Thank you for agreeing with me, Joe. We both trust him well enough as a forum operator. I’d say that the vast majority of people on here do!
What I was getting at in my last comment is that trust in one area of life doesn’t necessarily affect trust in another area.
Here’s an example that should make sense:
You’re sailing off the coast of East Bumf*ck and the Chief Engineer comes up and says “Wow, it’s so beautiful here in West Bumf *ck!”
Now, this incident might rightly reduce your trust in the Chief’s navigational skills (after all, he doesn’t know where in the f*ck you are!), but it wouldn’t affect your trust in his ability to run an engine.
That’s the scenario we have here. Some people expressed a lack of trust in John’s journalistic integrity, and that was conflated into a lack of trust in the forum.
John could exclusively write paid clickbait and still run a good forum, or he could be the world’s most respected journalist and run a terrible one. The two don’t have to correlate. Sure, they can, but they don’t have to.
I don’t have a dog in that fight. Never said their questioning was rational, just that it happened.
I’m not talking about rights, I’m talking about trust. There’s no right to free speech on a forum, but a feeling of censorship can absolutely reduce trust in the integrity of that forum, even if nobody has any rights to violate.
Note: I am not claiming that there’s any issue with censorship here. Just talking about forums and trust in general.
Errrr… try again, boomer. Your definition says systemic injustices… ‘Woke’ is used in political contexts, such as Gender Studies majors saying that ‘All White people should have no representation in government’ and ‘Black people ain’t done nothing wrong, ever’.
And it’s hilarious how you automatically assume I took offense to John’s labelling of deck officers.
Go take your statins, and make sure to screw your kids out of any potential inheritance.
In my experience on a regular commercial cargo ship, calling anybody on a ship “Chief” other than the Chief Engineer (even if they have it in their job title: i.e. Chief Steward, Chief Electrician, Chief Cook, etc.) within earshot of the Chief Engineer will likely cause the overhearing Chief Engineer to erupt in a fit of apoplexy directed at the offending party and anybody else that can hear and explain to the uninformed offender that there is only one Chief on the ship and that is the person screaming at them. This lesson seldom has to be repeated.
Boomer? I looked that up and it is a person born after 1945+. Children of the returning folks who fought or worked during WWII. Now used as a blanket insult at times by younger generations rather than reasonable and logical discourse.
History shows the decline of reasonable discussion and the increase of divisive labeling is a good indication of a declining country prone to civil war or revolution. Germany of the 30’s is the best known example but there are other more recent examples.
Back in the 60s/70s, an era of riots and bombings, the pejoratives were hippies/longhairs versus chauvinists/squares. (I’m sure I missed some other choice terms). Not to mention the fine gradations of peaceniks, hawks, and chicken-hawks.
That time too was one where much of the populace seemed reduced to quivering masses of resentment, taking immediate umbrage to any perceived slight.
That era has parallels to this one: each was a conjunction of rapidly changing technological, social, industrial, and monetary sectors, as well as sexual mores, during and following an unpopular war. The result was the uprooting of old norms, and dissatisfaction with old authorities, setting up an antagonism between younger people and older.
Nothing new. The same thing happened in the 1920s, during the aftermath of WW1 and the Spanish Flu. Some nations survived it (USA). Some didn’t. As you say…
The best account of what happened in Germany/Austria that I’ve read is by Stefan Zweig, who actually lived through it all: war, pandemics, inflation, the rise of political strongmen and conspiracy theories. But there are major differences between now and then.
I have thought the same but recognise that today those arguing have more weapons and can carry them freely. In the 60s and 70s my center fire rifles as well as shotguns were limited to 5 shots and you sure couldn’t sling them over your shoulder and walk down town without being stopped by police.
The name calling was similar true, but I don’t recall mass school, shopping center etc. shootings being prevelant. Its a bit more volatile now.
I agree. My impressions as a child growing up in America from about 1965 to 1974 were of non-stop rioting, bombing, kidnappings and assassinations. But the body count was far less than the mass shootings we have today.
The situation back then was considered intolerable. People warned that society was disintegrating. But far more people die now from mass shootings and much of society just shrugs.
This sums up my opinion of both threads. Image hearing about multiple rapes, horrible abuses towards innocent people at a local restaurant close to your house, you click on a forum for the employees at that establishment & they are arguing about the job titles of the accused rapist? The rapes are chalked up into the category of serving fries. You people fck’ed up.
Since this discussion has gotten so literary, and often pedantic over word usage. It reminded me of a book we had to read in a college English class. It was “Resurrection” by Tolstoy. In it a young noble rapes a young house maid, who becomes pregnant and then suffers a whole series of misfortunes as one can imagine an unwed mother would face in 1800s Russia. A decade later he gets to be on the Jury that sentences her for her life of crime. He visits the jail and becomes so disillusioned with the state of injustice in the world, that he never experiences in his aristocratic life, so he gives it all up and travels with her to Siberia. I think that’s how it ends, I don’t remember finishing the book.
Anyway my point is, we sit here behind the safety of our phones or computers complaining about small issues of word usage, while out there, there are real issues of injustice that people face. There are such bigger problems to solve in this world, and we want to debate over the pomp and circumstance of titles. Whether it was sexual assault or rape, or maybe just old fashioned workplace sexual harassment taken too far, I guess we won’t know because not enough journalists are putting their eyes on these issues. Not enough politicians are bugging the Navy or MARAD to bring change. Not enough Mariners and industry leaders are bugging the politicians to create the economic conditions that would make it the thriving type of workplace that it could be, for people of all backgrounds. With all the big ticket items war, poverty, hunger, drugs, human trafficking, etc., out there you’d think we’d be able to make this an easy one and create some incentives for better gender diversity on our ships, and less harassment. This is obviously a global problem and it’s muchhh worse in other nations, but We can still be better.
I find this very ironic because it is you who sits safely behind your computer NOT falsely associated with a serious crime. Had it been YOUR name tagged to this serious accusation, perhaps you wouldn’t find it ‘pedantic’ or a ‘small issue of word usage’.
As far as the meat of the story, an accusation was made, the accused was removed from his post (in very public and embarrassing fashion no less) I’m assuming pending an investigation. What more do you want?