[WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

[Geoff Burling]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Tony Sidaway wrote:

> Geoff Burling said:
> > but is noteable because one
> > side is attaching workplace unsafe pictures to their contributions,
> > thus
> > disrupting the forum to prove their point.)
>
> What does workplace unsafe actually mean in this context?  Whose
> workplace?  Why unsafe?  How can a person placing a photograph on a
> website cause a completely unrelated workplace to become unsafe?
>
This post challenges me in a way I haven't been challenged before: I
can express three possible responses, but given the nature of these
responses, I feel I am limited to only using one of them. Could
someone help me decide which of these three responses should I use?

1. Tony, do you  honestly not know what I meant by "workplace unsafe"?
Are you, for some reason, unable to point your browser at
http://portland.craigslist.com, find the link for "Rants & Raves", then
examine the posts there to see what I might mean? The ones with pictures
attached are all helpfully marked, so if this is a sinceely pressing
question for you, I'd expect you to take a look & see what I meant.

And if you have no interest in doing your own research, what is your
point for these questions?

FWIW, I picked this term "workplace unsafe" because I had only looked
at two of the 20 or more posts with pictures on this topic. While
both were images of part of an unclothed body, I didn't want to base
my assumptions on such an unrepresentative sample & assume that none
of the others were more appropriate for a web site named
www.pregnantteeniesfuckedbygoats.com. And because I'm sure if I had
merely written "pictures of unclothed people", someone would have
found the few that were not simply unclothed people, & made the effort
to misrepresent my point by accusing me of condoning pictures I might
find offensive.

2. I was sincere in describing the exchanges here as intellectual as
compared to what usually appears in "Rants & Raves". Even the concurrent
exchange about "Rogue Admins" is polite, thoughtful, & restrained compared
to the ones I've seen in that spot at Craig's List; over there, telling
someone you disagree with "Fuck off and die" is better than half of the
exchanges I've read in "Rants & Raves" -- & one reason I don't usually
read it, despite the fact there are some very fine posts there (which
fortunately make it to "Best of Craig's List").

However, if you want to be disruptive to make a point (something usually
discouraged here at Wikipedia), & show that we can be just as nasty &
offensive, please don't try to imitate examples of Gay bashing, complaints
about fat women, national business chains, or local government. As the
joke goes, a single feather can be a lot of fun; the whole chicken is just
plain offensive.

3. I am reminded of a Zen Buddhist story, about a Master who has taken a
vow of chastity, & his young disciple. One day, as they were travelling
along, they came to a river, where a woman was standing, in provocative,
yet expensive, clothes. She asked the Master if he would be so kind as
to help her across the river; the Master agreed, and carried her across
the river on his back. She thanked the Master, & they went their
separate ways.

This incident troubled the young disciple: why did his master let a
woman -- particularly one dressed as she had been -- touch him? Didn't
that infringe on his vow of chastity? The disciple thought about about
this for a long time, & at last asked his Master about the woman.

"I left her back at the river, & have gone on," the master replied
calmly. "You appear to still be carrying her."

I recall you making a point about the phrase "workplace unsafe" quite
eloquently in a discussion some time back, about how you didn't like
the phrase & why. I have left that discussion & have gone on.

Geoff