I believe that actual calls for adherence should be channeled through Torah leaders, whatever camp they may come from. There are lines of communication to all the English-speaking Torah leaders, both in the US and in Eretz Yisrael. I do not think it appropriate for any blogger who is not a Torah authority to be determining practical public policy, whether on Klal issues or how to relate to particular incidents relating to individuals.What R' Beckerman seems to miss throughout the piece, in which he implies that bloggers are trying to do away with Torah leadership and create constructive change on their own while ignoring Torah leadership, is that his base assumptions are completely incorrect to begin with. Moreover, it is some of the side comments he makes which are particularly grating to people who are paying attention.
At one point in his essay he discusses a recent (/current) situation where a Rav allegedly stated that cheating on taxes is muttar. After explicitly noting
Those who have spoken up about this, say that they consulted with their Roshei Yeshiva who allowed for publicizing this issue.he decries their doing so, arguing
I don’t understand why it is deemed necessary for people who are not at all considered equals of this Rabbi to act as jury and judge. Torah leadership demands that other Torah leaders take such a stand publicly, not k’tanim.Skipping for a moment the backwards view that someone could be "better" than others, and that non-Torah leaders are "ktanim", who is acting as jury or judge? People are disseminating information about an incident that they - and their rabbonim - find to be important. Where is the Torah leadership that R' Beckerman is referring to regarding what happened? If it is false, as some have claimed, then have the Rav publicly state that cheating on taxes is assur. Have other Rabbonim come out and make such a statement. It is very easy to defuse the situation with a clear statement, much as is the case in other situations. Where are the lines of communication to gedolim that R' Beckerman claims exist? When people seek out their own Rabbonim, that apparently is not good enough; what is?
R' Beckerman notes the obvious flaw in his piece at the end:
Sadly, not only does his conclusion not satisfactorily answer his second question, it doesn't address the first one whatsoever. Where are the gedolim? Why isn't there any leadership? Why are the only statements from gedolim filtered through kol korehs on mostly irrelevant issues which R' Elyashiv acknowledges have little impact?People may ask a whopper of a question on this essay. Shouldn’t Gedolim be issuing statements like this? Aren’t you issuing a call for public policy here, in defiance of your own suggested guidelines?
Yes, I am. But only because asking for respect for Torah leadership is, perhaps, the one public policy vehicle the K’tanim should be driving.
R' Beckerman seems to misunderstand what people are trying to accomplish when they write about issues which are troublesome in the frum community.* The objective is not to throw off the yoke of Torah and to replace Torah leadership at the head of our communities. It is to call out for a strong Torah leadership which acts in the best interests of the community at large. Someone named Chaim Fisher commented on Cross-Currents very simply:
The ideas on blogs which are attracting attention and picking up momentum are ones which are resonating with a struggling community looking for ideas and assistance on issues which matter in their day-to-day lives. The gedolim are being presented with a plethora of ideas and some really excellent discussion on every subject; they merely need to step up and lead from a place where people know it's a) coming from them and b) demonstrate that they understand the issues and possibilities being presented before expressing what they think will work and why.I would like to question the implication here that somehow bloggers are having too much influence and power. Why? Blogs don’t have power; ideas have power.
If some am haaretz with little background writes a fantastic svorah and other people like it, great. And if he writes silliness then nobody’s going to pay any attention to him.
People are looking for Torah leadership to help implement the ideas and solutions necessary to turn things around. Where is it?
* I'm excluding deliberately inflammatory and contrarian blogs, whose only objectives seem to be hits, money, and attention. It's quite easy and proper to ignore such blogs.
** Note: The title of this post is Inflammatory Discussion because of how the Cross-Currents piece came across. What is particularly hard to determine from the piece is what R' Beckerman expected to accomplish other than start an inflammatory discussion on blogs about blogs, including posts such as this one. Perhaps he truly felt compelled to post much as one might feel compelled to respond as I have here, but that is difficult to believe in light of comments such as the implications that people aren't willing to shift to the right because it's a problem for "the hit counter", or the poor joke about violating J-blog ettiquette by quoting from an ArtSctroll biography. The snark is unnecessary and uncalled for if the objective is to point out what one views as a serious flaw.
Finally, if R' Beckerman had simply been dan l'kaf zchus on what most bloggers write about these subjects for he could have easily understood that his own throwaway lines actually summed it up perfectly:
A more critical problem – it isn’t healthy. Input from the layman is critical to proper decision-making, and sometimes the best ideas come from them. [...]Besides, the status quo may need some fixing.
Ezzie,
ReplyDeleteAlot of your comments here are off-base.
Skipping for a moment the backwards view that someone could be "better" than others, and that non-Torah leaders are "ktanim",
How is this backwards? כל העדה כולם קדושים?
who is acting as jury or judge? People are disseminating information about an incident that they - and their rabbonim - find to be important.
No, that's not all they are doing.
Where are the lines of communication to gedolim that R' Beckerman claims exist?
Have you tried to contact them?
When people seek out their own Rabbonim, that apparently is not good enough; what is?
It is. That's why I respectfully asked whether it was the right way for those Rabbonim to go about it. You're denying me that? How is that fair-minded of you?
Sadly, not only does his conclusion not satisfactorily answer his second question, it doesn't address the first one whatsoever. Where are the gedolim? Why isn't there any leadership? Why are the only statements from gedolim filtered through kol korehs on mostly irrelevant issues which R' Elyashiv acknowledges have little impact?
There is a basic, fundamental lack of trust between the leadership and the multitudes right now. The purpose of the piece was not to decry anything, but to propose guidelines that make sense. It is EMPOWERING the leadership by channeling public policy through them instead of saying YOU ALL STINK, which is the tone of alot of blogs, especially tolerated in the comments section, like it or not, acknowledge it or not.
R' Beckerman seems to misunderstand what people are trying to accomplish when they write about issues which are troublesome in the frum community.
I understand it all too well. I've been around that block many, many, many times.
The objective is not to throw off the yoke of Torah and to replace Torah leadership at the head of our communities. It is to call out for a strong Torah leadership which acts in the best interests of the community at large.
And I'm proposing what I think is the best way to do it. Blogs have been around for long enough for an assessment period. It isn't working too well.
I'm excluding deliberately inflammatory and contrarian blogs, whose only objectives seem to be hits, money, and attention. It's quite easy and proper to ignore such blogs.
Like a whole truckload of them.
Perhaps he truly felt compelled to post much as one might feel compelled to respond as I have here,
Just to let you in on a little secret, without going into too much detail, it will very likely end up on the desk of people who are among these designated drivers.
but that is difficult to believe in light of comments such as the implications that people aren't willing to shift to the right because it's a problem for "the hit counter",
ReplyDeleteOh, please. What I meant was that even if it was the best idea in the world, people love their soapboxes.
or the poor joke about violating J-blog ettiquette by quoting from an ArtSctroll biography.
The whole idea of making ArtScroll taboo is snarky. Tell me with a straight face that that isn't the undercurrent on the blogs.
Finally, if R' Beckerman had simply been dan l'kaf zchus on what most bloggers write about these subjects for he could have easily understood that his own throwaway lines actually summed it up perfectly:
Hello. These were NOT throwaway lines! To talk about dan l'kaf zechus in the same sentence where you aren't!
About the grating - people generally hate criticism, that's true.
Let me give you a little example of something. In the other article you were "completely disgusted" with, your main gripe was basically that people are antagonistic toward Kollel per se, just the massive burden it creates due to the numbers. And yet on your own blog, when discussing what would comstitute a "moderate community" - comments were very clearly agaist having any Kollel at all in such a community - EVERYONE MUST WORK. So tell me that's not principled antagonism.
Should be "people are NOT antagonistic..."
ReplyDeleteThe majority of j-bloggers have no problem with gedolim. Ah, with those who surround them it is a different matter.
ReplyDeleteSome shakeups need to occur. Some problems need to be addressed rather than let fester. Our gedolim are wise, some of the community infrastructure however is very self serving.
We all know there's an Eye that sees and an Ear that hears - and the way gedolim are scrutinized throughout their lives there is no question they are the epitome' of the goals of yiddishkeit. But some of the communal infrastructure and gedolim hangers-on are suddenly being scrutinized also, and sometimes it's not so pretty.
Is that a service or a disservice? Well, in a day and age when we are fed with information and disinformation massively every day, and are striving for the truth - finding the glaring opposite in the midst of the kahal is a problem that must be dealt with.
The option to sweep things under the rug is fading. Perhaps that's a sign of the coming of Olam HaEmet in the zman Moshiach.
Personally I recognize that organizations have to be somewhat businesslike to operate, and those operating such are not tzaddikim and gedolim - just people trying to get a job done. Everyone has a yetzer hara. But damaging the klal, either as a whole or through persistently hurting others can't be ignored if Torah and emes is to survive.
How is this backwards?
ReplyDelete?! The idea that we shouldn't question the actions because he's supposedly "better"? That's so twisted!
No, that's not all they are doing.
? What are they doing? Calling it out as wrong? If these Rabbonim feel it is wrong, what's wrong with their saying so?!
Have you tried to contact them?
Give me an e-mail or direct phone number and I'd be glad to. (And yes, I have.)
It is. That's why I respectfully asked whether it was the right way for those Rabbonim to go about it.
!? Firstly, the implication you make in the piece is that you are referring to the people not the Rabbonim. If you meant the Rabbonim, the Q on "better" is even stronger - other Rabbonim can't judge what they deem to be an improper act by another Rav!?
There is a basic, fundamental lack of trust between the leadership and the multitudes right now.
Agreed!
It is EMPOWERING the leadership by channeling public policy through them
But how does this fix the lack of trust!? Saying "Shh, we must not criticize" and that if we all listen everything will be just fine is how the lack of trust has grown.
instead of saying YOU ALL STINK, which is the tone of alot of blogs, especially tolerated in the comments section, like it or not, acknowledge it or not.
Go to any reasonable blog and tell me where this is. Commenters? The reasonable comments are respected, the ones that merely bash are not, when it comes to the average person. Nobody wants kannoim on the other end any more than they want them around Rabbonim. Lumping all bloggers together as evil simply because a couple of anonymous ones make stupid comments is silly. It's yet another reason people lose respect for Rabbanus - if there are statements essentially making gross sweeping generalizations about groups that are inaccurate it becomes difficult to maintain respect for the person who made the statement, and this has happened on more than one occasion. It's silly to lump all bloggers/commenters into a basket because of the words of a few that the others clearly do not associate with, but then act surprised when people lump Da'as Torah as a whole together when some make similar sweeping statements on behalf of a Da'as Torah that DOES claim to be united.
I understand it all too well. I've been around that block many, many, many times.
What does that mean? And therefore? What have you tried, and how were you successful? That's a rather poor smokescreen.
And I'm proposing what I think is the best way to do it. Blogs have been around for long enough for an assessment period. It isn't working too well.
That's simply untrue. It's effective enough that its voices are slowly seeping in, enough that you felt compelled to address it. Beyond that, it has had very nice impacts on individuals in communities and on communities at large from the bottom up, even if the "leaders" are still trying to avoid change.
Like a whole truckload of them.
Whole truckload? Please, list.
Just to let you in on a little secret, without going into too much detail, it will very likely end up on the desk of people who are among these designated drivers.
Please elaborate? I do not understand.
Oh, please. What I meant was that even if it was the best idea in the world, people love their soapboxes.
ReplyDeleteThat's garbage, and that was my point: You're just throwing it all out because you think it's all about people who want their soapboxes. That's sad.
The whole idea of making ArtScroll taboo is snarky. Tell me with a straight face that that isn't the undercurrent on the blogs.
On some, sure, with the reason that they have slowly shifted Judaism with their influence. It's a silly game. But who cares? That was worth a mention in a serious piece? That's babyish.
Hello. These were NOT throwaway lines! To talk about dan l'kaf zechus in the same sentence where you aren't!
Then why have the rest of the piece? How can you in one line say it's about hit counters, then say they're interested in changing the status quo and are the best way of doing so, then go on and bash bash bash!?
In the other article you were "completely disgusted" with, your main gripe was basically that people are antagonistic toward Kollel per se, just the massive burden it creates due to the numbers. And yet on your own blog, when discussing what would comstitute a "moderate community" - comments were very clearly agaist having any Kollel at all in such a community - EVERYONE MUST WORK. So tell me that's not principled antagonism.
!??! That is simply false. Not a single person said anything of the sort; the closest was someone asking very respectfully how a community could sustain such a thing, and I addressed that afterwards. I don't believe there's a single other comment that even discusses Kollel.
Akiva - Well said.
ReplyDeleteHe wants power, she wants power...
ReplyDeleteIn the words of a great rabbi - YOU ALL SUCK
The idea that we shouldn't question the actions because he's supposedly "better"?
ReplyDeleteI explicitly said questioning is what blogs should be doing!
What are they doing? Calling it out as wrong? If these Rabbonim feel it is wrong, what's wrong with their saying so?!
Saying "tax evasion is wrong" is absolutely fine. Saying "... said that" - maybe, maybe. Saying - "He should be discredited and disregarded as a Posek, he is a walking Chillul Hashem, a Menuval" - NO WAY!!!! Let your Rosh Yeshiva say that - not some nobody!
Give me an e-mail or direct phone number and I'd be glad to. (And yes, I have.)
I'll email you.
other Rabbonim can't judge what they deem to be an improper act by another Rav!?
See above.
But how does this fix the lack of trust!? Saying "Shh, we must not criticize"
Could you please stop presenting this as something I said when I said the 180 degree opposite?
Go to any reasonable blog and tell me where this is. Commenters? The reasonable comments are respected, the ones that merely bash are not, when it comes to the average person.
There is no outcry when this occurs. I don't want to name specific blogs, but they are not fringe ones.
What does that mean? And therefore? What have you tried, and how were you successful? That's a rather poor smokescreen.
I;ve tried my own blogs, I;ve tried commenting by name, I've tried commenting anonymously, I;ve sent emails to the bloggers, I've now written a cross-currents piece.
That's simply untrue.
No it isn't. You acknowledge yourself that there is a basic lack of trust, and the blogs haven't helped it. If you recognize that it is important to keep Torah leadership, more is needed.
Whole truckload? Please, list.
No thanks. I don't want to directly antagonize anyone in particular. Let everyone do their own Cheshbon Hanefesh.
Please elaborate? I do not understand.
check your email.
You and Garnel just don't get it. His main problem is OTD blogs, not frum ones.
ReplyDeleteOTD - Unhelpful.
ReplyDeleteR' Beckerman - Saying "tax evasion is wrong" is absolutely fine. Saying "... said that" - maybe, maybe. Saying - "He should be discredited and disregarded as a Posek, he is a walking Chillul Hashem, a Menuval" - NO WAY!!!! Let your Rosh Yeshiva say that - not some nobody!
So why hasn't this happened!? Why does it seem more as if people are trying to pretend this didn't happen? Why can't (for example) someone step up from the Moetzes and state unequivocally the position of the Agudah is that tax evasion is wrong?
Could you please stop presenting this as something I said when I said the 180 degree opposite?
The implication of empowering leadership while quieting blogs is that if we would only do this, then things would get better.
I;ve tried my own blogs, I;ve tried commenting by name, I've tried commenting anonymously, I;ve sent emails to the bloggers, I've now written a cross-currents piece.
What were your blogs? Commenting anonymously is like blogging anonymously, and will often be ignored. I don't recall receiving e-mails, so perhaps you were contacting the wrong blogs. As for the CC piece, starting from an antagonistic POV will not help make progress.
You acknowledge yourself that there is a basic lack of trust, and the blogs haven't helped it. If you recognize that it is important to keep Torah leadership, more is needed.
I think the blogs have simply shown just how much of a lack of trust there is and why. The question now is if Torah leadership can step up and say "okay, here is what we will do now". This is not a "bloggers must do this, and then Torah leadership can function" situation - if it were, that means bloggers wield an incredible amount of power. Let the Torah leadership step forward irrespective of what happens on blogs.
I don't want to directly antagonize anyone in particular. Let everyone do their own Cheshbon Hanefesh.
That's fine, but please don't claim there is a truckload of such blogs. A heavy majority of the blogs I frequent have incredibly respectful, thoughtful discussion even though the subjects are those which are the hardest for many of the people involved in the discussion.
OTD - Garnel?
ReplyDeleteThat's garbage, and that was my point: You're just throwing it all out because you think it's all about people who want their soapboxes. That's sad.
ReplyDeleteI'm NOT throwing it all out, and I'm not saying it is ALL about that!!! But at the same time, it is definitely true that people enjoy their soapboxes. It is completely naive to think otherwise.
That was worth a mention in a serious piece? That's babyish.
You don't like it - ignore it.
How can you in one line say it's about hit counters, then say they're interested in changing the status quo and are the best way of doing so, then go on and bash bash bash!?
Because it isn't one or the other. There are many things that motivate bloggers, some more noble and some less. There are things they can accomplish, things that they do well, and things that they don't.
That is simply false.
"4. Torah Umadah. Learns Torah in his or her own way. Works regularly to earn a living."
With all due respect to Rabbi Beckerman, he couches his argument in language that contradicts and causes confusion, not to mention dissension.
ReplyDelete"I believe that actual calls for adherence should be channeled through Torah leaders, whatever camp they may come from. There are lines of communication to all the English-speaking Torah leaders, both in the US and in Eretz Yisrael. I do not think it appropriate for any blogger who is not a Torah authority to be determining practical public policy, whether on Klal issues or how to relate to particular incidents relating to individuals."
The words "I believe" and "I [do not] think" are opinion words, not words that introduce factual statements. He was not giving out psak halachah as to how complaints/suggestions/comments are required to be delivered to those who are in rabbinic positions of authority. Had he had such halacha to back up his opinions, he would have, in rabbinic form we have seen in countless of other places, stated "The halacha says."
If the Torah scholars of Klal are actually connected to and cognizant of the practical problems facing Klal, then why have there been no practical solutions forthcoming? Why have there been no announcements dealing with such practical matters? Why is it that seemingly only the most esoteric and marginalized, if not downright mind boggling, issues that get public play by the Torah scholars? Is banning a Lipa concert of such major importance to Klal that it needed the firepower that was unleashed? More important than the burgeoning tuition crisis? More important than discussing or coming up with sensible guidelines for simcha making? More important than the very real and very documented scourge of abuse? More important than the inability of huge swathes of Klal to support itself financially due to planned poverty? Should not Torah greats already be aware of these problems and seeking real and practical solutions? And if they are not aware of them, why not?
Those lines of communication the Rabbi refers to? Busy signals on a whole lot of them, not to mention that I would be willing to wager with no fear of losing that if I were to call one of these Torah greats, I wouldn't get through: no women need apply.
Are there bloggers who go over some clear line of correctness of speech? Without a doubt, just as there are those outside of the JBlogosphere who do so, "peasant" and rabbi alike.
Rabbi Beckerman divides the world into gedolim and ketanim and we, the people, are firmly in the ketanim column. We are to be seen, not heard. And perhaps, if the life in Klal were perfect the Rabbi might get his wish. But here is the thing about leadership and innovation and action: if you take the power to yourself then you are required to exercise that power for the good of the governed in a timely and judicious fashion. You are expected to be on top of all problems and to come up with solutions that are workable, not air dreaming. In short, you are asked to produce. And if you do not? Well, history, secular and Jewish, is full of depictions of what happens when leaders fail to provide adequate leadership.
Attacking bloggers en masse is a red herring aimed at deflecting what the real problem is. It is not our complaining that needs to be eliminated: it is what we are complaining about that needs elimination.
garnelironheart.blogspot.com/2009/07/sit-down-shut-up-and-listen-to-us.html
ReplyDeleteSo why hasn't this happened!?
ReplyDeleteThis is the RCA! The people who spoke up on the blogs asked RIETS RYs what to do after he spoke in *Teaneck*. Ask Rav Hershel Schachter why not.
The implication of empowering leadership while quieting blogs is that if we would only do this, then things would get better.
It would be a start. And for the umpteenth time - I don't want blogs to be silent!
As for the CC piece, starting from an antagonistic POV will not help make progress.
That's my point.
Take care for now.
I'm NOT throwing it all out, and I'm not saying it is ALL about that!!! But at the same time, it is definitely true that people enjoy their soapboxes. It is completely naive to think otherwise.
ReplyDeleteTo use that as a predominant drive of most bloggers is disgusting and silly.
You don't like it - ignore it.
?! Why didn't you!?
Because it isn't one or the other. There are many things that motivate bloggers, some more noble and some less. There are things they can accomplish, things that they do well, and things that they don't.
Again - what are you accomplishing by railing on them? What have you positively affected?!
"4. Torah Umadah. Learns Torah in his or her own way. Works regularly to earn a living."
!?!?!? How is that "clearly against Kollel"?! How is that "principled antagonism"!? Are you serious? Suggesting that people learn and also work regularly to earn a living is anti-kollel?!
ProfK - Great comment, thanks.
ReplyDeleteThis is the RCA! The people who spoke up on the blogs asked RIETS RYs what to do after he spoke in *Teaneck*. Ask Rav Hershel Schachter why not.
I'd love to! But why can't any powerful org. speak up!?
It would be a start. And for the umpteenth time - I don't want blogs to be silent!
How can you say "it would be a start" and then say you don't want them to be silent!? The start needs to come from the Torah leadership in addressing issues!
As for the CC piece, starting from an antagonistic POV will not help make progress.
That's my point.
So then you shouldn't have written the piece. It had no constructive purpose.
Who the hell does he think he is? Just because there are gedolim in the world, doesn't mean that we are ketanim!
ReplyDeleteFinally, the essence of the problem lies almost directly at the feet of the gedolim. The biggest problem is that they don't have achdut, and therefore cannot make the pronouncements that are necessary, and that will be accepted by the tzibur. And the individual gedolim don't have the fortitude ("beizim", "cojones", etc) to make the necessary pronouncements on their own. In fact, so many of the gedolim say little to nothing at all, and would rather hide behind massive obfuscation (as with the recent gezel akum issue, and many other issues). The gedolim are simply not taking a stand, so we have to do it instead.
And what "lines of communication" is he talking about in the first place? There is no place that one can have a back-and-forth discussion of any particular issue with a gadol. Instead the gedolim prefer to lecture and render an opinion with no opportunity for the tzibur to discuss the issue with them and have a good back-and-forth discussion with questions.
Frankly, they are not leaders if they don't act like leaders. And they are not teachers if they don't engage the people in discussion.
Mark
>Let your Rosh Yeshiva say that - not some nobody!
ReplyDeleteIs there anyone surprised at some of the disdain people feel towards those on the right with a comment like this? It's like what ProfK said. You are either a Gadol or a Katan, and as a Katan, basically a serf, who are you even to question of someone that someone else professes to be a Gadol? This is the same thing they did to Slifkin. "Who is this Sflifkin to go against the words of the Gdolim?" Nevermind that Sflifkin new his stuff.
First off "Gedolim" is an artificial term. Rabbonim, or Rav is who the average person relates to. That is who should be their guide. Gedolim is, I think, an invention of Agudas Yisroel. After you have dealt with the Rav of your choice, it becomes an argument "who is a gadol"?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, calling Jews a community, outside of chassidic circles is a misnomer. Only when it comes to extraction of money or restrictions do we hear of communities. When pain and need are present the machinery of support (systematically) is lacking. If you are fortunate and belong to a shul where the Rav is more concerned with his flock than with abstract principles "torah" "chessed" "avoda" or whatever, then you can turn to him when a person is sick, a child goes OTD, a messy divorce, shidduch. When such a Rav responds his leadership authority is reinforced and his torah and halachik pronouncements are respected.
The story goes that Rav Moshe Feinstein became "Rav Moshe" because he was asked a sheilah, and answered, and then again and again. People liked and respected his answers thus his authority grew.
Such, too, with Torah Leadership.
People become gedolim on the force of their ideas and personality. People who are annointed gedolim for other reasons do not carry the same moral force. (Perhaps --- in the chassidic community this is not the case. But let's see what happens to the Rebbeships that are in dispute --- whom will the congregation follow).
There is enormous anger because people feel that leadership is exercised to restrict and not to enable, to take away, not to teach, and because we have no basic respect for people --- (i.e. Ktanim) 9 gedolim without the kal/koton do not make up a minyan. Referencing Korach for a blogger who tries to be fair and open is a sign of contempt. Who that reads a blog will take anything that Rabbi Beckerman seriously if he demonstrates such flagrant dismissiveness.
Finally, to get on my hobby horse, Kollel neither adds nor subtracts from a community perse. This Yissachar/Zevulun myth needs to be exposed. It is not a partnership and not a sharing relationship in these times. Yissachar extracts, and displays contempt for zevulun's life style. The opposite is true as well. The businessman does not feel he is getting value for his buck, and the Kollel community probably does not feel that the community enthusiastically supports them. So what is being accomplished except another dividing line in the community.
If we start seeing people as people, payos, srugim, etc. become irrelevant if G-d wanted us to be the same we'd all be the same height, same color hair, same face etc. Different ideas, and practices do not call for contempt.
Mark - Frankly, they are not leaders if they don't act like leaders. And they are not teachers if they don't engage the people in discussion.
ReplyDeleteVery interesting way of putting things.
HH - Is there anyone surprised at some of the disdain people feel towards those on the right with a comment like this?
I don't think it's a right/left thing so much as simply an "are you kidding me" one. It's circular: If only a Gadol can speak up, and a Gadol is assumed to be right to start, then nothing stops someone made out to be a Gadol of sorts from making outrageous statements such as the tax evasion one.
Anon - Well put regarding Gedolim. What's unfortunate is that we seem to almost have exclusively anointed rather than built Gedolim in this generation, and when they are deserving, there is no way to access them due to the layers surrounding them which filter out any meaningful communication.
>I don't think it's a right/left thing so much as simply an "are you kidding me" one. It's circular: If only a Gadol can speak up, and a Gadol is assumed to be right to start, then nothing stops someone made out to be a Gadol of sorts from making outrageous statements such as the tax evasion one.
ReplyDeleteOf course, but where does this typically come from?
I think that a specific type of blog/blogger was really the focus of R Beckerman's posting on C-C. Sort of like when the teacher says in front of the entire class "Don't forget to bring in your library book", when really it's just one or two kids that need to hear the message.
ReplyDeleteEveryone seems to agree that there is a big rift between the "massess" and the Gedolim of today. Maybe a post like R Beckerman's and Ezzie can start to bridge that rift.
is EMPOWERING the leadership by channeling public policy through them instead of saying YOU ALL STINK, which is the tone of alot of blogs, especially tolerated in the comments section, like it or not, acknowledge it or not.
ReplyDelete====================
R'DB,
Forgetting about the blogs issue for a moment (I see that others have already discussed it), I fundamentally disagree witht his statement. First I would not use the word gedolim (which at least traditionally aiui denotes greatness in Torah learning) but manhigim (leaders) who may not be at the same level of learning as the greatest learners but have other talents for leadership. I'd also say that rather than demanding respect, respect must be earned by their actions. IMHO the reason for the current lack of respect in communities which would tend towards the "sage on the stage" approach is that many things go on and the response you hear is "it's the askonim" not the gedolim. The buck stops at the top.
KT bahava
Joel Rich
HH - I've seen it in all places. Certainly here it has nothing to do with left/right.
ReplyDeleteNeil - I respectfully disagree. R' Beckerman is addressing all bloggers, with perhaps a caveat of "well if you're not like this, you're okay". But the assumption is that bloggers as a whole lean this way.
Joel Rich - Good comment (as always).
Ezzie,
ReplyDeleteAfter digesting R Beckerman's post (again), your post, several of the back and forth written ping-pong game b/t You and Rabbi Beckerman, a hotdog (from Romanian)and a hamburger, I'm just...well...confused. The first line of your well addressed post, Ezzie, really states your main problem with R Beckerman's post. I think my blog is fairly "squeaky clean" and I, too, hate to be lumped in the same category as those bloggers who, to use a line from the past two Agudath conventions, "engage in character assassination".
Skip down to R Beckerman's last comment when he says, "And for the umpteenth time - I don't want blogs to be silent!".
If inclined, I'm sure R Beckerman will comment again and FWIW, Ezzie, your integrity and willingness to follow the path of Emes and Shalom is true middah that transfers easily from the computer monitor to the eyes that read your words.
Neil - Can you send me some Romanian salamis!?!? :)
ReplyDeleteI'm having a simultaneous discussion with R' Beckerman via e-mail. He quite clearly feels that all blogs are lumped together, and that blogs should be policing one another. His views on how blogs work and interact are simply wrong: Interaction does not equal endorsement.
Ezzie,
ReplyDeleteI wasn't inclined to comment here again, but after this, I will.
That last comment of yours is: a) inherently rude, and b) a blatant misrepresentation of our correspondence.
"Of course responsible blogs don't publicize correspondence without explicit consent" - except when they do. And then they distort it.
I shouldn't dignify such behavior with a response, but to clarify what I actually said, as opposed to "policing" and "interaction":
Blogs that list other blogs on their limited blogroll indicates endorsement AS PART OF LEGITIMATE DISCOURSE. This is a reasonable conclusion and pointing to links from 2004 that point to saying that "I don't endorse blogs that link to me" as some kind of proof that this isn't so, is plainly ridiculous. To counter this, those blogs should be repudiated as part of legitimate discourse so that you can be taken seriously.
Blogs that list other bloggers as contributors are indicative of them as acceptable contributors. The fact that this was done for some other, clandestine, motive as exculpatory is laughable. Maybe you'll put Osama Bin Laden on as a contributor and then say that you know he won't actually contribute, and you just exchanged those rights so you can get your message out to Al-Qeida. The idea is preposterous.
Recommending posts and blogs for JIB awards is indicative of support for their message. This conclusion is eminently reasonable, and saying, after having been on the blogs since before the birth of delicious Elianna (at least), that I don't get how blogs work, means that either I'm hopelessly mentally challenged, or there's some work to be done to change perceptions.
And Refuah Sheleima Achshav (better than B'karov) to your grandmother. May she know many more years of Nachas from you along with all of her descendants.
ReplyDeleteOnce again you are misreading.
ReplyDeleteI did NOT publish correspondence. I noted only that our separate correspondence confirms that you believe blogs are responsible for one another in terms of how regarded their opinions will be. Yes, that implies policing and interaction in the sense that you expect explicit disagreement when we disagree being stated publicly and you falsely assume that any agreement or interaction implies across-the-board approval.
There's a far cry between having "Osama bin Laden" as a contributor and allowing certain other bloggers with which someone usually disagrees as contributors. That I liked a single post by a blogger I normally disagreement is not an implicit endorsement of his "message".
The Gil Student post from 2004 about explicitly NOT endorsing blogs he links to is one that is clearly linked on his homepage under LINKS. He (or I, or anyone) do not need to constantly state whom they support and do not support and why. We are not, and do not claim to be, a unified organization nor do we have to respond to the opinions of other bloggers.
That you do not get this despite so much time in the blogosphere is sad. That you don't see how the complaints about Torah leadership are similar but they *are* part of organizations and typically *do* present a unified front is sadder.
I did NOT publish correspondence. I noted only that our separate correspondence confirms that you believe blogs are responsible for one another in terms of how regarded their opinions will be.
ReplyDeleteIn the middle of an exchange, to state what I believe or don't believe, when we are still hashing out the issues, would be wrong without explicit consent, even if it were a correct represntation. It isn't.
Yes, that implies policing and interaction in the sense that you expect explicit disagreement when we disagree being stated publicly and you falsely assume that any agreement or interaction implies across-the-board approval.
This is again a very blatant distortion. I didn't say ANY agreement or interaction. I said particular types of interaction which are indicative of endorsement, of which there are those I listed, require repudiation.
There's a far cry between having "Osama bin Laden" as a contributor and allowing certain other bloggers with which someone usually disagrees as contributors.
You're not getting something. I don't care if you AGREE or disagree with him/her. What I care about is that you consider the blog part of LEGITIMATE DISCOURSE. If he is on your limited blogroll, then you do. If he's a contributor on your blog, you do. If you liked a post on a Jews for J blog you wouldn't nominate it.
The Gil Student post from 2004 about explicitly NOT endorsing blogs he links to is one that is clearly linked on his homepage under LINKS.
Please, I really, really don't want to talk about particular bloggers. He has NO SUCH post. That post is saying that he doesn't endorse blogs that LINK TO HIM!
.
In the middle of an exchange, to state what I believe or don't believe, when we are still hashing out the issues, would be wrong without explicit consent, even if it were a correct represntation. It isn't.
ReplyDeleteAgain, not what I did. I noted that your emails seem to confirm what is implied from your statements here. I did not publish any correspondence, quote any lines, or make reference to other aspects of our conversation. (Though you did.)
As for incorrect or not, please feel free to elaborate: I see nothing that belies this point.
This is again a very blatant distortion. I didn't say ANY agreement or interaction. I said particular types of interaction which are indicative of endorsement, of which there are those I listed, require repudiation.
No, you've implied and stated that we "don't seem to disagree" with statements of theirs. That implies any interaction. Again - if you don't or didn't mean the things you said or implied, than state so CLEARLY. Your post was very implicitly denigrating blogs as a whole.
You're not getting something. I don't care if you AGREE or disagree with him/her. What I care about is that you consider the blog part of LEGITIMATE DISCOURSE. If he is on your limited blogroll, then you do. If he's a contributor on your blog, you do. If you liked a post on a Jews for J blog you wouldn't nominate it.
What does "legitimate discourse" even mean? That on occasion the guy says things that are reasonable? So what? That implies endorsement? I'm planning on sending out a post by someone who went OTD to educators because it's fascinating and excellent. Does that mean I think going OTD is great?! That's ridiculous!!
Please, I really, really don't want to talk about particular bloggers. He has NO SUCH post. That post is saying that he doesn't endorse blogs that LINK TO HIM!
HUNDREDS of blogs link to Hirhurim. That post was written before my blog existed, yet I'm on there. That list is not about who links to him so much as who he felt important enough to link back for whatever reason. Does that imply endorsement?! No. Go see any post on a later date where he references this. This is not difficult.
Again, not what I did. I noted that your emails seem to confirm what is implied from your statements here.
ReplyDeleteThey don't. And if the point of our correspondence it to reach clarification and understanding if not agreement, they don't confirm or allay anything until we're done.
No, you've implied and stated that we "don't seem to disagree" with statements of theirs.
No I didn't. I said that there is an implied acceptance of those blogs as legitimate discourse and that when there is a swerve from what should be legitimate discourse it should therefore be repudiated.
Your post was very implicitly denigrating blogs as a whole.
On ArtScroll, yes, I think there is a a general (NOT ALL) snarky tone about it. The bloggers that don't engage in the snark acknowledge this. On the issue of undermining , where is this implied? I implied the opposite, when citing the particular example of what I thought to be undermining - "THOSE that take this path etc....". I said that there is a crossroads ahead, and never said nor implied that anyone has taken the left or the right road. Yet.
What does "legitimate discourse" even mean? That on occasion the guy says things that are reasonable? So what? That implies endorsement? I'm planning on sending out a post by someone who went OTD to educators because it's fascinating and excellent. Does that mean I think going OTD is great?! That's ridiculous!!
Now we're finally getting somewhere. Legitimate discourse means, for purposes of this discussion, that the blog does not take the left turn.
HUNDREDS of blogs link to Hirhurim. That post was written before my blog existed, yet I'm on there. That list is not about who links to him so much as who he felt important enough to link back for whatever reason. Does that imply endorsement?! No. Go see any post on a later date where he references this. This is not difficult.
This has NOTHING to do with his limited blogroll.
(Gil - if you ever read this , I think you are a more or less a model blogger and a mentsch. I don't mean to attack you. I'm only pointing out what I think are flaws in the perception of blogs.)
I said that there is an implied acceptance of those blogs as legitimate discourse and that when there is a swerve from what should be legitimate discourse it should therefore be repudiated.
ReplyDeleteAnd again, I think this is a false implication.
On ArtScroll, yes, I think there is a a general (NOT ALL) snarky tone about it. The bloggers that don't engage in the snark acknowledge this. On the issue of undermining , where is this implied? I implied the opposite, when citing the particular example of what I thought to be undermining - "THOSE that take this path etc....". I said that there is a crossroads ahead, and never said nor implied that anyone has taken the left or the right road. Yet.
I disagree. You implied that bloggers are "as a whole", when it's not the case. Re: ArtScroll, there was no need to snark back even if there are blogs which are snarky about ArtScroll. It served no constructive purpose in your piece.
Legitimate discourse means, for purposes of this discussion, that the blog does not take the left turn.
...Huh!?
I agree that Gil is a mensch. I don't think his "links" implies that he agrees or endorses any views of anyone on there, and "legitimate discourse" seems to be a vague and meaningless term.
...Huh!?
ReplyDeleteI agree that Gil is a mensch. I don't think his "links" implies that he agrees or endorses any views of anyone on there, and "legitimate discourse" seems to be a vague and meaningless term.
Looks like this is all we're left with in terms of clarification on here - so legitmate discourse means that they aren't out of bounds in terms of basic Derech Eretz toward the concept and personae of Torah leadership.
You wouldn't link to a blog denying the Holocaust, you wouldn't link to a Jews for J blog, you wouldn't link to a Neturei Karta blog. Even if they had some beautiful post about flowers in Asia, you wouldn't link to it because they stand for things that are abhorrent, you wouldn't allow them to contribute on your blog, and you wouldn't nominate them for a JIB award.
From where I'm sitting, if a blog semi-consistently crosses that line of critisicm to undermining, it enters the Shaketz T'shaktzenu domain and should be an out-of-bounds blog for all of the above. YMMV.
You wouldn't link to a blog denying the Holocaust, you wouldn't link to a Jews for J blog, you wouldn't link to a Neturei Karta blog. Even if they had some beautiful post about flowers in Asia, you wouldn't link to it because they stand for things that are abhorrent, you wouldn't allow them to contribute on your blog, and you wouldn't nominate them for a JIB award.
ReplyDeleteThere's a far cry from NK or Jews for Jesus to any of the blogs you're against. Even if I disagree with their tone 100% and their content 75%, there is little value in ignoring their positives or slamming them for their negatives. Better to balance careful relationships, particularly when they're still reaching large segments of frum people. This does NOT imply endorsement nor agreement except where explicitly stated as such.
From where I'm sitting, if a blog semi-consistently crosses that line of critisicm to undermining, it enters the Shaketz T'shaktzenu domain and should be an out-of-bounds blog for all of the above.
That's your view, but that's not how others view it. To thrust your view onto others and then judge them for it is wrong.
That's your view, but that's not how others view it. To thrust your view onto others and then judge them for it is wrong.
ReplyDeleteLike I said, I've been around for a very long time, and I'm not dumb. If others don't view it that way then they are simply blind to perceptions shared by many, and it isn't helpful to say that the bloggers don't think it implies anything. Perceptions about the blogosphere impact their ability to shape reality, and I assure you I am not alone.
This goes back to the original point: Unrealistic/false expectations of how bloggers act and interact vs. how someone else thinks they should don't accomplish anything.
ReplyDeletePeople cannot in one breath have expectations of bloggers as a group, when they are not one, yet ignore reverse expectations of Torah leadership as a group, when they are one.
People cannot in one breath have expectations of bloggers as a group, when they are not one,
ReplyDeleteThey are. Haveil Havalim, post roundups, cross links, JIBs, blogrolls, cross-contributions blogger conventions etc. all create the atmosphere of a group. Heck, when Gil wanted to start reshimu, he was blinded to the glaringly obvious fact that being on the same blog with LF crushes your credibility. He said no, it's just a tool, a vehicle to get the message out, etc. He got blasted, and rightfully so, for being unaware of the perceptions created.
Is the blogosphere monolithic, no. (And neither are the Gedolim). Camaraderie and acceptance as legitimate and furthering of the overall cause - yes.
They are. Haveil Havalim, post roundups, cross links, JIBs, blogrolls, cross-contributions blogger conventions etc. all create the atmosphere of a group.
ReplyDeleteHuh?? It's the opposite - all those are to help spread stuff around so more people can see them *because* it's not at all like that. I've never heard of most blogs in an average HH, for example.
Heck, when Gil wanted to start reshimu, he was blinded to the glaringly obvious fact that being on the same blog with LF crushes your credibility. He said no, it's just a tool, a vehicle to get the message out, etc. He got blasted, and rightfully so, for being unaware of the perceptions created.
He got blasted for it because there's a far cry between letting someone post on your blog where you can delete it if you want and ceding control to and merging completely with people who he shouldn't be. If anything, this shows the reverse: Anything that would actually imply endorsement IS problematic.
(And neither are the Gedolim).
...but the issue is that they are presented as (present themselves as?) such.
Camaraderie and acceptance as legitimate and furthering of the overall cause - yes.
What overall cause?
I'm not going to keep going around in circles here. It doesn't matter what YOUR point in getting HH out is, the point is that this is the PERCEPTION! If the Jewish Observor, even Jewish Action, would have a column listing all the great articles you could from all kinds of places, you could bet your bottom dollar that those articles would not be from places that aren't legitimate public discourse. When they had the infamous RYBS eulogy in the JO, Rabbi Tendler blasted them for deigning to quote Jewish Week!
ReplyDeleteOn reshimu, that was ONE (big) criticism!
On the Gedolim being monolithic, that's just your perception. Which is my point.
The overall cause of benefitting Orthodox Judaism.
Take care, I've made my case.
My goodness!
ReplyDeleteYou don't think it matters that the perception of Gedolim as being monolithic matters, yet you think that the false perception of bloggers as being so when it makes no logical sense does!?
If you want to help the overall cause of Judaism, focus on doing your part, not on everyone else falling in step.
Hatzlacha.
You don't think it matters that the perception of Gedolim as being monolithic matters,
ReplyDeleteNO! I'm saying that it is exactly PERCEPTIONS that DO matter, as you acknowledge! And I've never stated anything about what I do or don't think about what the Gedolim do or should do, other than contacting them, which I facilitated for you.
yet you think that the false perception of bloggers as being so when it makes no logical sense does!?
Okay, you're obviously not reading. Did I just say that the blogs are NOT monolithic?
I guess all the people who think that there is a group atmosphere just idiots who can't think logically.
You know there is. Since you openly acknowledge there is such a concept as the blogs being generally snarky about ArtScroll, then there IS such a thing as a group of blogs, and I'm telling you what the perceptions of that group are BEYOND just ArtScroll snark, and you can deny it all you want. I don't think I'm being illogical.
You don't have to do anything to change those perceptions if you don't want to. But denying they exist, beyond just myself and a couple of other drooling morons, isn't helpful.
Since you openly acknowledge there is such a concept as the blogs being generally snarky about ArtScroll, then there IS such a thing as a group of blogs, and I'm telling you what the perceptions of that group are BEYOND just ArtScroll snark, and you can deny it all you want. I don't think I'm being illogical.
ReplyDelete!?!?!? Seriously? Because a few blogs are all snarky about the same thing --> there are groups of blogs? Really? ...wow.
You don't have to do anything to change those perceptions if you don't want to. But denying they exist, beyond just myself and a couple of other drooling morons, isn't helpful.
No - what's unhelpful is people who should know better making claims about bloggers as a whole, thereby *creating* a perception to those who do NOT know much about blogs that they are a monolithic, united group.
What *would* be helpful is people who can point out which blogs are worth listening to and on which subjects, and why.
Seriously? Because a few blogs are all snarky about the same thing --> there are groups of blogs?
ReplyDeleteYou are being SO disingenuous here. "A few", yeah. Not that we don't all wink and smile at this. It's all part of the entertainment value. Voila!
No - what's unhelpful is people who should know better making claims about bloggers as a whole, thereby *creating* a perception to those who do NOT know much about blogs that they are a monolithic, united group.
That is a complete laugh. I'm the one who told Rabbi Shafran about blogs, and I'm the one who Novominsker and all the others who speak about "blogs" regarding what they are like. I'm telling you, you don't have to do anything about it.
You're also not reading again.
What *would* be helpful is people who can point out which blogs are worth listening to and on which subjects, and why.
A nice step would be to clearly disassociate from those that aren't.
You are being SO disingenuous here. "A few", yeah. Not that we don't all wink and smile at this. It's all part of the entertainment value. Voila!
ReplyDeleteSnort. Like I said, you're causing the problem by making up falsehoods. YOU think something that is false, and when people tell you as much, you think not that you could have been mistaken, but that they're self-deluding. Wow.
That is a complete laugh. I'm the one who told Rabbi Shafran about blogs, and I'm the one who Novominsker and all the others who speak about "blogs" regarding what they are like. I'm telling you, you don't have to do anything about it.
Great - so someone who has a skewed view of what they think blogs are like and their intentions and beliefs is the one advising the Novominsker and the Director of the Agudah on blogs!? Wonderful. No wonder there are issues.
A nice step would be to clearly disassociate from those that aren't.
Ah, yes. Back to "You do this (even if it makes no sense), THEN we'll think about doing something."
Sigh. Full circle.
YOU think something that is false, and when people tell you as much, you think not that you could have been mistaken, but that they're self-deluding. Wow.
ReplyDeleteThis is so inane!!! You can't tell me my perceptions are false! You can tell me what your intent is, which is fine, and I even believe you, but the perceptions you create whether you are cognizant of them or not, exist!!! That's like the Charedi shaking his fist at the lady saying that he was having Kavanah in his Tefillos! Maybe - but that sure wasn't what it looked like!!!
Sigh. The perceptions you have do not make sense when you take a reasonable look at what happens, and I've shown you exactly why. Rather than saying "I understand now", you're choosing to say that bloggers are self-deluding and that they are in fact a group. (Then you kind of switch and say that the perception is that they are, but this makes no more sense than the other statement.) A reasonable person understands that it does not make logical sense for there to be a monolithic attitude among blogs.
ReplyDeleteIf you are in a position as you claim to affect the Novominsker or Avi Shafran's views on blogs, then it's very simple: You can go and say "bloggers in no way view themselves as monolithic or united. Here are a list of blogs that are worth having a constructive discussion with; some will agree with Issue A, some with Issue B, some with C, etc." It matters not at all what someone else "perceives" - you get to directly affect *their* perception and have a constructive approach.
Got that? Great. Now please do so. You have a perfect opportunity to help rather than harm.
I would not recommend any social commentary blog that does not clearly disassociate from the destructive ones, or that clearly has nothing to do with them in the first place, (like Rabbi Horowitz) hand-waving away perceptions by imagining them illogical due to, e.g., clandestine rationales on why contibutors are on lists notwithstanding.
ReplyDeleteAnd the fact that you repeat monolithic for the fifth time doesn't make it what I said. It is really dishonest to debate that way. I said "accepting as part of legitimate discourse".
ReplyDeleteGot that? Great. Now don't snort at other people, and you're all set.
Byedidus.
that does not clearly disassociate from the destructive ones
ReplyDeleteThat's silly. A lack of clear disassociation does not equal association. On the flip side, the clear association among Torah leadership should require clear disassociation when someone acts/says something the others disagree with.
or that clearly has nothing to do with them in the first place
Why are not all blogs assumed - as is correct - to have nothing to do with one another?
hand-waving away perceptions by imagining them illogical due to, e.g., clandestine rationales on why contibutors are on lists notwithstanding.
That's just stupid. "Clandestine rationales"? Really? Because you found one blogger who's a little nuts among 50 contributors on a good blog, despite his having posted perhaps once or twice out of the 2,000+ posts on a blog, now all J-bloggers are a unified group? That's amazingly twisted.
It's obvious to anyone with a reasonable, unbiased view that bloggers are not so incredibly interconnected that they need to vocally disassociate when others act in improper ways. I am not responsible for the content on DovBear or HaEmtza, or on Hirhurim or the Muqata. They are not responsible for the content here. It's questionable how responsible anyone is for the comments on their own blog. (Legally, Orthomom's lawsuit victory seems to say not responsible.) That you keep trying to 'pin' bloggers to each other in a game of "gotcha" is ridiculous.
And the fact that you repeat monolithic for the fifth time doesn't make it what I said. It is really dishonest to debate that way. I said "accepting as part of legitimate discourse".
...which you've still yet to define in a meaningful way. The closest understanding is that some kind of lack of disassociation shows that bloggers are tied to one another and thereby included in a single group, which would then be responsible for one another's actions, which essentially creates... a monolith! I agree it's silly, and based on a silly logical progression. So why such an implication? If that's *not* what you mean, please, explain clearly.
We've discussed many times that the words and exactness of your terminology does in fact matter. Please clarify what you meant and what you mean in non-vague terms.
Thanks!
I've defined it well enough for those not wearing their blogosphere blinders to understand. There's a reason Cross-Currents hesitates to call itself a "blog", as per Yaakov Menken, (and it isn't a result of moderation, au contraire) and why Rabbi Shafran wrote an article titled "Blogistan", and by golly I had nothing to do with it. You said it yourself in the post - the destructive blogs should be ignored . If you don't, you're associating with them, and unequivocal, clear, transparent, and obvious repudiation of their message and content becomes your paramount responsibility if you are to be part of positive discourse, even if you are not a monolith (which means that you are all on the same page ideologically).
ReplyDeleteI've asked you not to discuss particular blogs, and I don't want to discuss any.
I wouldn't send any Rabbis to your blog for a different reason, though. You tend to be real quick with calling things stupid and silly and then asking for clarification. That just raises people's hackles, makes each side dig deeper into their positions, causes the other side to feel the need to respond in kind, doesn't do your case any more good than simply stating it, and isn't respectful. Really, I can handle it, I'm not anyone special. Except to my Rabbeim, my family, some friends, and about 500 hundred Talmidim I've taught, some of them quite close. I haven't had anyone say anything I said was "silly" or "stupid" even if they thought it was, even in private, and certainly not in public. If you think terminology matters, choose your words (and snorts) a little more carefully.
All the best.
I've defined it well enough for those not wearing their blogosphere blinders to understand.
ReplyDeleteOr you've been wearing yours the whole time. Again - almost all bloggers are good, normal people. To imply or claim otherwise is disgusting.
There's a reason Cross-Currents hesitates to call itself a "blog", as per Yaakov Menken, (and it isn't a result of moderation, au contraire) and why Rabbi Shafran wrote an article titled "Blogistan", and by golly I had nothing to do with it.
It hesitates because its own leaders have called out blogs as evil despite not knowing much about them, and to associate as one would undermine themselves in the eyes of those people. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place, so the simple solution is to say "well, we're not really a blog" - when they are in every sense of the word. Shafran's piece was disgusting, fwiw.
If you don't, you're associating with them, and unequivocal, clear, transparent, and obvious repudiation of their message and content becomes your paramount responsibility if you are to be part of positive discourse, even if you are not a monolith (which means that you are all on the same page ideologically).
That's absolutely crazy. There is absolutely NO need for me to repudiate the opinions by other bloggers whatsoever.
I've asked you not to discuss particular blogs, and I don't want to discuss any.
Excuse me - I didn't until you used an example that (to my knowledge) only exists in one place.
I wouldn't send any Rabbis to your blog for a different reason, though. You tend to be real quick with calling things stupid and silly and then asking for clarification.
Wow - that's just disgusting and false. In 3,700 posts or so on this blog, there are only a few which criticize quickly, and I cannot currently think of one where I have regretted doing so - you just happened to have been a target in two of the three pieces you've written. Perhaps (!) it's not me, but your writing. Worth considering.
That just raises people's hackles, makes each side dig deeper into their positions, causes the other side to feel the need to respond in kind, doesn't do your case any more good than simply stating it, and isn't respectful.
Perhaps that's exactly what your piece was, as was my comment from the beginning.
Really, I can handle it, I'm not anyone special. Except to my Rabbeim, my family, some friends, and about 500 hundred Talmidim I've taught, some of them quite close.
So you are special or are not? I'm not sure what your point is. Please, go ask the Rabbeim in OJ who know me well what they think of my middos and menschlichkeit and whether my (rare) criticisms are typically well-founded or not.
Inflammatory Discussion – A Clarification
ReplyDelete1) I want to thank Ezzie for the opportunity to clarify things.
2) In addressing the J-blogosphere as a whole in my essay, the intent was for each blog to make their own Cheshbon Hanefesh as to whether they comport with the suggested guidelines, as I stated in the comments here, not that they all violate these guidelines, which is plainly obvious. I thought this was clear enough by stating that “The licenses of those who take this path” as limiting those who do. Being that I passed this essay on to a very experienced writer to read before posting it, I considered it sufficiently clear. I am not under the impression that the blogosphere is a monolith, as I stated many times in the comment section here.
3) As a DISTINCT issue, I think there is a problem of the perception of blogs as a whole, where particular types of associations give the impression of granting some level of Hechsher. There was somewhat of a cross-over between these two issues in the comment section, where I related to the charge of “not all blogs are like that” as separate from what I thought my post conveyed. This separate issue is in ongoing email discussion between Ezzie and myself, and I apologize for the confusion.
>Just to let you in on a little secret, without going into too much detail, it will very likely end up on the desk of people who are among these designated drivers.
ReplyDeleteThen why did you post it on Cross Currents, which filters comments? Giving the designated driver's complete information would seem like a good idea, no?