Conference taveng::bagels

Taking off my moderator's hat, I, too, have been bothered by many of the
recent contributions.  I don't think that anything is served by dueling
biblical quotations, or by arguing over piety.

Can we have a notesfile that discusses Jewish (religous and cultural) and
Israeli issues without calling each other names?

Can we treat others with respect, even if we don't agree with, or respect,
their views?

Martin.

    Re .0 and .1:
    
    I must say my tone in Note 794 was not exactly conciliatory and
    my glass house is not constructed of shatterproof glass either.
    
    I'll try from here on to do a little better.
    
    My apologies if I offended anyone....
    
    Mark

    I am often bothered by the tone of noters' comments, but I wonder how
    much of the heated reaction is to intentional anti-Semitic
    provocations.  I would ask the anonymous complainer to elaborate on my
    "reputation", for example.
    
    I sincerely doubt that Karen Kolling was chased away or intimidated by
    BAGELers.  She came into BAGELS when the Easynet Usenet distribution
    disappeared, and left BAGELS when she installed VNEWS on her system.  I
    am sure she is alive and well in soc.politics.mideast, where the
    temperature is MUCH hotter than in this little conference.
    
    We should be cordial with eachother because it is the right thing to
    do, the human thing to do, the Jewish thing to do (remember Hillel's
    all-of-Torah-while-standing-on-one-foot?), and NOT because we care what
    the Goyim think about us.  That attitude has gotten us nothing except
    worse persecution throughout our history.
    
    Ed

    I second Ed's comments (.3) with some additional qualification.

    Many of the topics under discussion are things about which many of us
    care passionately, and that passion surfaces in our comments.  In some
    cases, unfortunately, arguments over data or ideas spill over into
    attacks on people.  When this happens, protest (such as .0) is
    justified.

    We also have to distinguish between people who are trying to talk with
    others and those who are merely talking at others.

    I suggest that some of the exchanges between me and Jem Steinberg are
    examples of the first category.  We have argued quite vigorously, yet I
    have never had the feeling of being attacked personally and, I hope,
    neither has he.  I think, by and large, we have tried to talk (write?)
    with one another.

    In the second category, I have seen serial monologues in which people
    simply insert (longer or shorter) quotations, or slightly paraphrased
    versions of someone else's `official' line, and more or less ignore the
    responses.  I, for one, find monologues (and they are not only coming
    from one side) largely a waste of time.  Responses that attack the
    monologuist rather than his/her ideas also turn me off.  People should
    not be the subject of personal attacks, nor driven from the conference.
    They should be encouraged to add value by expressing their own ideas
    and feelings in their own words.

                                                Aaron

The following comes from the author of .0.

Martin.
------
Thanks for placing my note, and your response, into the file.  You might
want to include this reply (anonymously):

I was not "pointing fingers" at any one, but if you took offense, then
(1) I apologize, and (2) perhaps you feel "guilty"??  With some of the 
tones of voice in the notes, I feel uncomfortable, both as a Jew and as a 
human being.

The Jewish people, throughout our history, have had some, and more of the 
following traits attributed to them:  pushy, belligerant, money-grubbing, 
'greater than thou' attitude, so Jewish that it "sticks out all over you", 
etc.  Perhaps some of the members perpetuate these traits by the way they 
answer other noters with whom they violently disagree.

.3 and .4 said it all for me.  However I take some offence at .5's comments 
about our so-called traits.  You'll find throughout history that these "traits"
that have been ascribed to us are nothing but racist fallacy.  If some of us
have displayed unproper etiquette, than it was due to our human failings, not
Jewish failings, if there are such things.

--David

    Hmmm, I thought this was one of the *less* heated notesfiles.  I guess
    it depends on what's in your notebook.  There have been notes that
    have verged on name-calling, but they've usually returned to the
    right path (done t'shuva?).  I agree with -.? that postings of
    party lines from outside sources are annoying, but I think that
    they should remain, and those who want to bother should be allowed
    to rebut them (as long as there's no name-calling).

    A note worth its existence...
    
    As a less-belligerant, neutral contributor to this notesfile, I made
    some observations:
    
    Some subinformed contributors to this conference still carry as many
    stereotypes about "any religion", "any nation" than any other
    subinformed member of said religion or said nation, about them.
    
    So, rather than immediately (you'll find out after two more replies)
    attributing suspicious or anti-semitic intentions to said contributors,
    why not starting of the "innocent as long as ignorant" principle and
    put as much effort into enlightening obscured opinions as is put into
    sometimes collective beating up.
    
    Positively yours,
    
    Chris