(no subject)

[muckefuck]

Sixteen years on the Internet, and I still can't tell what anyone thinks of me. I thought for sure foodpoisoningsf would deFriend me again after the last time I ended up insulting him in his journal. But it's been a couple weeks and the axe hasn't fallen, so I guess I'm out of the woods if still not exactly in good graces.

So then today I go to comment in someone's journal and find that I can't: He's banned me. Maybe I've got a quaint idea of netiquette, but I always thought it was customary to at least give someone a head's up. Provided they weren't obvious trolls or harassers, of course. But given that this is someone that I've actually taken out to dinner before, I didn't think I'd qualify as either.

Comments

[nibadi.livejournal.com]

Du bist im persönlichen Kontakt (face to face und auch am Telefon) ganz anders als im virtuellen Verkehr. Persönlich habe ich dich immer warmherzig, freundlich und angenehm erlebt, selbst wenn wir unterschiedlicher Meinung waren. Virtuell habe ich dich schon häufig gnadenlos und aggressiv erlebt. Ich habe spontan über die Jahre sicher auch das eine oder andere mal gadacht, jetzt reicht "er" mir. Aber ich habe immer die Endgültigkeit gefürchtet. Die Erfahrungen mit dir im persönlichen Kontakt haben mich auch immer gehindert.
Wenn ich verärgert oder gekränkt war, habe ich mich nicht um Feinheiten wie "defriended" und "banning" gekümmert. Das sind doch öfter spontane Reaktionen der Wut und des Ärgers und seltener Reaktionen, die auf differenzierte Überlegungen zurück zuführen sind.

Ich wundere mich über die Feinheiten deiner Überlegung. Mich würde der Unterschied zwischen "defriended" und "banned" überhaupt nicht jucken. Entweder es wäre mir generell egal oder es würde mir generell Kummer bereiten, wenn ich so oder so ausgeschlossen würde.

Ist es Eitelkeit, wenn es dir Kummer bereitet, dass jemand nie wieder an deinen Gedanken teilhaben will? Es erinnert mich an Peter Ustinov als Nero, der eine Träne in einem Gefäß auffängt, damit sie der Nachwelt erhalten bleiben.

Have a nice weekend.

[caprinus.livejournal.com]

I'm totally glad I took the time to try to translate this, it was very insightful! :)

Wm. Blake has this cryptic line in the Marriage of Heaven and Hell: "Opposition is True Friendship". I always took it to mean that best friends are those that do not hesitate to disagree, in the most forceful way possible if it be needed, but hold no grudge and bear no wound but spring apart again after each battle, ready to laugh together again. In fact I find it impossible to judge the depth of my affection for anyone with whom I am always in concord. I am therefore attracted to those who are "schon häufig gnadenlos und aggressiv" in their thoughts and writing, for the wait for a test is always short and they don't go for "making nice", "keeping the peace" and pretending to agree when they do not.

Of course, I also have to feel, once a test comes, that the offered arguments or corrections are sound, that the feeling comes from an honest place and reasoned thought, that the disagreement is not just some manipulative or melodramatic flailing; that the minds involved are living and flexible, for, to quote Blake again in the same passage, "The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, & breeds reptiles of the mind". Whether I learn something or I teach something is all the same, as long as there was an ex/change.

(I don't presume to know our host very well and I'm not asking to be "tested", but I've always found him to be vigorously informative about language, which is why I've now followed him to his personal journal to learn more of how he makes his supper and his nest. From what I've read, in the context of what I wrote above, I can only imagine his friends are lucky to have him be forcefully honest with them! And if they can't take what he has to dish out, they weren't friends truly, by my reckoning. ;))