people, and never responded, even with an “I was a jerk, I’m sorry.”

I still don’t think that is enough to poison the well against a person. Just MHO.

[pseudotriton_ruber_ruber]

I’m a New Yorker with a spare bedroom (occasionally), and a generous spirit (once in a while ) and I was asking myself if TubaDiva’s request was one I should be considering, until I read Billdo’s post and said, “Uh uh.” Knowing Billdo a little bit from Dopefests, I felt him to be reliable, plus I remember reading his “bar tab” story, and finding that one a harrowing tale, I felt Billdo had done me a service here.

Frankly, I can’t see what’s jerkish in offering a politely worded dissent in MPSIMS. We’re free to reject Billdo’s p.o.v., just as we’re free to reject TubaDiva’s original request. I admire Billdo for offering what must have been a delicate and potentially disturbing position on the OP.

[Fenris]

@gobear

I also think people should lay off Tuba. Her position as Admin doesn’t mean that she can’t post as a member, and her request for aid does not, IMO, carry any more weight than do the past requests for aid that were started by regular posters. It’s not as if she has any coercive power–what’s she going to do, ban you for not ponying up?.

Actually, this brings up a question: are regular members allowed to post requests for help and/or requests for fundraising? I thought I’d read that it was a no-no: you wanted to do a fundraiser/ help thread, you had to e-mail a mod/admin and they would decide if it was ok. But looking, I don’t see a sticky to that effect. So I may be on crack.

Could we have a rules clarification/reminder?

Thanks!

Fenris

[gobear]

@Fenris

Actually, this brings up a question: are regular members allowed to post requests for help and/or requests for fundraising? I thought I’d read that it was a no-no: you wanted to do a fundraiser/ help thread, you had to e-mail a mod/admin and they would decide if it was ok. But looking, I don’t see a sticky to that effect. So I may be on crack.

No, that’s correct AFAIK, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that previous charitable solicitations have been started by regular Dopers. So y’all shouldn’t be gettin’ all up in Tuba’s grill, ya dig?

[kabbes]

@Munch

Who on this message board has done so? Has anyone? Did someone who helped MM out before suddenly forget what happened? No - that didn’t happen, and your analogy is completely inapt. If *you * made a mistake, learn from it. One Doper’s mistake does not collectively apply to the other 10,000 Dopers. In no way does Billdo’s example paint the entire picture - in fact, it paints only negative things that skews the message unfairly towards the negative.

No, what I said was a specific response to Lib, who was questioning the relationship between generosity and charity - “it is also my opinion that giving in exchange for gratitude is not charity”. We were discussing the nature of charity itself.

In this case, there was repeated giving in exchange for ingratitude on each occassion. You might extend charity and not expect gratutude but there is a limit to which this sequence may be drawn.

pan

[dantheman]

@gobear

No, that’s correct AFAIK, but that doesn’t detract from the fact that previous charitable solicitations have been started by regular Dopers. So y’all shouldn’t be gettin’ all up in Tuba’s grill, ya dig?

Yes, they’ve been started by commonfolk, but more to the point would this particular thread been approved? What if the moderator whose permission was requested knew of the earlier issues?

[Liberal]

To clarify and reiterate my own position — an opinion that I hold despite whether Pan agrees — charity does not seek nor does charity expect gratitude in the sense of a debt owed.

[Munch]

@kabbes

No, what I said was a specific response to Lib, who was questioning the relationship between generosity and charity - “it is also my opinion that giving in exchange for gratitude is not charity”. We were discussing the nature of charity itself.

Quite true.

In this case, there was repeated giving in exchange for ingratitude on each occassion. You might extend charity and not expect gratutude but there is a limit to which this sequence may be drawn.

pan

I agree. But I’d also offer up MM’s first post in Tuba’s thread, which indicates (to me, at least) a certain amount of humbling. As I think **gobear ** has been pointing out (and I hope he corrects me if I’m assuming too much), there has been sufficient time between the Dopefest incident and now to grant a certain amount of leniency, and to assume a certain amount of restitution on his part.

[kabbes]

@Liberal

To clarify and reiterate my own position — an opinion that I hold despite whether Pan agrees — charity does not seek nor does charity expect gratitude in the sense of a debt owed.

No, I agree with that absolutely.

But what if the charity itself was never intended? That’s what mooching is all about.

And what if the charity is taken advantage of and taken further that was intended? That’s the understandable fear of folks like Bill and that’s why they wish to warn others of the possible fate that lies in store for them.

pan

[gobear]

@Munch

I agree. But I’d also offer up MM’s first post in Tuba’s thread, which indicates (to me, at least) a certain amount of humbling. As I think **gobear ** has been pointing out (and I hope he corrects me if I’m assuming too much), there has been sufficient time between the Dopefest incident and now to grant a certain amount of leniency, and to assume a certain amount of restitution on his part.

Up to a point. I’m extending a generous benefit of the doubt to him, but I would not presume to ask the NYC Dopers to lend a hand without profuse apologies from MM, evidence that MM is busting his butt to help himself first, and that aid received would be temporary and he wouldn’t transform into The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave.

[Jodi]

LIBERAL –

To clarify and reiterate my own position — an opinion that I hold despite whether Pan agrees — charity does not seek nor does charity expect gratitude in the sense of a debt owed.

The point being what, exactly? If I see people doing good in the world, I don’t really care what their motivation is. Beyond that, I’m uncertain how I could ever establish their motivation, or why I would want to try.

In this context, the question is whether it is appropriate to give the TM additional adverse facts that might disincline them to help a person who apparrently needs help. I don’t think it really matters whether the provision of help meets a particular definition of “charity” – though, for that matter, it does meet the general defintion of charity, which does not include the motivation component you add to your own definition. But even if we go with your definition and all agree that the assistance being asked for may not be charity, exactly – so what? The question is, when someone needs help, whether it’s appropriate for another person to advise the world that reasons may exist not to help the first person, even if he or she really does need it.

[Bricker]

I think Billdo’s action was very appropriate – perhaps the only change I might have suggested, in retrospect, was to post to the MPSIMS thread a link to a new Pit thread in which the warning is delivered. This avoids sullying MPSIMS with any negative words, but provides readers of the thread an easy oppportunity to follow the link and read about Billdo’s very relevant warning.

Certainly the information was the sort I’d want to know before making a decision about whether or not to help out.

• Rick

[ioioio]

@TwistofFate

…OK, MM mooched some beers and a hamburger and fries. I’ll grant you that was out of line. but is it really a crime so evil that when he fucks up bigtime that people can’t point him in the direction he needs to get back on track? There are vague allusions to other instances, but if they are so bad why not make the case for MM’s alleged abuses of charity with those instead of beers, burgers and fries.

[ul]
[li]If the mooching wasn’t that big of a deal, then the reporting of it shouldn’t influence people’s decisions, no? So why are you upset about it?[/li][li]Has there been any indication that MM is interested in getting “back on track”? Is the rest of humanity obligated to keep giving to MM and then offering kind advice to the effect that he shouldn’t take things from people?[/li][li]You disapprove of the mooching being reported, but yet you are encouraging the reporting of MM’s other “abuses of charity.” Who gets to be the judge of what should be reported? Perhaps those with knowledge of other incidents have decided it’s better not to pile onto someone whose luck is down. Isn’t this exactly what you’ve been urging?[/li][/ul]

@TwistofFate

If people wanted to help MM, it is their choice to do so. Charity shouldn’t come with preconditions attached. If someone I knew and had bad experiences with made a stupid decision with their lives, and it resulted in them being stranded in a foreign country, I’d either help them out to get back on their feet, or not actively try to dissuade people from helping out.

[ul]
[li]Charity does come with preconditions attached. When I decide to make a charitable donation I investigate the charity; if I don’t like the way the charity is run, I send my money elsewhere. [/li][li]What MM got at the Dopefest was not charity. No one offered anything to MM. He simply took advantage of people who didn’t realize at first what he was doing and then were too shocked by his behavior to call him on it.[/li][li]You cannot compare MM’s case to that of someone you know. If you know someone, you already have information on which to base your decision about what you are willing to do for that person. [/li][li]No one has actively tried to dissuade people from helping out MM. All anyone did was present some information that might guide others in their decision.[/li][/ul]

[Liberal]

@Jodi

LIBERAL –

The point being what, exactly? If I see people doing good in the world, I don’t really care what their motivation is. Beyond that, I’m uncertain how I could ever establish their motivation, or why I would want to try.

In this context, the question is whether it is appropriate to give the TM additional adverse facts that might disincline them to help a person who apparrently needs help. I don’t think it really matters whether the provision of help meets a particular definition of “charity” – though, for that matter, it does meet the general defintion of charity, which does not include the motivation component you add to your own definition. But even if we go with your definition and all agree that the assistance being asked for may not be charity, exactly – so what? The question is, when someone needs help, whether it’s appropriate for another person to advise the world that reasons may exist not to help the first person, even if he or she really does need it.

The point being what, exactly?

[Shayna]

@Esprix

If Tuba posted it publicly, it’s anyone’s “place” to reply. That’s what this Board is for, after all. Whether or not it was “meanspirited an intentionally hurtful” is obviously up for debate.

And his experience happened at a Dopefest, which is, officially or not, an extension of this message board. Again, I don’t see bringing up the incident as inappropriate in any way.

For some people, that is enough for them not to give someone a hand for fear of it being bitten. It seems encumbent upon Tuba to provide the whole picture if she’s going to ask people to give him a hand, IMHO.

Not unemployable, but perhaps not someone to recommend for employment yourself.

All just my opinion.

Esprix, if MonkeyMule himself posted a public plea for assistance, I might agree that a public reply by someone who felt they’d been screwed over by him might be warranted. But MonekyMule didn’t make this thing public, Tuba Diva did – and without his knowledge or permission. That he posted after the fact to thank her for her show of kindness, doesn’t mean he opened himself up to nasty potshots about his character in MPSIMS. He didn’t put this out there, yet you say since a third party did, that makes him fair game. I completely disagree.

Your contention that the incident occurring at a Dopefest also makes it fair game is actually contrary to every ruling about such incidents in the past, not to mention the disclaimer that’s been posted and locked at the top of that forum for over 2 years now, advising people that Dopefests are not in any way an extension of the boards or sanctioned by it’s owners/operators, and that everyone attends “at their own risk.”

We have had similar anonymous Pit threads about dopers shut down immediately when it was determined that the Pitee was, in fact, a doper, and the incident in question happened IRL. It’s never been allowed here before, and for very good reason – look how this mess has turned out. I’m with wring on that original thread by Billdo – it should never have been posted in the first place.

While I in no way condone mooching and don’t wish to diminish Billdo’s anger, if we had been made privvy to MonkeyMule’s side right from the start, we might very well have come away with a different opinion – or not – but now we’ll never know. For all we know, MonkeyMule felt that since he stated his financial situation up front and was told by the others there that they were happy to front him, for which he said thanks right at the beginning, he was a bit taken aback by their outrage when he did nothing more than what they’d already given him permission to do. They didn’t put any limits on him, but after the fact he’s accused of being a glutton for drinking X number of beers more than someone should if they’re being fronted and not paying for themselves that night. I don’t know, I wasn’t there. But neither were any of the rest of us, so using one side of the story to pass judgment on a man’s entire character just feels wrong to me.

[dantheman]

@Shayna

Esprix, if MonkeyMule himself posted a public plea for assistance, I might agree that a public reply by someone who felt they’d been screwed over by him might be warranted. But MonekyMule didn’t make this thing public, Tuba Diva did – and without his knowledge or permission. That he posted after the fact to thank her for her show of kindness, doesn’t mean he opened himself up to nasty potshots about his character in MPSIMS. He didn’t put this out there, yet you say since a third party did, that makes him fair game. I completely disagree.**

I feel that since he did post in that thread and did not dissuade anyone from offering help, he implicitly gave permission to the thread’s existence. If he was bothered by TubaDiva’s OP, then he certainly could have said so.

We have had similar anonymous Pit threads about dopers shut down immediately when it was determined that the Pitee was, in fact, a doper, and the incident in question happened IRL. It’s never been allowed here before, and for very good reason – look how this mess has turned out. I’m with wring on that original thread by Billdo – it should never have been posted in the first place.

The original Pit thread, however, made no mention of a DopeFest. All Billdo said was that it was a gathering of friends. For all anyone knew, it was just people he knew offline. Why would that be shut down?

[Mtgman]

@TwistofFate

To me, Bildo’s posting in that thread smacks more vindictive than helping. If you wanted to, you should have started a second thread saying why giving to moochers is a bad idea, and like your previous piut thread, not name any names, and send MM an e-mail saying that it was about him. If it was good enough for the original incident, why not do it for the second incident also?

Holy passive-aggressive, Batman!

Confrontation can be tough, but actions should carry consequences. Unrepentant mooching casts doubt on the character of the moocher. Calls for help based on the character of this individual, and a recommendation for a job certainly puts personal credibility on the line, should be made from an informed perspective. Passive-aggressive means of delivering the context to make an informed decision just cloud the issue.

The most interesting point in this thread for me was the observations from wring about others in this generation. Being not far removed from that generation myself(about four years older than MM) I’m not sure what to think about it. Maybe I just hang out with a completely different crowd, or maybe there is a regional component to this cultural behavior, but I have never had to deal with unrepentant moochers. Most of my friends are actually generous to a fault and if there was someone who couldn’t carry their own weight at a gathering they either wouldn’t come or would explain and make arrangements to cover it(and provide payback to anyone who floated them) well in advance.

I have seen groups where the responsibility for the tab rotates among various individuals and everyone takes a turn in the informal rotation according to their fortunes at the moment. I’ve done this myself, but the understanding is tit-for-tat and no one would think of titting without tatting as well as thanking the person who titted during this go-round.

Enjoy,
Steven

[Shayna]

@dantheman

I feel that since he did post in that thread and did not dissuade anyone from offering help, he implicitly gave permission to the thread’s existence. If he was bothered by TubaDiva’s OP, then he certainly could have said so.

That doesn’t mean that he made it public, so public chastisement is therefore allowed. He posted to thank her for her help. He’s being accused of being ungrateful and therefore unworthy of receiving help. If he hadn’t posted a thank you at all, people would accuse him of further ungratefulness. It’s an ugly, ugly circle, wouldn’t you say?

The original Pit thread, however, made no mention of a DopeFest. All Billdo said was that it was a gathering of friends. For all anyone knew, it was just people he knew offline. Why would that be shut down?

It shouldn’t have been opened in the first place. And I contend that if the moderators had learned, while it was open, that it was about a fellow doper and not some random stranger who doesn’t read the boards, they would have shut it down exactly as they did when someone posted a rant about an “anonymous” friend who’d sent her a late birthday card, and though most everyone supported her hurt indignation at first, when it turned out it was about a fellow doper (and, by the way, who had his own version of events that differed quite greatly from hers) it got shut down immediately, as did a recent Pit rant by someone against a fellow doper who dumped her, even though she didn’t name him by screen name.

It’s not allowed here. It’s never been allowed here. That Billdo got away with it doesn’t make it ok for him when it’s never been ok for anyone else. And yet he’s referencing that thread now as a way to further malign that person, now naming him by name, and everyone seems to think that’s just honky dory. I don’t.

[GingerOfTheNorth]

@Shayna

…as did a recent Pit rant by someone against a fellow doper who dumped her, even though she didn’t name him by screen name.

But, she did. Which is why it was closed.

[TwistofFate]

@lainaf

[ul]
[li]If the mooching wasn’t that big of a deal, then the reporting of it shouldn’t influence people’s decisions, no? So why are you upset about it?[/li]

But it was obviously done to influence peoples decisions. I’m not upset about anything here. I just feel it was the wrong forum to do it in.

[li]Has there been any indication that MM is interested in getting “back on track”? Is the rest of humanity obligated to keep giving to MM and then offering kind advice to the effect that he shouldn’t take things from people?[/li]

How are we to know? who is to say this won’t bring him around? Noone is obligated to help MM. that is the benefit of choice. If people aren’t interested in helping, they won’t.

[li]You disapprove of the mooching being reported, but yet you are encouraging the reporting of MM’s other “abuses of charity.” Who gets to be the judge of what should be reported? Perhaps those with knowledge of other incidents have decided it’s better not to pile onto someone whose luck is down. Isn’t this exactly what you’ve been urging?[/li]

Basically, all I’ve heard that is bad about MM is that he stiffed a few of the dopers over beers and food. I agree that is out of line. but if that is all that was done I don’t see why that should be enough to not help someone out with a pointer to cheap accomodation or who is hiring. If there is more to the story that the NYC dopers feel would be classed as “dogpiling” then fair enough, it’s their choice not to post it. but to allude to it is wrong. either post the information so that people can make the informed decision, or don’t post anything at all.

It’s this simple. Those Dopers who know what he’s like won’t help him. And if his antics have been as widespread as has been alluded to, then most of the NYC dopers won’t help. If that’s the case, there was no need for Bildo’s input.

[list]
[li]Charity does come with preconditions attached. When I decide to make a charitable donation I investigate the charity; if I don’t like the way the charity is run, I send my money elsewhere. [/li]

That is what you do before you donate. once you donate, you shouldn’t expect anything afterwards.

[li]What MM got at the Dopefest was not charity. No one offered anything to MM. He simply took advantage of people who didn’t realize at first what he was doing and then were too shocked by his behavior to call him on it.[/li]
[/ul]

did bildo not offer to stand him a few rounds? I agree that he did abuse that offer, but I got the impression he was at least offered some help at the start of the night.

and if people didn’t call him on it and allowed it to continue, then they do share some of the responsibility.

Look. I trust Bildo. I’ve read much more of him than I have of Monkeymule. I trust his opinion on things. I believe he came out for Kabbes dinner when he was over, and when Kabbes says that all the people he met were good people, I trust his opinion on it.

I just think he would have been better off doing as Bricker (on preview) suggests. Putting it all in a seperate pit thread.