8th December 2005, 09:19 AM
Morning trench_Foot
Many a fair POint... but you will see that in the main there is constructive work and positive actions taken. Beery is a fine guy, he just got a bit between his teeth and perhaps said things which he shouldn't. I for example personally do not agree with the line in the 'letter' however it is not constructive to demand that I remove it or call the Digger an SWP rag and then claim that BAJR is full of Anarchist Idiots - especially then adding that this is the view of many CBA, IFA and Britarch members. You may notice I am equally hard on those who breach any of the AUP... have a read and you will see a fair but strict policy, that ensures there is no repeat of the previous incident you talk about.
We are a community, and so have developed over time into one which is inclusive - people range from Curators to Consultants Diggers to Directors and this Forum is only a percentage of what BAJR does. Valid points are welcome, but only if put in a civil and reasoned way. The opening lines of Beers post is full of accusations and anger. That way he got people backs up straight away - and as I have said, even if people did not agree with the letter, his attack on the Digger as being an Extremist was to say the least 'Extreme' A look at the Diggers over the years where Ed2 has been involved shows no real sign of Political Extremism. The polite request to also ask why this person wrote the line in the letter was greeted with just as much anger and a refusal to do so. I have learned that even if I feel I am not to blame, it is good to work out why people write drivel/misinformation/bile (delete where applicable) about me that way I can examine my public face and see where I can improve.
That aside, thanks for this and I appreciate you coming here to say it, Beer was justified in complaining - all he had to do was complain in a way that did not cause offence.
ps. the AUP was brought in after the legal threat. (Most Companies took to looking at why they had been named and only one threatened legal action) So you should notice that posts after are tempered by the AUP.
http://www.bajr.org/BAJRForum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=5
Beery is more than welcome back - and I again hope we (and I do mean we) learn from this. Discussion is better than mud slinging in both directions.
Another day another WSI?
Many a fair POint... but you will see that in the main there is constructive work and positive actions taken. Beery is a fine guy, he just got a bit between his teeth and perhaps said things which he shouldn't. I for example personally do not agree with the line in the 'letter' however it is not constructive to demand that I remove it or call the Digger an SWP rag and then claim that BAJR is full of Anarchist Idiots - especially then adding that this is the view of many CBA, IFA and Britarch members. You may notice I am equally hard on those who breach any of the AUP... have a read and you will see a fair but strict policy, that ensures there is no repeat of the previous incident you talk about.
We are a community, and so have developed over time into one which is inclusive - people range from Curators to Consultants Diggers to Directors and this Forum is only a percentage of what BAJR does. Valid points are welcome, but only if put in a civil and reasoned way. The opening lines of Beers post is full of accusations and anger. That way he got people backs up straight away - and as I have said, even if people did not agree with the letter, his attack on the Digger as being an Extremist was to say the least 'Extreme' A look at the Diggers over the years where Ed2 has been involved shows no real sign of Political Extremism. The polite request to also ask why this person wrote the line in the letter was greeted with just as much anger and a refusal to do so. I have learned that even if I feel I am not to blame, it is good to work out why people write drivel/misinformation/bile (delete where applicable) about me that way I can examine my public face and see where I can improve.
That aside, thanks for this and I appreciate you coming here to say it, Beer was justified in complaining - all he had to do was complain in a way that did not cause offence.
ps. the AUP was brought in after the legal threat. (Most Companies took to looking at why they had been named and only one threatened legal action) So you should notice that posts after are tempered by the AUP.
http://www.bajr.org/BAJRForum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=5
Beery is more than welcome back - and I again hope we (and I do mean we) learn from this. Discussion is better than mud slinging in both directions.
Another day another WSI?