 |
| National Museum of African-American History and Culture, Washington, D.C. |
"What makes a young, educated person from Chicago do this?" my wife said at breakfast Saturday morning, not needing to explain that the person in question is accused murderer Elias Rodriguez, and the "this" is the killing of two young Jews, Sarah Lynn Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, both Israeli embassy staffers, in front of the Jewish Museum in Washington D.C. on Wednesday night.
"Because he's worked up over the Palestinian situation," I replied. "He's so upset about innocent people being killed that he kills innocent people. That's human nature."
Especially when they have no access to the powerbroker decision-makers profiteering from their actions. The mass suffering and death also human nature.
ReplyDeleteYoung, educated people can be stupid. So can old educated people. Stupid is as stupid does.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if he is really worked up over the Gaza situation or he is just antisemitic and that is just an excuse.
ReplyDeleteThis will seem so obvious, I know. Youth and the 80-year distance (time span?) from World War II. Those of us with a direct connection to WWII through our parents wartime service or through European relatives that remained behind to suffer are quickly departing, obviously. Forget the WWII generation. They're 99.9% gone. They've shuffled. We in our 60s and 70s grew up listening to them and now WE are exiting stage left, to paraphrase the great philosopher Snagglepuss. Many of us have no extended family left to track down through Ancestry.Com, to go visit, because our European families ended rather abrubtly before 1945. My rambling point here: The passage of time blurs reality, especially for the very young and naive. Especially when reality is manipulated by the clever and charismatic. No matter how many museum visits and classroom speakers they are exposed to...they are still young and so very far removed. And so many among them are led like sheep. So easily led like fatted sheep. They just don't know. This gutless kid who shot that couple had no clue about anything that went before or any of the issues. About any of this. And why would he? He probably never heard ANYTHING pertaining to this subject mentioned in HIS home while growing up. Why would he? That's it right there.
ReplyDeleteDo the math. More than 16 million served during WWII.
DeleteLast time I checked, there were 66,000 still alive.
Four out of every thousand. We're losing thirty a day.
So 2024 was the last big Normandy commemoration
I am increasingly inclined to think that “anonymous“ should not be a choice for posting comments. At least make people go to the trouble of thinking up a nom de plume or a nom de guerre. .
ReplyDeleteI'm open to that. Anybody else? Thoughts?
DeleteI agree; “anonymous” is annoying and somewhat cowardly.
DeleteAbsolutely. I prefer real names. I think making people stand behind their words cuts down on snide comments, and snarky remarks. I'd argue it makes people actually think about their remarks before posting. Really helps follow comment threads too!
DeleteI suppose there's some argument for allowing occasional anonymity. So how about named comments on top and readers have to scroll down to see others who aren't willing to be public with their remarks? Call it a carrot vs stick approach.
Yes. Doesn't need to be a Real ID.
DeleteI agree
DeleteI agree. If they respond to you, they should have the courage to use their real names, no aliases.
DeleteYes, I sometimes forget to put in my name and end up posting anonymously. I'd be happy not to have that option.
DeleteAgree. If someone can write a post, they can come up with some name.
DeleteI have posted as anonymous many times I have also posted under many names I have posted under my name today I'm posting is Charles does anybody know who Charles is no I didn't think so people post under a variety of pseudonyms and nicknames.
DeleteNo real way of knowing who anyone on this comment board is nor do I care I don't understand what the big deal is get rid of the comments it's just a bunch of people that like what you write I don't think they'll like it any less if they can't comment on it then there's the people that sometimes don't like what you write and you don't publish their posts very often only occasionally so that you can be snide to them call them stupid I like your writing I'm a big fan I come to your events or when you're going to be speaking at an event you're nice in person because the anonymity thing which you also take advantage of is gone and you have to be nice whatever
Yes, no more anonymous.
DeleteWell, these postings motivated me to learn how to post as something other than "anonymous" -- sorry I've simply been too lazy to figure it out.
DeleteCharles, you described the comments section as "just a bunch of people that like what you (NS) write", and don't understand what the big deal is about "anonymous" posting. I believe you are underestimating this comment board in a couple of ways. First, the comments board clearly has value to the members, and second, the way commenters interact and exchange thoughts has been evolving, too. Credit for this rests solely on the moderator, NS. I cant imagine the work involved in screening our posts, even to the point of privately replying to a commenter if they went a bit overboard, and suggesting the comment be toned down and resubmitted. Regular commenters have shared enough personal asides that others recognize them, and remember. All while maintaining an atmosphere of civility and respect. (again, credit to the moderator... I can only imagine the work involved in fostering this slice of community).
DeleteI recognize a healthy group when I see one, because I was a group therapist for many years. The comments forum has become an online community for some, and today one of its members, Rick W, directly challenged the "group norm" regarding anonymity. And our skilled group leader threw it back to the group in an open-ended way, for discussion. Which we are now doing.
I've enjoyed watching this process unfold. I never expected to find such a space online, and half expected it to devolve as most community message boards do. But so far, this group has pleasantly surprised me. I am grateful to Mr S and all of you for this.
As Monica M pointed out, its hard to follow and respond to 'anonymous' posts, and as you pointed out, the name doesn't need to be real. I don't think anyone should engage beyond their comfort level, so I like your suggestion of a fake name over "anonymous" . If there are 2 or 3 anonymous posts on the same day, I don't know if its 1 person or 3 "talking", either. Yet, on the other hand, when I first started reading EGD, I never made a comment. When I finally spoke for the first time, I was anonymous. It took a while.
I've observed members of this community directly interact and sometimes confront another in this comments section, and it was done respectfully. That instills a sense of safety for me because I know I can present a different perspective and won't be attacked. I might be challenged, but I won't be attacked. That's a big difference compared to some other message boards.
Like the breakfast conversation between Mr S and his wife... just because there are no answers to a question, it doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it.
I was catching up on previous posts and saw "Only comments using a name of some sort will be considered" under the Comment box. Hallelujah! I've wished you would do that for years.
DeleteI disagree with Monica, though. (Obviously, since I don't use my real name.) Facebook and Twitter have proven that plenty of people are more than happy to post obnoxious stuff using their real names. Plus, there's no way to assure that someone using what seems like a real name is actually that person, anyway. The reason I'd prefer people use a name or pseudonym is that, if they're consistent in doing so, we can associate their comments with what they've said before. That's not all that important, of course, but I think it can be interesting.
A suggestion, though. I've thought for a long time that many folks use "Anonymous" because it's the default option that shows up when you go to comment. You need to click the little arrow next to it in the comment box to access the other options. Also, folks might not know that you can put in whatever name you want under "Name / URL" and you don't need a URL.
An additional line like "If you don't want to sign in via Google, you can use whatever name you like after clicking on 'Name / URL'" might be helpful. Though I suppose you'll find that to be overdoing it.
Sure, use another name. I'm curious why anyone would choose to do so if they stand by their comment. If you think you have anonymity, sorry to disappoint, although I doubt Mr. Steinberg's readers go after anyone with a different opinion.
DeleteMy objection to the "anonymous" option is simply that when multiple authors can share the same default anonymous ID, it makes it difficult to follow who is saying what, or who is responding to what.
DeleteI appreciate the folks who add a timestamp to pinpoint which poster they're referring to (e.g. "the anonymous from 11:11 a.m."), but we shouldn't have to rely on that. Really, just pick a name, any name, and that's all you need. I think the system will tell you if you're attempting to use a .sig name that's already in use by someone else.
Jill: Well put. The bulk of comments get posted. Occasionally one of my lunatic readers will become active, and flood the section with insane remarks. But those are easily batted away. It's been a number of years since I've been tempted to shut them off. So maybe I'm becoming hardened. Yes, it's a small community. A few dozen, at best. But it seems very important to them, and they certainly add something — I know I often benefit from interesting perspectives, persuasive arguments and new information, to say nothing of those who point out typos that I'd missed.
DeleteReady to see "anonymous" become no longer optional.
DeleteCommented on this issue earlier, but in the wrong place.
Just scroll on down.
I have commented as anonymous in the past, just basically due to not knowing how to create a user name, and (sorry) being too lazy to look into it. I do agree that anonymous going away would not be a bad thing. If you have an opinion, have a screen name to define who you are.
DeleteSome anonymous comments are indeed valuable. The trouble is, when you're deleting dozens of mass ravings, you can't weigh each comment for its value.
DeleteWe may have become inured to senseless killings committed by otherwise promising young Americans, yet personalized details of the act still tend to weigh on us. For me, it was that the murderer went into the museum afterwards and accepted kindness from Jewish attendees who remained in the building. Totally senseless, but my mind still searches for an explanation.
ReplyDeleteIt's all just too stupid. How could killing two obviously innocent and powerless people somehow associated with Israel possibly help the cause of innocent and powerless Palestinians. It seems violence is always the answer. Some portion of a population kills several of our kin, we retaliate by killing their kin and destroying their homes, whether it be in Gaza or Afghanistan or Iraq or Viet Nam or Korea. And now in Washington. It makes no sense.
ReplyDeletejohn
Educated people can behave just as irrationally as uneducated people.
ReplyDeleteThe masters of war hide in their mansions after getting the hollow self-righteous all riled up.
ReplyDeleteHave been annoyed by the anonymice for quite some time. Like a live mouse problem left untreated, it's getting worse. I'm assuming there are several of them, making it difficult to keep them straight. And to know who you're mousing with, and who's mousing with you.
ReplyDeleteAt the very least, they can have serial numbers. Or just make them be named.
It's not all that hard to learn how to sign up, and then to pick out a clever handle.
I’m for no anonymous.
ReplyDeleteWell! Thank you! I finally figured out how not to be anonymous anymore by getting a little help from the comments above. I HATED being anonymous all the time. I love the comments. If I read NS early in the day I might go back later to see if more have been added. I did that today and here I am. Thank you all again!
ReplyDeleteWe seem to have a consensus. (Though I'm not reading the anonymous comments anymore, so they might be opposed but, eh, so what?) This makes the screening process so much easier too. Thanks for the suggestion.
DeleteI'm also troubled with "Anonymous" entries and find it ironic that after Rick Weiland posted his objection, there was only one "Anonymous" posting. And it could not have been, serious or not, more hilarious, "I agree; “anonymous” is annoying and somewhat cowardly."
ReplyDeleteI have every confidence that whatever NS does will be in the interest of all of us who read EGD regularly. My message to those anonymous contributors, your comments go in one ear and out the other.
Too.many. guns. Too.easy.access.
ReplyDeleteWould have been equitable, even just polite, to look at my reply explaining why I welcome your blog and its anonymity. Maybe Grizz and some of the others would have reconsidered their position. Maybe not. Instead Trump logic beats rationality.
ReplyDeleteAs Jakash pointed out, he and everyone with the clever handles remain virtually anonymous, so what's the point?
The point is that I receive bunches of anonymous emails — 25 just now — from lunatics. I don't want to read them.
DeleteMr. S, I understand your health and event stress of the last few years could make you not want to read every comment .
ReplyDeleteFreaky to read, "At the very least, they can have serial numbers." No one else have a visceral reaction?
Okay. Maybe serial number is not the right word choice here. More like a "VIN number" on a car. Or better yet, a product key, which is usually not embedded in the software but is assigned to a specific user with a right to use the software. The software will function only if a potential user enters a valid product code.
DeleteThat one is even more appropriate in this instance. A set of numerals, or even a letter-number combination. Or just Anonymous 435 or Anonymous 7734. Anything that would be a unique ID and differentiate you from all the other users.
Maybe it's an incorrect assumption...and I sincerely hope so...but it clearly sounded to me like you' were referring to Nazi tattoos. JFC. As someone who's seen the real thing, on live human beings, that strikes me as being quite a stretch. As was the reference to the health of Mr. S. If you can't play by the rules and create a new name, then just don't play.
No, because I don't think it was meant the way I believe you see it. Have a name, a fake one if you feel the need, but I like to know who is writing what.
DeleteI chuckled when I saw the first post from FormerlyAnonymous. He/she/they reiterated their distaste for retiring the "anonymous" option, yet complied with group consensus by creating an identifiable handle. Their ID will work. I also think formerlyAnonymous deserves points for creativity - continuing to make his/her/their point, despite not agreeing with a change on the message board. Having a sense of humor is a good thing!
DeleteMy health? It's because I'm not the crazy police. And it's important to keep the poison out. And there's no point in it.
Delete"Anonymous" posting has been a fixture of the internet since day 1. I know, because I was there long before the internet. In fact, I worked for the company that, long, long ago, wrote drivers for the very first generation of machines connected to the ArpaNet (yes, Arpa, not Darpa: ARPA was first). The argument for keeping anonymity is that without that kind of protection kids who want to know about things their parents would rather they didn't. Gay kids. Trans kids. Kids who don't WANT their parents' lousy religion. There's a long list.
ReplyDeleteOf course I'll comply (and I'll point out that I am, and have always done so, posting as "ivanlan9"). But I disagree that eliminating "anonymous" is an improvement.