Hospitality

[I. Marc Carlson]

<Gunhilda<Leslie Miller <miller at pp.okstate.edu>>>
>Well, I was just trying to imply a certain level of hypocracy.  Blast 
>Michael for his language even though what he says may be of value, 
>but excuse ourselves for doing the blasting because what we say about 
>him is "true".  

Unfortunately, as you can see, I'm not convinced that it's entirely
a valid comparison.

>Sigh.  This brings up all sorts questions, like, do you really define 
>this list as a "society" of individuals?

If it isn't a "society", what is it?

>What kind of society is it?

Since we don't have a specific leader who actually leads (no offense
intended Pug) I assume it's some form of egalitarian cluster-f., er,
democracy.

>Who and how do you define "right", and where does that authority come 
>from?

If I recall my anthropology correctly, the authority to govern a society comes
from the populace, and societies mores are defined by the majority.

>The term "regulate", especially in combination with personal 
>freedom, sets off all sorts of warning bells in my mind.

I don't recall using the term "regulate".  Did I?

>>...This is about whether a society of individuals has the right to 
>>regulate the behavior OF its membership.

Well, lookity there.  I guess I did.

Ok.  I'm not talking about government regulation here, or trying to 
decrease major personal freedoms here.  I'm talking about simple
social things here.  To extend the metaphor, how do you feel about
having an armed society?  Do I have the right to express myself by
firing my automatic weapons?  (I'm not talking about shooting people,
mind you, although I could be)

>Michael is not somebody to be disciplined or regulated.  People have 
>tried politely (like Cynric, most recently) to point out his 
>misbehavior, and occasionally he has even apologized for it.

I know of at least one case however, where his offlist postings more
than destroyed what little credibility he had earned on list.  I know
this, as he sent it to me.  I assume I am not the only one so "blessed".

>I assume that he's capable of change if he so desires.  If he doesn't 
>desire to do so, well, that's tough for all of us, but I'm willing 
>to bear with it.

Have a good time.  Some of us aren't.

>I would question whether or not ignoring (as opposed to attacking) 
>boorish behavior, personal attacks, etc contributes to the rising 
>number of thefts in the SCA....

They are both, to me, symptomatic of a greater ill.

>I would be more likely to argue that the sheer growth of the Society 
>coupled with a moral decline in society as a whole are far more likely 
>culprits.  In any case, do we govern our ranks by example, or by the whip?
 
Where?  In the SCA?  I thought we governed by bad mouthing them behind
their backs

>> Once upon a time, you could go to an SCA thing and assume that you would be
>> respected enough to not be attacked, or stolen from.  Now we have these
>> little "problems" starting to arise because of the attitude that "well, we
>> don't want to interfere with their fun"...
>How do you construe that?  What sort of problems?  Can you give 
>examples?

Of what?  Being attacked, or being stolen from?  I consider those problems,
don't you?

>Whatever happened to the principle of "turn the other cheek"?  I 
>suppose I'd rather be a doormat with "Welcome" written on it than a 
>door saying "Keep Out".     

I fail to see what has led you to the implied conclusion we're talking
about "keeping out".  There's a wide gulf between expecting simple 
courtesy and telling people not to come around.  I'm sorry that you
feel that I would prefer Litch not participate at all.  I thought I
was talking about standing up for ourselves.

>> >The real trick is to teach the people who he offends to ignore him before 
>> >they are driven off.   
>> Why?
>"Welcome!  Come on in!  Have a good time!" = good, desirable thing.  
>I'm certain I read that _somewhere_ in my book of human relations.

THAT isn't what you said, though, now is it?  You said "teach the people
who he offends to ignore him".  The only person you are saying should
feel welcome, to have a good time is Litch.  The rest can expect only
to be offended in silence.

Diarmuit