First of all, thank you for your response and approaching this in a reasonable way. I just wanted to address each point separately. I don't wholly disagree with you, but I think there are some things worth expanding on.
Greyce wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:00 pm
It's your clear and deliberate generalization of "the community", "all" of us. All against one. This is coming off as victimization and I don't agree with it. I don't know, speaking as genuinely and honestly as possible, who you were appealing to while blaming all of us.
Actually, I think by using the word "community" I am actually speaking to a smaller selection of people than most people are when they generalize and use the word "city". I've been actively trying to stop using the word "city" because there are probably so many humans and supernaturals in this city who don't even know what goes on in this paper or in the streets and go about their lives none the wiser, and wouldn't care if they did know.
And when I said "all of you" I meant the people who responded to the thread, because you all had one thing in common: You took what I said and made it about something it wasn't. Every comment (except Gypsy's) made the assumption that I posted what I posted because I was upset or hurt by what Stryker said about Alise. They made this thread about something emotional and personal, when that's not what was intended. And that may have partly been my fault.
When I said "this is what's wrong with the community" I didn't mean that the community is only negative and wrong. I just mean that this specific behavior, this specific act, is a facet that is wrong with the community. I do realize now that to say "this is what's wrong" makes it sound like this is the only thing that's wrong, and it isn't. But I also don't mean that the community is strictly wrong, evil, cruel, etc. etc.
I should have said "this is one of the things that's wrong with the community." And that I stand by. Such acts are one of the things wrong with the community.
In trying to be succinct, people misunderstood the post to be about my feelings and emotions towards Alise and/or Stryker, when that couldn't be further from the truth, and I misspoke in saying "this is what's wrong with the community."
To me, it was clear what I was referring to because I specifically said "words like this prove..." but maybe that wasn't enough. I take the fault for any misunderstanding concerning those things.
Greyce wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:00 pm
Your delivery here was inflammatory, just like the comment you reacted to. You're grieving, and I understand that this is a hard time for you. This is not an easy event to cope with and you might need someone or something to blame. "The community" is a big target, and you're going to isolate yourself by going after it.
My delivery was not meant to be inflammatory and I'm not trying to blame anyone for anything. In fact, who committed the act and who they were talking about isn't even relevant to the point I was trying to make. Regardless of who said it and who it was said about, I would have made this point. I've seen it happen on many an obituary, from people I don't like to people that I loved, and every single time I thought it was something that reflected negatively on our community as a whole and something that drives people out and stops people from coming. This was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
Greyce wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:00 pm
What I was saying, before others tacked on, was that if you want to change what you perceive as being wrong with the environment and society around you, then you have to bring that change. You chose to take what was said and come here, to a place that is literally titled 'SOAPBOXES', to vent your outrage and say that those who leave us are better off for it.
This is the part of your initial statement that had me answer all of the responses in the way I did. In every single response, either an assumption was made about what I was doing (for example, you flat out said I was "shaming" Stryker, and I wasn't, as stated above), or people were calling me names ("morality police" and "self righteously indignant") for reasons that were so far off the original reason from what I posted.
Every response after yours, made the assumption that what I said was in defense of Alise. That I was upset with Stryker for saying mean things about Alise. That if I knew Stryker's side, maybe I wouldn't have attacked him. Literally every person had a reference to "both sides of the story."
I've already stated that neither side of the story is relevant in what I am speaking out against, so I won't belabor the point.
Here, again, you say that I came to vent my outrage, which, again, is an assumption. I don't feel outraged by what Stryker said to Alise. I don't feel anything towards it. What I feel is what I've stated many times at this point: That the act that was committed is a negative one for our community and drags us down.
Greyce wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:00 pm
You could have responded differently, and it might have garnered a different reaction. You could have taken the opportunity to remind people that an obituary is a place for remembrance and mourning. You could have spoken privately with the individual involved to explain that it hurt you to read that, and while he is entitled to feel that way, you would prefer it be removed. You could have responded by opening up about your grief to appear to those who have also felt it. To start a kind of courtesy that will prevent this from happening in the future.
But you did none of those things. You took up arms, you came here, created this thread, and pointed fingers.
While inconsiderate, I don't think Stryker's post was cruel. The difference between inconsideration and cruelty is the intent. I don't think it was said with the intent to hurt those left behind by Alise, but I also don't agree with the fact it was done in the first place. We have a WAYT thread for that reason. Had you started a movement to keep negative and painful posts out of obituaries, without pointing fingers and throwing blame, I would have supported you.
Maybe that's worth a moment to think about.
I'm sorry for your loss.
Here, I do disagree. Cruelty isn't only doing something with the intention of harming, but doing something and not caring whether or not it harms anyone.
I wanted to publicly state that I thought that the act that was committed is one of the things wrong with the community, and a small part of the reason that it has stagnated. Then, people chose to focus on something that wasn't the point of my statement and here we are now. Maybe I should have expanded on my post, but I thought that specifying that it was "words like this" that "prove the people who choose to leave are the ones who are better off" clarified that my issue wasn't with Stryker, but his words. The act committed.
Again, I don't know Stryker, so I couldn't say if this was characteristic of him or a one off or anything, so I wouldn't shame him or make fun of him or insult him.
I wouldn't do those things anyway if I did know him, just vehemently and publicly tell him that his actions are cruel (if he repeatedly did cruel things).
In trying to make up for the lack of clarity in my attempt to be succinct, I've probably over corrected and become too verbose. I apologize for that.
And yes, it's worth more than a moment to think about for the future.
Thank you.