tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post7830273322282480871..comments2024-03-28T23:38:22.511-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: If You Can't Say Anything Nice (Come Over Here and Sit by Me)Melissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-76548273699069670682013-12-10T12:50:52.884-08:002013-12-10T12:50:52.884-08:00Grazing by, thanks for that link. I like it a lot...<br />Grazing by, thanks for that link. I like it a lot and I had wonder why there was no defense of snark by Scocca. From the Barnes piece:<br /><br />"Snark and Smarm are synonyms, they aren’t antonyms, they aren’t opposites. They’re both insincerity. One is intended to deceive and the other is intended to derail and trivialize. Neither are honest. Both are lies. One is a sin of commission and the other is a sin of omission but they’re both sins. The difference is that Snark is desperately lonely because it’s in a state of permanent rebellion. Smarm knows exactly what it wants. It wants you to be fooled by it. But Snark isn’t some purveyor of truth telling. It’s lazy criticism. Smarm can be taken down easily and Scocca does so with a number of examples and he’s not explicitly Snarky about it. He makes arguments and supports them. He tells me why Smarm is bad and, at the end, I understand. So why is Snark necessary? How is it anything more than comment section reactionary stuff? How is it valid? It’s not. Again, Snark is intended to discredit and derail, never to address.<br /><br />He conceded all his rhetorical territory for the simple reason that arguments against Snark, however imperfect, are real and substantive. This seemed to amount to “but look, they’re ever bigger jerks.” Please, no one’s buying that. You have to give me something here because otherwise I’m going to continue to think of Snark as basically just ressentiment.<br /><br />What’s the best way to have better discourse? Discuss the topic, whatever it is, without introducing fallacies into the mix and without seeking to falsely moralize or derail discussion with appeals to collective cultural belief.<br /><br />As with Snark, what we need is not some imagined return to some previous state of civility, what we need is better arguments based on evidence, good writing, precise thought.<br /><br />Address the thing itself, always."<br /><br />Always. Makes me want to be a better writer.Melissa Westbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12588239576000641336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-60059874399610072742013-12-10T12:05:23.482-08:002013-12-10T12:05:23.482-08:00Melissa - a sincere "thank you" for shar...Melissa - a sincere "thank you" for sharing this piece, and your good curation/commentary on it. Very insightful, and occasionally uncomfortable to read ... but that means it's maiking me think about myself construcively. Thanks again.Joe Wolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16747791661117554332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-78430644239649337372013-12-10T09:57:26.228-08:002013-12-10T09:57:26.228-08:00Then you might enjoy James Barnes' response to...Then you might enjoy James Barnes' response to said gawker's article.<br /><br />http://thoughtcatalog.com/james-b-barnes/2013/12/a-response-to-on-smarm-by-gawker/<br /><br />I find the whole thing just a bit funny and rather fussy. Puts to mind two old biddies at each other while the world moves on. I think I'll just stick with Strunk and White.<br /><br />grazing by<br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-28446696081917927502013-12-10T05:45:49.571-08:002013-12-10T05:45:49.571-08:00For two fine examples of the above tribalism consi...For two fine examples of the above tribalism consider Steve Sunquist and Peter Maier.<br /><br />From 2007-2011 this duo voted with the superintendent always while often rejecting data that clearly showed the opposite of the superintendents proposed action.<br /><br />The voters said "be gone" and now the all tribal guys sit on the State Board of Education (PM) and the Charter School Commission (SS).<br /><br />Both were appointed to these positions not elected.... that is democracy for ya (I guess). <br /><br />-- Dan DempseyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-59624419322254097522013-12-10T05:35:09.559-08:002013-12-10T05:35:09.559-08:00Why can't people tell the WHOLE story and not ... Why can't people tell the WHOLE story and not the one that will suit their agenda/purposes? <br /><br />====<br />Because today an actual search for truth and a best path decision runs counter to the blatant tribalism so popular today.<br /><br />"Support my team or be gone" has replaced any search for truth.<br /><br />-- Dan DempseyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-76259059011136273862013-12-09T19:52:54.148-08:002013-12-09T19:52:54.148-08:00Whatever is the opposite of a troll, this is it.
...Whatever is the opposite of a troll, this is it.<br /><br />Long GoneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-59749756962243704202013-12-09T19:45:51.287-08:002013-12-09T19:45:51.287-08:00I mean this without smarm or snark, but reading th...I mean this without smarm or snark, but reading this post calls to mind the entire Seattle TFA PR routine. "Oh HOW can you be so mean to these idealistic, awesome young best and brightest?!" Forget about all the crappy ole farts hiding behind the curtain.mirmac1https://www.blogger.com/profile/10183460709639638172noreply@blogger.com