It seems a long time ago, but it's just about a week that we had the day of the rabblement (to borrow a phrase from James Joyce). I'm speaking of rating hunters, bullies and public disgust.
There was even a tribunal, which I from now on will call the LJDT (Last Judgment Day Tribunal), their members being eljeedetians.
I thought it above all entertainment. And I have amused myself. Not in the least, because my muse reached out for me and made me write a short story, which I published under the name avatar village.
I didn't take a position.
It was just a hilarious account, in which the antagonists neither were recognizable, nor were dealt with in a different way.
Which got a favorable reception as well as was met with a frosty welcome.
It got 11 comments (and 10 ratings). For rating runners like you it's nothing, I know, but this child is easily pleased.
Yet, I had expected more comments.
Why then is it that I'm not frustrated.
First of all I'm not the one to succumb to disappointment.
Besides, there was something strange.
I never have had 500 views within the first 10 hours after publishing. Out of my 44 posts only 9 posts welcomed more than 500 views - and it took some time to reach that number.
With this post, within said 10 hours I had reached 500!
So it was popular!
Something was eye-catching.
I had informed both sides of the conflict of the publishing of my view on these historical events.
There were 2 reactions of one side, the victims of what I now call a good witch hunt.
They are a minority of course.
The eljeedetians are the majority - no reaction at all from them.
May be a lack of humor. You see that often in circles of do-gooders and crusaders.
But I was worried: do they consider it as critical?
A few days went on. I was thinking of signaling the phenomenon in another post, when a PM arrived.
It confirmed my forebodings.
NB I will not mention the author of this PM. To prevent the (mis)use of he/she I will speak of OSm(ember).
Next to some moral stuff and other points, OSm's first question was: "If you want to criticize me, please do so directly."
But I wasn't criticizing at all, leave alone one person.
I wondered why this text was not posted like a comment. There was nothing wrong with the text, it differed in no way from comments I had lately seen of OSm.
So I invited OSm to publish OSm's text at the proper place: as a public comment on a public post to enable me to answer OSm in the public sphere.
There was some moralizing commentary on my allegory (OSm's term) and on my commenters and their comments. Therefore I took the liberty to confront OSm in my reply with OSm's own morals regarding the witch hunt. (You understand: OSm doesn't speak of a witch hunt.)
I got a PM back. Again, a lot of text filled with moral stuff.
It was clear that OSm had no intention to post OSm's comment under my story. Till now, I'm unable to grasp the reason.
There was a lot of moralism, and emotional bla bla bla which was at a great distance of my narration. I told OSm so and left it that way.
To clear that piece of air: I told OSm that OSm's morals are none of my business.
Then I answered the points which I thought were the important points.
Some of the major points.
OSm felt criticized and me coming after OSm. I answered that OSm was not all day long in my mind, I reminded OSm it was OSm who had sent me a message, I concluded that I hadn't criticized left nor right; if OSm felt so, then only because of a big ego: and I had no intention to feed that.
I blamed OSm for moralizing about my commenters and their motives.
I told OSm that, in case of a witch hunt, I feel myself qualified and entitled to write a hilarious story, if necessary to the comfort of possible victims.
OSm had spoken to me about avoiding moral choices. I told OSm that demanding a proper filing of causes at a place where a proper judgment is possible not should be confused with avoiding a moral choice.
I finished with: I think I have answered your important points. If you think something is left open, please let me know.
OSm was not amused. I can understand. The language I used was as polite as possible, but as clear, or, if you like, as blunt as necessary.
Yet I was embarrassed and offended by OSm's finishing shot.
First of all, OSm made clear that OSm hadn't read well my answer.
I had said: your morals are none of my business.
OSm answered: so now you question my morals?
That aside, in the few lines I got from OSm I was called a troll and a fatuous, self-regarding blowhard.
Hate mail from heaven.
I'm not surprised. I've seen the process of crucifying Matt Paust and FusunA. There was some collateral damage, as usual when Americans go on stampede: liberallibbynyc and STATHI STATHI. Only because they chose to demonstrate their friendship. Stathi was called Statsinazi and no one of the eljeedetians had the decency to correct that when Stathi protested.
So, now I'm a troll.
Well, I will not be confused by OSm's judgment, and it doesn't bother me.
Yet, it made something very very clear: if people cannot read, if people jump to conclusions, if people suppress dissent voices, if people become agitated as soon as they're confronted with cool and sober reasoning - what about their competences in the long process that starts with suspicion and has to be guided step by step to end with a verdict?
I don't give a damn for it.
The absence of LJDT in commenting my story, and the one eljeedetian's comment and replies have convinced me: the LJDT wasn't a tribunal at all. The eljeedetians were like a posse, with only one aim: hang'em high.
So, I want to make two statements here.
First I want to address Matt Paust and FusunA.
Matt Paust, we are not friends (well, you are an OS friend) - now and then you come to my place. I want you to know that at this moment you are for me the same Matt as before the witch hunt. And until a proper complaint has been filed, at a proper place leading to a proper investigation and a proper verdict, you will remain so.
FusunA, as far as I know, we never met. But the same goes for you.
I think OS management owes Matt / FusunA / libby / STATHI an apology - because the public space where these things could happen, is her responsibility.
Last but not least, I want to address the LJDT. But not anonymous. So here's the list of names I'm addressing (in alphabetical order): Drew-Silla, femme forte aka candice, grif -, nanatehay, Safe_Bet's Amy, Sirenita Lake, rita shibr.
If there's an eljeedetian who is insulted because I have forgotten him/her: please let me know, it will be easy for me to add your name to the list, just a straw ballot.
If someone thinks he is wrongfully included in the list: that person has a lot to explain to me.
I want to say to them what I've said to OSm.
I do not know of the morals of Matt Paust, or FusunA. And with good reason: the morals of another person are none of my business.
The same goes for LJDT. I do not know of your morals: they are none of my business.
But, do not have the illusion, not for a split second, that my esteem for your morals (or the morals of the lower members of that judgment-day-coterie) is just the tiniest bit higher.