Sep 16 2007
yikes… this is like deju vu all over again… where am I? at dKos????
see what you’ve stirred up Armando? … factions… now we have factions!!! now we have to worry about defining civility::: what if we get rules about what coloring inside the lines mean??? huh??? what then armando… sure you get your over 300 comments… but what do we get???
take the jump::: if you want that is….
Sep 16 2007
I can’t post in Armando’s diary, for some reason. It keeps rejecting my comments. Since I am the one who wrote the comment that led to his diary, I figure I might as well say something.
Armando misread my comment. He also ventured that I would find his diary uncivil. I did not. He did none of the things I regard as uncivil. He argued with me. That’s fine. I will argue back. I *like* argument. I like *civil* argument.
Sep 16 2007
Bud and turk, you are not listening to Armando and are giving responses that are not relevant to the issue Armando raises, which is a valid issue.
I can not speak for Armando, but this is my take of this thread in my unawake state.
There are several ways that an unwritten “rule” becomes a “law.”
One method is intentional and is similar to how statutes are enacted by congress (or unilaterally by Bush). Someone drafts a policy that becomes a rule either by the unilateral decision of the community leader or group consensus. It is usually transparent. Bud and turk are focused on this type of rule, Armando is not.
A second method is more stealth and is similar to natural law or common law. Someone says yada, as in this comment, which is a definitive statement of what is and is not civil and therefore constitutes a “rule” whether the leaders or community call it that or not. The community approves, in this case by a good chunk here reccing the comment. Then, at some point in future, one of the members of the group who approved the comment applies the civility rules to a comment or diary, maybe not expressly, it could be implicitly. You now have precedent in the facts of this rule being applied to the comment or diary, whether it is called a civility rule or not. In the future, this precedent can be cited by others, again and again, and eventually the rule is recognized as a rule.
Turk and bud, when you tell Armando that this will not happen, what you don’t see is that it has already started. The stealth manner of adopting rules has already started when the declarative statement was posted and then approved by a good chunk of community. So, Armando is saying, wake up because down the road you may find that a rule you did not intend to “enact” has already taken hold at this site.
btw, if this posts as an essay, i will be surprised because i tried to post as a comment in armando’s thread, but it was rejected several times. hmmm…
Sep 16 2007
The Morning News is an Open Thread
From Google News U. S.
1 Episcopal Church Faces Deadline on Gay Issues
By NEELA BANERJEE, The New York Times
Published: September 16, 2007
| Ever since the Episcopal Church consecrated an openly gay man as bishop of New Hampshire four years ago, forecasts of a rupture over homosexuality within the church or with the rest of the global Anglican Communion accompanied each big church meeting, only to fade.
But as the bishops of the Episcopal Church approach their semiannual meeting this week in New Orleans, the predictions are being taken very seriously. At the top of the agenda for the Sept. 20-25 gathering will be a directive issued by the leaders of the Anglican Communion to stop consecrating openly gay and lesbian bishops and to ban blessings of same-sex unions or risk a diminished status in the communion, the world’s third-largest Christian denomination. |
Sep 16 2007
Join me again tonight for the second part of a little series I’m developing. I’ll attempt to start each one with a little intro, a little refresher of the previous tale, and at the same time, develop this in such a way that each step stands on its own. Tonight’s entry is a revisit and modest revision of this previous posting…Fields, Motels, Gideon’s Bible, Marines.
There once was a girl who grew up in a really small town, really far away from much of anything. As you might assume, that girl was me. I started this little humble series with the intent to see what would happen when I walked back down the streets of my childhood – would I see how things had changed or, in reflection, how much my own perception has changed; have I taken note of what has been lost to progress and the decay of youth; who were the people and places I’ve left behind and if I remember them, does the telling shed light on who I am today. Consider, if you will, that this is an evening constitutional in the cool night air that circulates in the back of my mind.
Sep 16 2007
Booman has written an excellent diary wrapping up the coverage on the administration’s plans for Iran. He concludes with something I couldn’t agree with more: the
Sorry for such a short diary, but it’s 3 am and time for me to crash.
Sep 16 2007
The problem with civility is not the civility, it is the whining about civility.
This type of comment galls me no end:
Civility, to me, does *not* mean being ‘nice-nice’. No. If you see me posting something you disagree with, well… go for it! Tell me you disagree, tell me why, and I will try to justify my position.
Civility, rather, means treating one another with respect. Civility means knowing that, as LBJ said “When two people agree on everything, one of them is doing all the thinking”Civility means being polite; it does not mean being silent.
Civility means assuming that other people are of good will, even if they disagree with you.
Civility means being willing to entertain the idea that you are wrong. (well, except me, of course. I’m never wrong).
“How could you think that you ignorant baboon!” is not civil.
“F*ck you” is not civil.
“Only a Republican could think that” is, given the nature of this site, not civil.
“I disagree, because I think XXXXX” is civil.
Civility does not shut down debate, it opens it up. It allows people to venture unpopular positions, knowing that they will not be shot down. It allows people to disagree without risking friendship. It encourages those who are usually quiet to speak up.
Let’s disagree. But let’s not be disagreeable.
The problem with this is that the folks who write this type of comment will wield “civility” like a club in an attempt to stifle debate. I know it. I lived it. I came here because I felt confident we would not buy into this faux bullshit. Based on the reaction to the comment, I think I may very likely be wrong. More
Sep 16 2007
I love this time of year, all the summer visitors have gone home, the kids are in school, the days are getting shorter and our congress-critters are back in action. Next week we will embark on Autumn, the days will get cooler, leaves will change color and critters of all shapes and sizes will be gathering tidbits to save for winter. The Autumn goddess, Fortuna, carries a cornucopia full of the seasons’ harvests……Ah, yes the “harvest!”
Far and wide, my favorite time of year.
My daughter loves to build fairy houses for the fairies to stay warm during winter, it gives us a reason to be outside in the cool, fresh air.
Sep 16 2007
“We’ve got a house call.”
That’s what my Dad would say…usually late at night, sometimes even waking me up. He was a country doctor, among other things. Let me tell you some stories from my childhood about making housecalls with my Dad, who treated everyone the same, and paid a price for it in the Jim Crow South of the 1950’s and 60’s.
He was dead set against “socialized medicine” but he was so close to it I guess he didn’t see that what he was doing was socialized medicine at its purest, primitive form. Everybody got basic to intermediate medical treatment, whatever race, creed, color, income level, or social status.
Please enjoy!
Sep 16 2007
today with my feet dangling in the pool, sipping one of the heavenly brews, watching the Gators demolish the Tennessee Volunteers [52-20]…. a beautiful day, about 90 degrees, bright sunshine, with not a golfer in sight…. that beautiful Florida sunshine ablaze.