Monday, January 5, 2015 9:08 AM
"I agree, Kathy.
When I get to my computer instead of this phone, I will put something out. I am appalled by the way the discussion is going and see no peace coming from this exchange."
Moderator Sent from my iPhone
KPW,
First, let's be clear, this is not a personal attack against you, but a response sharing the factual truth about your personal, appalling, demeaning, devaluing, marginalizing directive post on this important subject addressed by W5 listserv members who recognized the serious racial over & undertones, potential adverse impact and false education in Kathy S's response to Ra's original post. Since I was one of the posters, I must respond to your unjust threat of expulsion from this listserv, protecting my well thought out, educated and love of my own race, and our rights to more informed, educated free speech in response to Kathy S's post.
This morning, the first thing I saw on this listserv was your response (titled Re: Moderator Again) to Kathy S., early morning post wherein Kathy S. states "I did not start a fire on this thread, as Ra claims…"
I sent you a "thanks" for requesting this thread end based on what I saw as Kathy S again trying to add "more fuel to the fire" by continued insistence that she did nothing wrong and doesn't deserve the responses to her unjust statement which she perceived as "a character assassination", adding, "It should be clear that Americans can't have a civil discussion about race in a mixed-racial forum, because throwing bombs isn't the best way to start or engage in a civil discussion." Further, Kathy S's "BTW, I can't find the comment in the list archives that I was responding to when I posted my comment about characterizing Ra as having "hate in your heart." But my prayer for Ra was my response to a personal attack against me, which I believed to be attacking me as racist without cause." Kathy S. should have taken responsibility for what she said, period! Her comments were racist, not the responses. Kathy S can't find the post? Well here it is (12/11/2014, 7:24am):
FACT: "Ra, I pray that one day you will find a way to look at the world without hate in your heart." Kathy Sinzinger
I now hereby withdraw my "thanks" to you KPW, and apologize to the list members for not reading back through the many emails I received to get up to speed on any other posts regarding Kathy S's response to the original post.
I had not been in the W5 listserv since very early Sat morn, 12/13/2014, so I didn't see your blanket post regarding the e-thread until shortly before writing this. From reading you "ultimatum post" to those that responded to what was seen as and processed as a coded, cloaked racially intended statement disguised as sarcasm (Dec. 10, 2014, 7:32am) which reads:
"Well, I guess the answer to the problem posed in this column is that we need to fire all white cops, prohibit all white folks from being cops and then watch as cops never shoot a black person ever again. Problem solved! (Sarcasm intended.) Kathy Sinzinger"
Again, how insulting! Clearly, who does this leave to serve as police officers? Blacks, Asians, and other races, meaning they would lack the intelligence to perform the job, especially to continue the "Lynching by bullets/chokehold mentality without justifiable cause", and would just stand by in these situations and let crime run amok, not become judge and jury because the alleged suspect is of color?
Sarcasm: the use of words that mean the opposite of what you really want to say especially in order to insult someone, to show irritation, or to be funny 2) a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain; 3) a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual.
You stated you understood what Kathy S. was saying, with the definition provided, so please educate us "ignorant folks" as to what you considered she was saying that shouldn't have caused such concern, and in your words, "appalling" responses?
Kathy S's response was based on this quote from the first paragraph, original post, 12/10/2014:
"I would have thought that by now, there would be so much revulsion over the treatment of Black folks, especially the males, that there would be universal consensus that White cops, district attorneys and crooked judges are up to no good and cannot be trusted to so much as empty the chamber pot in grandmother's bedroom in the morning. But alas."
Question: What was found to be so objectionable about this statement made by the writer of this article to incur wrath by free speech as stated by Kathy S and made the responses "appalling" in your words?
"cooperator@starpower.net [WARDS] (W ARDS@yahoogroups.com)
WARDS@yahoogroups.com;
Wednesday, December 10,20149:42 AM
Gigi,
Blanket statements about how bad "white people" are -- which are made in this column - don't add anything constructive to this discussion of a police violence problem we are having in our country.
I'm sorry if you're offended by my comment. But I'm incredibly offended by the attitude of this columnist!
Kathy Sinzinger"
Well, in mine and thousands, millions of other civilized peoples of many shades opinions, the behavior of who have been identified as white people in various roles of law enforcement and the judicial system in these situations has been repulsive and violated standing laws to protect the civil rights of people through the criminal law process. Just like you are letting Kathy S stated her opinion(s) to object to the news article in question, I also have that right, which should especially not be taken away by another person of color, who likes their "comfort zone", and doesn't want to "rock the boat" which might affect the sanctity of their comfort zone, speaking directly to you. No attack, TRUTH!!!
Ultimatum: a final demand or statement of terms, the rejection of which will result in retaliation or a breakdown in relations.
These actions, denying justice in these situations which were/are seen by millions around the world, and millions, if not hundreds of thousands people with common sense as outright homicides, has not only have been declared wrong by African Americans, but also by Whites, Asians and other people of color if you have been reading the papers, online or watched these scenes unfold on the news on television. I guess you also find their "call to action" in support of putting "Light" on these injustices, no matter who caused them, and no matter their race "appalling", but have limited your scorn only to the People of Color who responded on the listserv, which is acceptable to you, showing your bias as to who is worthy to speak on this subject!!!
This is not the first time, for I can go back to your allowance of Brian's (not Bradford), racially charged, insulting, demeaning posts on the W5 listserv, against, Rob Ramson, Robert Brannum, Debbie Steiner, me and others. You drew the line when those under attack responded intelligently to unjustified allegations, personal attacks by Brian, but the same threat of removal, suspension/expulsion from the W5 listserv was against the ones, People of Color under attack by Brian!!!
Definition of a Moderator: someone in charge of discussion, meeting, etc., someone who is in charge of a discussion, meeting, etc. between people with different opinions.
As a moderator, "you must be prepared to maintain order if it becomes necessary. At the same time, you must moderate yourself so that you do not alienate users and cause your list to suffer as a result."
Seems in your role as moderator, you have pre-determined that intelligent, informed, educated, caring, protectors of People of Color interests/rights responses should be classified as "appalling", as opposed to those, especially Whites who post/respond on the W5 listserv.
I could see if posters/responders were cussing people out, posting falsehoods to justify their position, making unjustified racist comments, using the listserv to gain support for a cause which may not be valid, etc, were warned, then if continued, were put off the listserv.
But you attempts to place "controls on People of Color" on this listserv because for some, you would/are conveying that "speaking truth & placing light" to darkness" is not acceptable by People of Color, which is unfair and adversely affects our ability to have the same free speech of those you choose to protect from their alleged character assassinations which is illusionary, because they don't want to take responsibility given the justified responses given.
From the 1970's words of empowerment by the late, great Gil Scott Heron:
The revolution will not be televised, will not be televised, will not be televised, will not be televised. The revolution will be no re-run brothers; The Revolution will be live.
KPW, there is a live revolution going on now which the extensive reach of its breathe and width seems to escape you for whatever reason. Advances in technology enable the truth to be seen, and individuals of all races to be involved directly in person, by Tweets, etc, putting a very bright Light on the injustices against African-Americans and other people of color in this country that can/should no longer be denied, with demands for these injustice being corrected and stopped in its devastating tracks in the interest of justice for all.
In the tens of thousands at the March & Rally Sat, 12/13/2014, there were thousands of White people, along with other races standing side by side with us. Was there something wrong with their thinking to be counted in the voices for change on this horrible matter?
It doesn't escape me that you may take this informative document wrong, as a threat, and want to remove me from the listserv, which would be wrong. You chose to make the statement, "While I understood what she was saying, some used her statement to exacerbate racial tensions. It is recognized that tempers are flaring and there is unease over the issue of police, race, and violence due to recent high profile cases in the news.
Some on this listserv seemed to take advantage of ugly situations in America to spew their own version of racism.
As moderator, be warned that attacks against people on this listserv will not be tolerated. We all must be civil."
Wow!! Seems according to you, no matter how well written the response, your classification of "attacks" will not be tolerated, for your feel they are "uncivil", which it seems you feel we are in standing up for what's right and acceptance as intelligent human beings, not 3/5 of humans!
Let's be clear, "exacerbate racial tensions", "tempers are flaring", "to take advantage of ugly situations in America to spew their own version of racism"…, I AM NOT A RACIST! Deflecting because your perception of how People of Color should behave or respond is not universal! We are not uncivilized beings, weak minded, looking to jump on someone for any reason; but to the contrary, well informed, educated, committed People of Color!!! How dare you insult and portray us in a negative light when our people are getting killed without doing anything to justify this lethal, life-ending force?
Nor should you/do you have the right as moderator to attack well-meaning intentions to disguise your personal contempt for People of Color which you may deem as more intelligent than yourself and shouldn't be speaking out, though they know what they are talking about. Yes, I said it and experienced it from/by you.
Bringing what you termed "I am appalled" by the way the discussion is going and see no peace coming from this exchange. Without taking responsibility for what Kathy S said, would not have brought what you are calling "seeing no peace coming from this exchange". The issue was not seeking peace, the issue was to find a way that the discussion could end with those involved agreeing to disagree respectfully for each position, not siding with Kathy S's interpretation of responses being deflected to character assassinations, instead of the truths stated, and some of Kathy S's response confirmed this, apologizing but you chose to ignore.
Since you seem to have a problem being fair to all members of this listserv, I would be more than willing to take over as the moderator, bringing fairness, balanced responses to issues posted when necessary, showing respect to all!!!
Albrette "Gigi" Ransom
0 comments:
Post a Comment