Hard News: Let's lynch the liberals!
455 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 12 13 14 15 16 … 19 Newer→ Last
-
fuck (just because everybody writes that;). You are right. A discussion about having a discussion is not necessarily a 'coffee-house talk'.
I think that can happen in any place.
-
Ben Shirmer - I 'm an ANZer of very long standing (some of my folk were here in the 14th century.) I'm also quite literate in English (and Kai Tahu dialect.) I am very interested in slang/cant/guild/in/variant(just to note a few) dialectual forms of English.
You've brought in a new term: I'm interested to know how that one transliterates into ANZ English.Using 'fuck' isnt actually compulsory, or necessary.
-
Ah, thank you. I was just getting annoyed by the fact that i was reading this horrible word all day.
Thinking about your country's history you should have some Maori blood then.
Sorry, but as a German, speaking English as a second language I can't really help you with that task. If you come up with a nice idea, we could talk about it.
-
Ko Aoraki te mauka, ko Waitaki te awa, ko Takitimu te waka, ko Kai Tahu te iwi e.
Um yes. I am part Maori. And rather known for it. Proud of it. Joyful about it.
I live in a place where several Germans have migrated to - & taken up residency, and (in 2 instances) become NZ citizens (with ANZ children.) So, among my mates, I can handle Bavarian, Austrian, and central Berlin dialects- I cannot speak any German! But they can..,
Ben, as I interpret 'coffee-house talk' it could be 'idle conversation that meanders everywhere and ultimately is just talk" (Thanks Rainer! Thanks Rickard)
-
My own contribution on this thread was probably a bit nastier than I intended - sorry 'bout that.
I struggle to contain my annoyance when people come here, complain and then wonder why people don't like them. But I shouldn't bite.
What I like about this place is that, usually, if there's been a bit of nastiness or tension in the air, someone steps in and calms us all down, and normalcy is restored.
This is still one of the few forums where flamewars aren't the norm.
-
For me it is really interesting how you point out intensely that you are proud and joyful about your origin. Is that the exception?
Regarding the 'coffee-house talk' I miss the idea that this talk is limited to topics, which are based on everyday life, so that they don't lead to a controversy, when any opinion is expressed.
Apart from that I really like the definition.By the way, did you want to express something in the first sentence. It is quiete hard to understand a language that you never were confronted with.
-
My own contribution on this thread was probably a bit nastier than I intended - sorry 'bout that.
no worries, let's call it spiritedness...;)
-
Aoraki is the mountain. Waitaki is the river. Takitimu is the ancestral canoe/ship/vessel of origin. Kai Tahu are the people.
My people-
and no, it isnt exceptional. It's just exceptional for people from elsewhere who dont understand these matters,
Did I want to express something in that sentence?
Yes.
Me.
Who I am.
Where I come from.
What I am about. -
A while ago, someone posted a link to a blog post of mine on this site. It was met with insults and derision. Someone put a link up, and people took that as free rein to insult me. Fine by me. I don't care.
Then, when I responded, someone, I think it was Emma Hart, assumed bad faith on my part and also assumed what was a simple statement as sarcastic. Assumed I meant the opposite of what I said, on no basis whatsoever, without knowing me. straight off from the first thing I said. That was really charming. Charming.
Then, foolishly, I tried arguing my point. No proper arguments were given against me. Silly statements like 'pathological cases' with no back up, no real arguments, very selective responses. Lots of calls of me being 'naive' though. One thing that amused me was someone saying 'The arrogance of that original post didn't help matters'. Help what exactly? It was as if I should construct my own personal blog posts so that they're acceptable here! Ye gods.
I admit I didn't sign off well on that occasion, being drunk, but I think you shouldn't just be so defensive about these things. Take a look at yourselves. These people might well be right wing idiots, but that doesn't mean they're wrong. The thing about that is you step outside yourself and look at it from someone else's point of view. Self-criticism.
No skin off my nose, whatever. Just thought I'd add my two cents' worth.
-
A while ago, someone posted a link to a blog post of mine on this site.
Yes, Stephen Clover linked to you talking about plagiarism.
This thing about Witi Ihimaera ripping people off is pretty funny.
...
So I reckon Witi should tell those po-faced motherfuckers to fuck themselves. Take a leaf out of Hone Harawira's book!In the context of a lively but measured discussion here up to that point, I trust you can imagine how people like Keir could have responded poorly to that tone, regardless of where it originated.
Worth noting that Philip Matthews immediately defended the value of what you had said, as did Stephen. You posted here, acknowledging the potential for contention:
To be honest, and this might sound wanky, but the only people's opinions who matter on this subject are those who produce creative work of their own and put it out there. Not the critics.
The blogger even responded:
You're right, it does sound a little wanky. But I do see your point. I just think it's a limited one.
Strong opinions were expressed, some of them no doubt insulting.
'The arrogance of that original post didn't help matters'. Help what exactly? It was as if I should construct my own personal blog posts so that they're acceptable here!
David, I reckon you have to take some responsibility for how the exchange began because of the nature of the words you published where anyone could link to them. Others are then responsible for both their constructive and otherwise responses.
Basically if you want to make forceful statements that are high in emotional tone and dismissive to boot, do not act all surprised when you attract the same. Some of the responses were well-reasoned and direct, like this:
pal, if you're going to start dividing the world up based on creative/non-creative in order to look clever & devalue people's speech then I am going to be rude. Also, your notion of plagiarism is naive and conceptually impoverished.
-
In the context of a lively but measured discussion here up to that point, I trust you can imagine how people like Keir could have responded poorly to that tone, regardless of where it originated.
Once again, a response thinking my original blog post, in my own context, should fit in with your discussion here.
Like I said, I don't care what others think of me. Yes, that context, and my work, involves 'forceful statements that are high in emotional tone and dismissive to boot', and I am not at all surprised if someone responds in kind. I think the NZ art world needs more public feuds, and I am more than happy to take part.
However, this site makes a big deal of being, and I wish I had the energy to find a direct quote, a forum for the considered and non-contentious exchange of ideas.
Excuse me if I express the opinion that, being dragged into this forum, I did not find it so. I repeat, I wasn't insulted by the initial response Stephen's link (or I) got, but I did think it a tad hypocritical.
Is it possible to make that point without a defensive response?
-
Oh yeah, sorry not to mention it earlier, but that last example of Sacha's was really funny.
-
But I don't think the responses you got were at all out of line; in fact, they were pretty temperate, and as far as people talking on the internet goes, exceedingly polite.
Mainly you seemed to be annoyed that people didn't argue the way you wanted, which, well, tough. There's no obligation on me to adopt a rhetorical stance that pleases you. (And `pathological case' is a perfectly respectable term of the art, so meh, I really couldn't care less if you find it silly. & of course it wasn't you that was naive, it was your ideas, a rather important difference. & again naive is a perfectly sensible word to use.)
-
Yeah, tough, wanting substantiated points preferably backed up by examples rather than airy assertions. More fool me. But good on you for being respectable and sensible.
I would say, go on, define pathological case. But I really don't want to get into this again, and I really don't want to debate with you. It's a waste of effort. All I wanted to say, to the forum in general, I've said: nosce te ipsum.
If you, Keir, come up with something worthwhile to say, I'll reconsider. That's me being arrogant again.
-
Using 'fuck' isnt actually compulsory, or necessary.
Ah, thank you. I was just getting annoyed by the fact that i was reading this horrible word all day.
Please don't take my profanity away from me. It's all I have. :)
All I wanted to say, to the forum in general, I've said: nosce te ipsum.
This is such a mind-numbingly ludicrous piece of advice to give to hundreds of random people with whom you have never interacted more than cursorily that I must actually give you a weird sort of props for the chutzpah. That's adorable.
-
All I wanted to say, to the forum in general, I've said: nosce te ipsum.
(donning on my "Hooray for sarcasm" T-shirt)-- Well, I think I do but I can get be a bit forgetful these days.
-
Fortunately I feel no obligation to admire arrogance.
Once again, a response thinking my original blog post, in my own context, should fit in with your discussion here.
No, thinking it should fit into a human conversation anywhere. You'd get a similar response to that tone from many people in any cafe. Your "context" on a public blog is not the same as a chat amongst friendly fellow practitioners/cynics at a private party.
Having said that, do argue however you want to. This is not an academic setting where citations are expected for every statement.
However, this site makes a big deal of being, and I wish I had the energy to find a direct quote, a forum for the considered and non-contentious exchange of ideas.
Excuse me if I express the opinion that, being dragged into this forum, I did not find it so.
Non-contentious? Open your eyes, man. There's the expectation mismatch right there.
-
I would say, go on, define pathological case.
Seriously, if you can't be arsed spending five seconds with a search engine...
The rest of your complaints really are just that we didn't argue like you wanted us to, which again makes me go eh.
-
Sure that's not meh?
-
I can understand David Cauchi's point, a little. Being a community, there are some things that don't go down well here, that might in other contexts, even polite contexts. You will get smacked down for some things, without fail. I'd give a for instance, but I'll get smacked down.
But that's how it goes in any conversation, anywhere, anytime. So you have to choose if you want to antagonize people and have a long and pointless fight with them, risking getting banned etc, or to change your style, or to leave.
I've tried all of these options. Leaving was by far the best one. It makes you realize (and it can take some time, in my case about 8 months of avoidance) that some discussions are worth having and some are not. I missed the ones that were worth having more than I hated having the other kind. I also realized that my participation in the other kind was at least half the reason they had happened, so I'm trying to change that. If I walk over a taboo subject, spark up the flames, I figure it's just the wrong place to talk about that subject. Doesn't mean you're wrong, or a bad person. Nor does it mean the other person is wrong or a bad person. Just that talking that way, in this place, is pointless, unless it is your purpose to antagonize.
Antagonism can sometimes be worthwhile, if you have a new or interesting point, or a good way of putting it. If you just insist, though, then it doesn't seem worthwhile to me.
-
Very well put. Now spare a thought for those of us whose culture dictates that if you agree with what somebody has to say, that's frightfully rude.
-
I agree with you BenWilson - will also spare a thought for Giovanni...sometimes, some of us just want a good old korero - I mean, talk being the food of chiefs and all that*- because it can be very interesting to get a small idea of how somebody's mind may work.
* My lines are rakatira, not ariki, so I dont feel obliged to only eat words ;) -
However, this site makes a big deal of being, and I wish I had the energy to find a direct quote, a forum for the considered and non-contentious exchange of ideas.
Come now, that's not so much a lack of energy as a lack of bothering to get your facts straight. to my knowledge, bro, the T&C, if it can be called that, say...
While we encourage vigorous debate, we require forum users to refrain from personal abuse and aggressive behaviour towards others. Posts which breach this policy will be deleted by moderators and persistent offenders will be de-registered.
Seems pretty fuckin' reasonable to me.
The considered and non-contentious exchange of ideas. You're 'avin' a larf init? -
I can understand David Cauchi's point, a little. Being a community, there are some things that don't go down well here, that might in other contexts, even polite contexts. You will get smacked down for some things, without fail. I'd give a for instance, but I'll get smacked down.
A good deal can depend on first impressions. People who arrive casting aspersions and making unflattering generalisations about others tend to get leapt on, but they also tend to milk it when they do. Sometimes those people really are just trolling, sometimes they're not, and managing it isn't all that easy.
Is there a basic philosophical cohesion to the PAS community? Of course. That's surely part of what makes it work. And I'm happy to let roles emerge and standards be set (and sometimes enforced) within that community. Sometimes (eg: that thread after the David Fisher guest post) I'll cop it myself. That's fine.
I didn't really get David's complaint that there was some breach of faith in people discussing his blog post here, rather than on his own blog, and I didn't think what transpired was anything other than a robust debate. Anyway, he's welcome here, and I'll continue to manage things as best I see fit.
But as I said on another thread recently, whatever happens is just an internet discussion thread -- there'll be another one tomorrow.
-
but it is far from okay to attempt/wage any sort of defense of yourself by yourself, and without any appeal whatsoever to social legitimacy
The problem is there you're not saying anything. There is no content whatsoever to your tirades, other than the idea that you're deeply misunderstood (by us). You keep insulting everybody here but have absolutely nothing to contribute to any conversation other than this notion that we are all terrible people all bent on excluding you from our conversations. Which rather begs the question why you keep coming back.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.