I'm sorry if I offended anyone. The specific phrase that I used was a meme
(it's the cartoon seal), and intended as a joke.

On Monday, November 18, 2013, Craig Bergdorf wrote:

> IMO:
>
> I agree with ben that debates of reactions to offence to one's core should
> be in person, (how else can you gauge when you're going too far? not going
> far enough?  or smack them in the face? :) ) A broad group demands broad
> humor, and personally, i take more offence to someone challenging what I
> hold above myself than attacking myself personally, so I can relate that to
> some it is a far greater offence (how many eggshells did I just win?).
> Neither is acceptable in print, or to be proclaimed/shouted from the
> streets. In person or simulated with chat it IS different, it is part of
> getting to know someone; deciding if they are compatible with you. Although
> I don’t think the op has any intention of starting this dialog, it was
> going to come up eventually.  SynHak is getting big,  there are already
> several pairs that don’t mix, Personally, I enjoy it, but I believe what
> separates a Hackerspace from a group of close friends sharing tools is how
> this specific issue is handled.  Some will just ban the offenders, some
> will push towards ridgid professionalism, I favor the model of too many
> people in a room:  if it sucks-yell as loud as the offence was yelled, as
> Torrie did so eloquently.  This keeps the clickieness (is that a word?)
> down to a minimum and continues the mixing of everyone on equal ground (the
> point right?).
>
>
>
> To me, (as I was reminded recently) the discuss list is for coherent
> thought, or proofread opinion,( or in my case, semi-intoxicated rants that
> are spelchek3d), but not for casual chat.
>
> On a few comments, including the two discussed here, Outside of severe
> incompatibility with the program I run (which I can’t really fault anyone
> for (however mad it may make me)), the only fault I saw is simply one of
> using the list as a chat forum to get to know people, we have IRC & real
> life for casual chat.
>
>
>
> Please don’t slash my tires,
>
> Craig
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Jeff Nielson <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> "I am your god" is just as vague as Ben was.  That is why people who are
> PC just stay away from topics that might offend.  This is a conversation
> that should be had in person.  I suggest you call each other, because this
> kind of stuff just gets blown out of proportion when written text is
> misunderstood.  Some might say, they were just being funny.  I suggest we
> look for ways to be funny that don't potentially tread on others when we
> are talking or acting publicly. My advice to all is that if you want to
> form your own RasPi church, say slurs, or create false idol walls you
> should probably just do it with your close friends, not in a group that
> wants to have a public face.  You will alienate good people that you would
> otherwise really like to be around.
>
> Disclaimer: I am not a member (because my schedule is bad).
>
> --Jeff
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
> On Friday, November 15, 2013 21:45:24 Seeley, Tim wrote:
> > Hi Torrie,
> >
> > Thanks for caring and asking to have a better understanding.  Jesus died
> so
> > that I could be forgiven and restored to a relationship with Himself/God.
> > That makes His and mine relationship very personal for me.  I am not
> > offended when others religious beliefs are different.  Nor is it
> offensive
> > when those beliefs are written and posted.  The portion of the note that
> > claimed the sales rack was a god gave no offence.  The sign goes further
> by
> > saying "I (the sales rack) am your god".  That is what made me wince.
>
> Ok, right. I'm still not sure why it made you wince. I'm really not a
> christian in any sense, so I have no idea about anything.
>
> In my opinion, I don't think it is necessarily un-Excellent to say
> offensive
> words. What matters, is the intent of those words. Consider the phrase "wow
> thats gay". It could be interpreted either way. In one instance, it could
> be
> said by a close LGBT friend as a statement that something is in fact
> incredibly gay.
>
> Another instance would be with Ben's post earlier in the thread, where the
> word "gay" was used as a negative statement. The connotation there is that
> being gay is an inferior state. After all, shouldn't an organization of
> technically-minded people be able to run a mailing list or two without
> issue?
> Since that doesn't seem to be the case, they must be gay.
>
> Considering the above, this is perhaps why I'm confused as to why "I am
> your
> god" seems to offend. I can understand that it makes an incredulous and
> blasphemous claim, but I'm not able to see how that statement might be
> describing your religious identity as an inferior state.
>
> To me, the statement was a playful joke that intended to convey to the
> reader
> that the rack was a corporeal entity trying to convince the reader that
> they
> were your new god and should be treated as such. I imagine that the rack
> could
> be seen as one of Satan's tricks that attempt to lure you towards
> disobeying
> the first of the ten commandments. Considering that, if Satan himself (with
> all his terrible power) could only muster the strength to conjure a test of
> faith in the form of a harmless wire rack, well, I think thats pretty
> funny.
>
> In no way do I mean to come off as trivializing your concerns, I'm merely
> trying to understand the intricacies of a culture I am rather unfamiliar
> with.
>
> >
> > Jesus willingly died that all who would repent and believe in His name
> shall
> > be saved and live with Him forever. That is great news!  Christians are
> > called to share that news. That means share not impose.  We are not
> called
> > to go around worrying about how others are offending Christians.  That
> > really would not help anyone.  By speaking up all that I really wanted
> was
> > to add religious preference to the list of things SYNHAK counts as worthy
> > of respecting in others.
> >
> > I am all for an eggshell-free zone at SYNHAK.  In an effort to address
> > potential future eggshell issues, let me say a few words about the use of
> > Jesus's name in ways that are
>
>

-- 
Thanks!
Ben Lippincott
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to