Quote:

Hmm--let's say that I had tried to get you to embrace, oh, say Eminem, and you told me that you didn't care for him. But if I were passionate about him, I might tell you something like, "Trying to run down Eminem is so very silly. [...] At the risk of offending you, I have to say that you are only making yourself look stupid [...]" Now--if you agree that not liking or understanding Eminem doesn't make you an ignoramus, then I hope you can also see that someone who doesn't like or understand Joyce isn't necessarily stupid.



There is an important difference or oversight here between your analogy and what happened on the arruginated thread.

Did I claim that not liking or understanding Joyce makes you an ignoramus?

I did not.

However, to proclaim that trying to understand Joyce is a complete waste of time (as one poster asked facetiously, and another saw fit to reiterate: "And trying to make Joyce make sense serves us how, exactly?) is a horse of an entirely different colour.

To summarily foreclose the possibility that a book of the significance of Ulysses has anything to offer without, evidently, having read it, is the worst kind of ignorance. Now that truly is to content yourself "with a place in the lower intellectual orders."

Quote:

[..] and if that doesn't change, I think that once again you will not be welcome here.



What are you doing? You have no right to threaten me. Do not abuse your position as moderator. We have had a difference of opinion on a public domain message forum. I have not broken the law.

Surely you would not want to edit my voice from this forum simply because you disagree with me or dislike my tone? Particularly when I have explained this tone as jocose banter, apologised, and nevertheless had a certain cretinous yahoo tell me to "f**k off" without retaliating.

I may take a dim view of stupidity, but I would never deny someone the freedom to continue expressing it.

This brings me to my next point.

In the interests of your position as moderator, it is important that you hear candid feedback.

As you say, some of the posters here are intelligent. I enjoy their repartee; and their rich lexical palette. It is for this reason that I must tell you that to the cerebral hum of these posters' threads your saccharine bromides and mawkish sentiments are so like unto a meddlesome old aunt in a home-knit cardigan who would like AWADtalk to be a conduit for the bibble-babble of crossword biddies.

Personally, I find this smothering. Your flock will here no doubt here fly to your defence, but they know exactly what I am talking about.

And yet however much I would prefer the cold meshing gears of logical syntax, I have tried to accept your shortcomings. I only ask that you accept mine.