If I did nothing else today...

[netmouse]

I got gas at 2.97 before the prices soared, and I washed my car and got some recent chips and scratches painted with my factory-direct spice red patch kit.

Oh, and I also got myself banned from a radical feminist's journal because I rudely stuck my foot in my mouth posting before I realized she was trying to create a space where she didn't have to put up with anyone of my ilk (sex-positive folk) while she chatted with like-minded people about the notion of a society where porn is obsolete. (I'm not being sarcastic. It was rude.) Anyway, a couple people there tried to actually engage me in conversation with something other than ad-hominem attacks, but by then I was banned, so this post is just to let people know why I'm not posting anymore, in case they drift over to see if I'm some kind of stuck-up weeny, or what.

ETA: I didn't identify the journal because I didn't mean to incite friends to stride over there and do the same thing I did. It has since been correctly guessed at in comments. But I still don't encourage such activity, even though it *is* frustrating to still be receiving comments there I can't respond to because I'm banned.

Comments

[rialian.livejournal.com]

===It was a nice try...(I read a bit of it when I had read Novapsyche's post...and then she had someone come over that wanted to curry favor with Ginmar's crew. It actually got me to check a few times so that I could keep up, and know Iwhat I was dealing with when I decided to write)

[netmouse.livejournal.com]

Thanks, but I spent most of my time trying to dig myself out of a hole that she accurately pointed out I had put myself into (having misjudged my audience).

While it's tempting to suggest she banned me because I was just starting to get myself out of that hole, according to her it was because of comments I made after she attacked me for suggesting she future-date her "rule #1: introduce yourself" post so that it floated on top of her journal, thus demonstrating that I was "too stupid" to have thought to read her profile to get such instruction.

I really was trying to be helpful with that suggestion, but my tone might have been read as snarky, and anyway some people can't really accept help from anyone who (they think) thinks they're smarter than them. I've been told the education thing really is a hot-button issue for her, so there you go.

I once watched my (now-ex) boyfriend get in a screaming argument with his mother about, among other things, the notion that we might think we were smarter than her. People can get really upset about that sort of thing.

I do think I'm smarter than a lot of people. The way "smart" is defined, that just has to be true. I don't think that means I'm a better person than them or that their opinions or thoughts are automatically any less valid than mine, however.

(But I will evaluate what people say by similar standards to the standards that state that I'm smart: logic and clarity, for instance. Appropriateness takes a kind of smartness too - and attention and consideration. I don't actually claim to be perfect at any of those things -- I have a lot to learn, in fact. Like I told novapsyche, there were lessons learned here, so it wasn't a *complete* waste of time. I learn quickly -- another characteristic of that whole smart thing. I hope I never stop learning.)

[rialian.livejournal.com]

===I look it in several ways.

===On the one hand...yes, that is what she wanted, and it was "rude"...but on the other, had she not wanted to have said conversation, she could have had the audience limited, the posting limited...(I have had to have that when I have had folks harrass me. The tools are there.)

===I guess I look at it more from the angle of being a good host of a hearth. My public posts have the possibility of having folks just "show up". The person may not have read my profile, will not know the history, and may honestly be lost, but feel they need to say something. Depending on how they handle themselves, I try to direct them elsewhere if I do not feel like chatting with them.

===That was not the case here....and I admit, I get the impression that the folks there want there to be blood on the floor. Not a place I would want to go to.

===So, while yes, I agree that perhaps you stepped into a bit of a hole there...but the host knows the hole better than the guest.

===Public faces...brings up the question as to just what the rules really are. (just musing. your post and what I saw happening has some gears spinning....thank you!)

[nicegeek.livejournal.com]

I just skimmed through that thread...my impression is that the author has laid down a series of rhetorical minefields, checkpoints, trenches, and barbed wire fences - it's so defensive that it would be quite difficult to meaningfully participate in a discussion there without setting off explosions.

IMHO, when someone makes a public post about a controversial topic with replies enabled - even on their personal blog - they are inviting open (civil) debate on the topic. If they just want a soapbox, they should reply-lock it, and if they only want concurring opinions, they should friends lock it. Doing otherwise is improper, as it gives a misleading impression of an open discussion when none exists - it's akin to (although not as bad as) deleting just the replies that the author disagrees with.