And The Beat Goes On

Rather than construct a long post reply, I've opted to make a new post in response to Nick, who is on the opposing side of the issue I mentioned yesterday. No yelling, no snark - just some intelligent commentary.

First thing's first. I know I'm older than Ben, and I'm 99.9999% sure I'm older than you - perhaps by a good bit. Yes, I have issue with Ben that goes beyone the Wikipedia incident. For I have, you see, what I call my Snark-O-Meter. It goes off when I am faced with things like smarminess, cockiness, smugness, and general condicending commentary. Ben's journal is rife with it.

I'm willing to play devil's advocate, and say that perhaps he doesn't realize that he comes across that way, but he does. And do a google search - plenty of people out there agree. Think that Javier is bad? Ever see the commentary that goes on over at Portal Of Evil's forums? Some of that stuff steps waaaay over the line, and makes even hardened BS slingers shudder in disgust.

So just because I need to say my piece, let me just cite some examples of what sets that meter off. This is good stuff - thousands of people have paid millions of dollars for this stuff:

1) The Protesting: I believe in protesting. It's at the core of our foundation as a country, and it's his right to do so. However, I do not listen to anyone who protests anonymously, or dresses up in silly costumes. I protested in my day, against all the things I believed in at the time: no nukes, animal testing and cruelty, Free Nelson Mandela, a woman's right to choose, make Martin Luther King Jr's birthday a national holiday, etc. I never dressed up in a silly costume. I never put on a mask, or hid my face. I never felt the need to learn tactics to fight or evade police - I was prepared to be arrested if need be, but I never fought with anyone or vandalized anything to get my point across, and I'm not saying Ben did, but those he hangs out with have, and in the real world, being there makes you a party to it. Speaking of which, be careful who you align yourself with in that regard. I was once a part of PETA and Greenpeace. When I would say that, people would just roll their eyes and no listen to anything I had to say because both groups take things too far in getting their point across. I have not given up my activism, but I align myself with more reputable groups. People will listen if you are aligned with people who present a rational and reasonable argument. For a good example of a fantastic blog written by a friend who works for improving her part of the country, I encourage you to read http://www.liprapslament-theline.blogspot.com. She's intelligent, and passionate, and heaven help anyone who gets in her way when she's rolling. Lastly, educate people about what you are fighting against. I don't think Ben has educated me at all as to why he feels the way he does on any of his protests. Instead, I get the impression that he thinks that any protest is a good protest, and that he often "tags along" without knowing all the facts.

So to recap:

I went to the protest wearing my silly mask be cause so and so did = Snark Alert
I went to protest against third world debt because it holds developing countries in involuntary servitude = I may or may not agree, but I will not Snark

2) Lappy, Compy, Big Mavica, et al: I just can't take anyone seriously who has pet names for inanimate objects, and I don't know anyone over the age of 17 that does. If he wants to write about it, fine, but don't be shocked if people over the age of 12 think it's silly, and say so.

So to recap:

I got out Big Mavica and uploaded the pictures to Lappy = Major Snark Alert

3) Unnecessary Commentary: let's start with the Hummer thing. For the record, I dislike Hummers too. Unless you're in the military, there's no reason that any private person needs to own one. However, I would NEVER say that because I didn't like it I was going to "run it off the road". Was that necessary? No. When speaking about a security guard in a news item he saw, Ben said "When questioned, he can't even cite what he's enforcing. Idiot. I hope his family is ashamed of him." Again, was that really necessary? No. The one where he makes the assumption about his sister's roommate's boyfriend when he'd only made one statement to him? Not necessary either. I find that before I hit the post button, I do better to re-read, and ask myself if some comments are really necessary to get my point across. If they're not, then they're gone.

So to recap:

Any of the above comments = the Snark is being written
I really hate Hummers - they're unnecessary for the average person = I agree
Get a load of the security guard - he's not well versed on regulations = He sure isn't
I met my sister's roomate's boyfriend - first impression wasn't much, and I hope the next meeting proves me wrong = That's happened to me too

4) Lack Of Respect: I blame some of this on the generation gap. To start, it ABSOLUTELY is disrespectful to mock the Iwo Jima landing. Good men gave up their lives so Ben and his friends can have the freedom run around and play like that. But just because they can, doesn't mean they should. I'd also bet that anyone who thought that was funny doesn't have any veterans in their family or close to them. The thing I found most insulting about that photo was that they were holding up their protest-du-jour flag in place of the American flag. Right there, they have cheapened the memory of the brave men that were honored in what they were mocking, and that's wrong. The same goes with showing the "road to hell is paved by Republicans" thing. You have an absolute right to your opinion in politics, as I have mine. I rarely discuss politics because it always gets ugly, no matter who is involved. I never said I thought Bush was a great man or doing a great job, but I don't need Ben essentially telling me I'm a moron for my beliefs, because they don't match his. That's incredibly disrespectful, and will cause my eyes to glaze over and stop comprehending anything afterward, thereby negating your position.

So to recap:

Republicans paved the road to hell = Get Bent 2: The Wrath Of Snark
I dislike Republicans because I disagree with...... = That's ok; I disagree with Democrats because........

And lastly,

5) The Double Standard: Ben deletes the Fail video because he doesn't like it or doesn't agree, but then it's brought up that the fail video was lame because it only says Fail and nothing else. If I were to post a video (although I never would becaue pimping yourself on Youtube is something I don't believe in), and someone posted the Fail video, I wouldn't delete it. I would challenge the person to tell me why. If they did, I'd suck it up because I put myself out there for everyone to see, and criticize. If they couldn't, then I'd fire back with a Fail video of my own. No double standard there. However getting rid of it, then taunting the person because they didn't say anything other than Fail is pretty much chucking rocks at glass houses.

No recap necessary here.

And as for the Wikipedia issue:

It's a non-issue at this point, and something I don't want to dredge up again, and before you say that we're being unreasonable by refusing to discuss it while you're trying to rectify it, let me explain as much as I am willing to.

As I said, I was part of a project. It involved a number of people. That project has been permanently killed. It's dead, gone, and not coming back. The website we had is gone, and the domain has lapsed, and is available for anyone that wants it. The forum we had where we dicussed our findings went with the domain. Any e-mails, etc, were done through accounts on that domain, and so they too are gone. The group has disbanded, and anything having to do with it would go back to the "owner" of the project, and I am no longer on speaking terms with him. Furthermore, I have no desire or need to be. By working on the project, I gave him permission to use my research, so should he want to pursue the project further it in the future, that is up to him.

So I will issue a personal thank you for the desire to rectify the situation (even years after the fact), because you at least were willing to try when others rebuffed us....repeatedly. The Wikipedia deal started the fire, but it's not what is keeping it burning. See the above noted items for the reason it keeps going all over the internet (not just at Javier's place).

And lastly, despite being Snark-Master-Extrordinare and a Habitual Line Stepper (:D), Javier is a great person. He's one of the best friends I have, and I'm better for knowing him. He's always eager to lend a hand or a shoulder, and has given me more pep talks and "get-a-grip" speeches than people I've known for 3 times as long. My husband says he's glad that I have him around and appreciates his friendship. But he, like me, is fiercely protective of his friends and family, and will fight when needed.

So that's my position, and like Forest Gump, that's all I have to say about that. I don't wish to debate this set of issues any further, and will not. Getting into a pissing match isn't what I want to do.

That being said, you're always more than welcome here, and intelligent commentary is always welcome on topics I bring up.