BS: Obituary threads

Subject: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:37 AM

There seems to be some manufactured controversy over how people "should" or "be allowed" to post in obituary threads. It seems like way too much bandwidth in the obit thread for the pope is being chewed up by people who feel no one "should be allowed" to say anything negative about the deceased person in any obit threads.

So, for discussion sake, I offer here the dictionary definition of obituary:

Main Entry: obit·u·ary
Pronunciation: &-'bi-ch&-"wer-E, O-, -'bi-ch&-rE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ar·ies
Etymology: Medieval Latin obituarium, from Latin obitus death
: a notice of a person's death usually with a short biographical account

I also submit to you that there is no Netiquette rule that says any discussion of the recently departed celebrity in chat forums must be sad, mournful, serious, and completely positive.

Why do people think they should be able to control what someone says about the death of celebrity in chat forums? Why do people feel they have a god given right to restrict obituary threads so that they are used by people as nothing except a place to expressing their "mourning" for people they know nothing about because they have never even met them? Or whine around about people not making nice about celebrities they detested when they die?

This is the internet people. You want to "mourn" celebrities, go to church and light a candle. Start a "prayer" or "mourning" thread for them. You control freaks come out of the woodwork when these celebrity obituary threads get posted, and you flame anyone you deem not "reverential" about the deceased. What makes you think you have the right to dictate what gets said about dead celebrities, just because the thread title contains the word "OBIT" at the beginning?

Maybe dropping the choice of the OBIT delimiter would end the rancor about this? Or adding a delimiter for "mourning" or "prayer thread" or something would make the celebrity worshippers happy. I doubt it, of course, because it seems to me they just have to bitch about something.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: wysiwyg
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:41 AM

... they just have to bitch about something...

How nice that Guest has not fallen into the habit of having to have something to bitch about! :~)

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:53 AM

I'm with 'guest'...

But I tend to think that Obit, prayer, or mourning threads are pretty stupid...

Especially when they're posted about celebs that no one here KNEW... or pets...

"it seems to me they just have to bitch about something"
That does seem to be the definition of Mudcatter doesn't it... And watch here to see how they're gonna wail, and cry, and rend their clothing that someone DARES disagree with them...

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: wysiwyg
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:54 AM

Mudcat BS = Reactivity Central, disguised as "debating."

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: kendall
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:57 AM

I still say we should be able to post anything except nasty personal attacks. No one is forced to read the obits.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Amos
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 10:58 AM

Now, Wyzzy, don't let yerself get bitter. Reactivity is where you find it. Sometimes in the world, sometimes in the mirror.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:05 AM

"There seems to be some manufactured controversy"

WHAT ?? When did that start happening on the Mudcat ?? Have I been away ? Controversy ? Here ??? I'm shocked !!

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: The Beast of Farlington
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:11 AM

I say let both schools of thought have their say. It makes for a debate and is all the more interesting because of it.


You don't have to have met a person to have an opinion on them - especially if THEIR opinion is supposed to influence YOUR life - in the case of the Pope.

C'mon folks. It's only the internet. It's not like someone who disagress with you is going to come round to your house to flame you.

If you don't like the opinion either ignore it, disagree or go and do something else

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:13 AM

Hmmm...so no votes so far for restricting OBIT threads to reverential and mournful outpourings about the deceased?

Celebrity worshippers, why the silence?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:13 AM

"if THEIR opinion is supposed to influence YOUR life"

Who said it was?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: The Beast of Farlington
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:16 AM

Clinton

I think it is fair to say that the Pope's role included influencing, even directing, Roman Catholics on what they should and should not do. So that's where that came from.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: LilyFestre
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:22 AM

Sometimes I learn more about a person through the obituaries than I would have known otherwise.

As for pet obituaries, why should folks NOT post about their loss? Pets are often times very loved members of the family. If one of my 4-legged children were to die, I'd post it here....even if it were just for myself and the chance to vent to the world.

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST,jOhn
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:25 AM

hello,
i think GUEST is trying to make trubble.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:27 AM

hello jOhn,

yes i am.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST,jOhn
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:33 AM

oh, well stop it then.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:37 AM

Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:54 AM

DNR

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:55 AM

FO

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:56 AM

"Roman Catholics"
Oh... just them then? O.k... I guess that I can agree with...

"even if it were just for myself and the chance to vent to the world"
Seems sappy, melodramatic, and more than a little unballanced if ya ask me...

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: The Beast of Farlington
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 11:57 AM

Hey,Clinton, it was just an EXAMPLE :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:00 PM

katlaughing being on the side of those "obit threads for celebrities are sacred" who wanted me censored in the pope's obit thread for not being on papal sycophant bandwagon.

Hence her order to the lot of you not to respond to this thread.

Why exactly Sir jOhn is lecturing anyone to stop making trouble, well...that one I can't exactly figure out.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:02 PM

Guest said:

Hmmm...so no votes so far for restricting OBIT threads to reverential and mournful outpourings about the deceased?

Celebrity worshippers, why the silence?

Looks like another Mudcat regular is trolling, doesn't it?

Simple good manners tend to dictate some reluctance to blast the deceased if they're well-known but not in the legally definded role of a Public Figure. This means folks who are performers but who maintain private personal lives should probably be treated this way. Those who set themselves up as "examples" for others and who fall on hard times have already removed themselves from that polite consideration (when Jimmy Swaggart dies, for example, his life will be out there for all to view and poke fun at if they wish--he is his own worst enemy). Big office politicians fall into this category also. We had quite a healthy debate following the death of Ronald Reagan, as I recall, but that's because the debate was a continuation of the debate that took place while he was alive.

Perhaps what "GUEST" sees are members who want to run a "hagiography," which they may confuse with "obituary."

HAGIOGRAPHY: From the late Latin usage, "that which is written about the saints": the type and also the body of literature and knowledge based on written sources and relating to the lives, sufferings, and miracles of the saints.

Whatever the case, those who are inclined to be rude or to be polite will no doubt continue to follow their own dictates, so trying to parse out the subject headings would be a waste of time.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:03 PM

It's the narcissism of the pet and celebrity obituary threads, and the delusional expectation that they be able to control who gets to vent what towards whom, that gets to me.

Oh yeah, and the delusional expectation that we all care equally about dead pets and celebrities. There is that, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: LilyFestre
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:21 PM

It IS an open forum so folks are going to say just what they want, it's as simple as that.

Michelle

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:24 PM

Michelle, I have no problem with people speaking their piece. I am only annoyed when people try to censor others because they don't like the opinion being expressed. That is what happened in the pope obit thread. It was so bad, some idiotic clone even CLOSED DOWN THE THREAD!

THAT I had a problem with.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:30 PM

And it was subsequently re-opened, so what's yer beef now???

Or do you just need to whine and suck and rend your clothes?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: khandu
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:34 PM

"Genuine Chocolate Flavor
HERSHEY'S SYRUP
REFRIGERATE AFTER OPENING

Hershey's Chocolate Syrup tatse great in many ways. Use it for:
CHOCOLATE MILK- Stir 2 to 3 tablespoons into 8 oz. glass of cold milk
DESSERTS- Pour over ICE CREAM, cakes and other desserts
RICH HOT CHOCOLATE- Stir 2 tablespoons into 8 oz glass of milk and heat
RECIPES- This bottle contains 2 cups of HERSHEY'S syrup
See www.hersheys.com for recipes

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:37 PM

No Clinton, I don't just want to whine. I want to see the subject of what is appropriate in obit threads discussed, because of all the rancor in the pope's obit thread, the requests that I be censored, and the thread eventually being shut down by a clone.

So I started a thread to talk about what people feel is and isn't appropriate in obit threads.

Have a nice day Clinton. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:39 PM

Though I have pets, I probably won't ever run any dead pet threads, because it crosses a line I haven't really defined, and consequently I usually also don't often read dead pet threads. Your mileage may vary, so to speak, on what you think is a bit too personal or off-subject. I suppose, for example, if the famous pet of a famous mudcatter dies, that could change my decision to read about it. (Right now I'm not aware of any famous pets of famous mudcatters.)

This is not to say that I don't understand perfectly how excruciating it can be to have a beloved pet die.

How we interact with pets is something over which Western culture is still in conflict--for all that there is a $billions industry that caters to people and their pets, there is a sense that since pets aren't humans (though they're certainly treated like "people") they're not worthy of the attention. This may be one of those Germanic property rights hand-me-downs, or a Puritan ethic of some sort, when contrasted to cultures that worship animals, pets or not, and treat them with great reverence and even (historically, as with cats and birds) embalm them with great pomp and bury them alongside kings.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: open mike
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:42 PM

well, why do you think they call them O-BITCH-UARIES??
and how come no one has mentioned THAT yet??!!

and i often hear about the deaths of people, esp musicians
here before i hear about them on the news. I , as the previous
poster mentioned, also often learn about them, their lives, their
music, and i am glad that info is availalbe here.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:47 PM

I'm not sure why people feel allowed to act out on the internet in a way that would be different than how they would act in the 3-D world. It seems a little cowardly to me.

Unless you're prone to running into wakes and shouting - "I think the deceased was a jerk and a piece of s***. And I'm not going to tell you my name either. That's how strongly I feel about the subject".

No - people don't do that because they know that someone would punch them in the nose. But yet they feel justified when they do it on the net. Or maybe they just feel safe and powerful in the privacy of their room.

But hey - It's a great way to get of all those frustrations. You don't like your job - trash the Mudcat. Your wife chewed you out - trash the Mudcat. Someone cut you off in traffic - you get the idea. I have no control in my world but look how I can get everyone to dance to my tune on the net !

I just wish people would act the same in both worlds. Your views may vary.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: PoppaGator
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 12:55 PM

Is there just one GUEST who always takes a position contrary to the majority and then bitches incessantly when anyone dates to criticize him/her? Or are there more than one? Is it always the same dyspeptic person?

We'll never know, because this chicken hearted piece of shit doesn't have the commn courtesy to identify his/herself, even with a made-up fake name.

Why do I bother????

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:12 PM

Wesley, that's a lousy analogy. A much better one would be what's the crack about a dead celebrity down at the pub.

In no way is an obit thread in an internet chat forum the online equivalent of a person's wake or funeral, so your suggestion that dissing a dead celebrity online is the equivalent of running into their wake and dissing them is way over the top.

But I love this!

"well, why do you think they call them O-BITCH-UARIES??
and how come no one has mentioned THAT yet??!!"

Amen, brother.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:13 PM

Would you like to put in the "dead celebrity obit threads are sacred" column then PoppaGator?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:15 PM

khandu... time for a (Hershey's) KitKat! When you need a break.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:19 PM

Well, I am completely in favor of unrestricted discussion in obituary threads on public figures. Some of the threads on the Catholic Church lately have bordered on bigotry, and then it gets "iffy" - shades of the Ku Klux Klan anti-Catholic crusades of the 1920's.

I do think that common sense dictates that we use a different approach when the thread is about a member of our Mudcat community or someone close to our community.

I suppose that second category also applies to pets, but I have to admit that makes me cringe. I've lost a mother, two dogs and a cat (that I hated) since I joined Mudcat, and I wouldn't dream of starting an obituary thread for them. But I suppose if people are grieving and find comfort in expressing that grief, we should respect that.

But if you're grieving the loss of a public figure, I think you are going to have to put up with comments from those who criticize that figure.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:26 PM

"I do think that common sense dictates that we use a different approach when the thread is about a member of our Mudcat community or someone close to our community."

Of course. That is perfectly appropriate, because people here will actually know the deceased.

But the pope? Bob Hope? Ronald Reagan? Fluffy the Cat?

I don't think so. I have never, nor will I ever diss some member's personal obit thread. But I'm with others here who would never post an obit thread for one of my loved ones or beloved pets in an online chat forum, Mudcat or otherwise.

I realize people are creating websites as online memorials to their loved ones. I think that's pretty cool. If they want to do it for their pets too, more power to them. But chat forums are a different thing altogether.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:47 PM

There was a hilarious moment in the Obit John Paul II thread. It was when a guest started a post like this:

So, is this a thread about the pope or a thread about me?

and everone could see that nearly none of the last two dozen posts before that was about any guest.

I laughed out loud for I could see a narcistic ego wishing this thread was not about JPII but rather about it. That gives that outcry So, is this a thread about the pope or a thread about me? a whole new and unintended sense: After a too long period in which too many posts have been about a guest there was actually a period with posts about the dead pope and who laments that? Guessed!

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 01:48 PM

"Wesley, that's a lousy analogy"

Actually I disagree - I think it's the perfect analogy. What I was trying to say was there there is a big difference between what someone is willing to say as an unnamed guest on a forum and what they would be willing to say in person in the 3D world. It's a lot easier to be critical of the Pope on a forum than it is to say the very same things at the local Knights of Colombus Hall. One takes courage { or reckless abandon } and the other is - safe. I can understand why you might disagree. You are welcome to your opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:03 PM

Your analogy doesn't work, Wesley. It just isn't logical. I've been discussing the pope with a lot of people in the past week. I had an especially good conversation with a bunch of teenagers about in my high school library last Friday, in fact. I said much of what I've said here in that conversation.

Last time I checked, the US was still a free country, no?

Plenty of members here (and I include you in that list) are playing their own little thread hijacking game here, by once again trying to change the subject by making my choice to remain anonymous the issue.

Y'all go for it. I never say anything online I wouldn't say in 3D. Not ever. I'm a curmudgeonly sort of person, who has made it one of my missions in life to combat what Sloan Kettering Cancer Center refers to here...the Tyranny of Positive Thinking.

And then there is the fact that I love to make a point of communicating here and in my 3D life using pointed barbs, especially to pierce the arrogant buffoonery of the self-righteous, the self-indulgent, the narcissistic. I'm a wise ass.

If I receive as good as I get, that's fine with me. You won't ever see me whining about all the personal attacks on me here.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:08 PM

"once again trying to change the subject by making my choice to remain anonymous the issue"

If names don't matter than why have you used MY name both of the times you've responed to my posts ?

I'm less concerned than a lot of others about anonymous posters here at the Mudcat. But it does help if we have some idea who we're talking too. Even if you make up a name for this thread only. But it's your choice. So be it.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:11 PM

I've heard every argument there is about why I shouldn't be anonymous, Wesley. So why do you think insulting me will change the outcome of how I choose to post?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Wesley S
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:22 PM

It's not an insult - I'm expressing no personal views about you. I don't know you. Please don't infer an insult when none was intended. I'm expressing my views about posting in general - I'm NOT trying to change you. Stop being so sensitive and go live your life in peace. Life is too short to get caught up in these issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:23 PM

So why did you bring "this issue" up then Wesley?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Raptor
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 02:30 PM

When I put up a thread for my wife "OBIT my Wife" The mudcat community helped me throught it greatly!!!

Through one of the toughest times of my life they were there, Even those who've disagreed with me about everything else.

I don't regret it I apriciated it!

David

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Once Famous
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 03:44 PM

If someone who dies was a jerk in life, I reserve the right to say so.

Private or public.

For those that cling to Mudcat or other web forums as their reality, I certainly feel sorry for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:16 PM

Poppagator wrote there, about having arguments with unnamed GUESTs "Why do I bother????"

Why indeed?

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:22 PM

If he is arguing with me, it's a one sided argument.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:37 PM

Say now. Never thought of it that way. Even more reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:41 PM

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people" -- Eleanor Roosevelt

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:45 PM

This I Remember.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 04:52 PM

You are such a people person, gnu.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: open mike
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 05:07 PM

Joe, let me offer you belated condolences on your mother's passing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 05:20 PM

I'll take that as a compliment. For those of you who did not catch the ref, read her book of that title. It's a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 05 Apr 05 - 07:02 PM

Curently listening on radio to a discussion with an Aussie Academic about JP II being a control freak who used social control techniques from both the Hapsburgs & Communism.

He wrote a recent book
The Austrian Mind

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST,Occassional
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 12:21 PM

So, I wonder why those who complain that everyone isn't being duly reverent to the deceased in OBIT threads never put an oar in the water on this?

I would have been interested in hearing some arguments from the faction here who want OBIT threads to remain respectful of the deceased (ie only positive discussions about them).

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: wysiwyg
Date: 08 Apr 05 - 12:50 PM

I don't think there IS a "faction." I think there were a few individuals who personally found something disturbing, said their piece about it in the context of the thread it was in, and moved on. THEN someone else tried to make a big mess over it. That appears not to be working too well. :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: Chip2447
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 12:27 AM

What I find interesting/amusing is that if you use obit in the filter and search for all threads, you'll find that Obits for animals and the bogus obits typicallly receive more responses than do the death notices of real people.

Chip2447

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST,Bill the Collie
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 07:36 AM

GUEST 05 Apr 05

I didn't know Fluffy the Cat had died.

It wasn't me.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 11:11 AM

I believe you Bill. But I did see you lifting a leg on Fluffy's obit thread.

Woof.

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST,Amos
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 11:20 AM

Tyrannical sentimentality is the most obstreperous emotion I know -- the asserted regret, the enforced sorrow, the refused communication, the rejection of ideas because they sit not well with the broken heartedness of sentiment made large for melodrama's spitworthy sake.

But in human tradition we have a tradition to speak no evil of the dead and maintain a modicum of respect during their period of mourning. Perhaps airing the worst side of someone should occur in a different moment and thread than their fresh obituary.

That said, I have to love Jon Stewart who calls bullshit when bullshit is -- in this case the ghoulish bullshit of Republicans who try to create a PR image of the President aligned with the Pope when they were in fact on opposite sides of so many critical issues. For the laugh of the day, watch Jon Stewart tear a strip off them at http://movies.ziaspace.com/Pope_TV_Stewart.wmv.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Obituary threads
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 05 - 11:47 AM

In "human tradition"????

Man Amos, I think I'll send that one to Jon Stewart!

The "speak no ill of the dead" is a human SUPERSTITION. And a persistent one at that. Many, many folk superstitions become ensconsed in "tradition" to be given an air of legitimacy they otherwise don't have, much less deserve. Ensconcing something in "tradition" is how the status quo gets maintained, culutral beliefs get enforced as "truth", etc.

Eulogizing is for the funeral. These claims that world leaders shouldn't have their legacies scrutinized at the time of their deaths is pure bullshit, especially in the era of global media manipulation, and the web's ability to counter that manipulation by challenging the tyranny of mawkish sentimentalism always present and to the forefront of all public remembrances in this media obsessed age.

Nobody is going to come back here 8 months from now and generate the heat the current discussions of the pope have had, by saying "now that ample time has passed for grieving..."

This is the internet, and people are going to call a spade a spade. The expression of phony mourning by people in internet chat forums will NEVER occur unchallenged. Never. Especially when the public figure was a controversial, divisive personality like JPII. There are many American Catholics, especially on the progessive end of the spectrum, who didn't like this pope, period. The pope is, at the end of the day, Catholic. It is his job to bring global attention to human suffering, hence the "official" position on both Iraq wars, on ministering to the poor and suffering, etc.

But this pope didn't make a peep about the devastating effects of capitalist globalization and exploitation upon the planet and especially it's poorest inhabitants. No--he had to be a rabid anti-communist right wing ideologue instead.