It seems to me that there's been a lot more irritability since lock down started.
This virus situation has likely made things worse, but the tone of the Ship has been in decline for some time, IMO. Likely mirroring the general frustrations in the rest of people's lives.
I agree about the decline. IMO, it started before Trump and Brexit. .way before. I don't have access to stats, but my general impression is that the demographic is aging here. And speaking as a retired person, life often presents challenges in retirement years that can distract from light-heartedness and general tomfoolery which was the tone of the ship when I joined 18 years ago. There were days when I laughed until my ribs hurt.
It seems to me that there's been a lot more irritability since lock down started.
This virus situation has likely made things worse, but the tone of the Ship has been in decline for some time, IMO. Likely mirroring the general frustrations in the rest of people's lives.
I agree about the decline. IMO, it started before Trump and Brexit. .way before. I don't have access to stats, but my general impression is that the demographic is aging here. And speaking as a retired person, life often presents challenges in retirement years that can distract from light-heartedness and general tomfoolery which was the tone of the ship when I joined 18 years ago. There were days when I laughed until my ribs hurt.
Not doubting your thoughts, but noting the sharpest change in the Ship that I noticed was in the transition from the old to the new one. No only in losing members, but attitudes generally just seemed to change.
I don't know, though, memory is a strange thing and much more changeable and variable than most think. Even those who are aware can fall prey to its vagaries.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
I think you're right that the sense that what unites us is greater than what divides us is being lost. The sense that however great our disagreements, they're not of ultimate importance.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
But some of the voices we've lost here on the Ship are those voices that don't want protestants at their communion rail.
And I'm wondering if there's a sense in which we don't mind what people think as long as they don't have the power to do anything about it.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
But some of the voices we've lost here on the Ship are those voices that don't want protestants at their communion rail.
Speaking as a Lutheran, this is intensely wrong and rude as well. Our Catholic brothers (Orthodox, etc. etc. etc.) do not practice closed communion because they don't "want" someone at their communion; they do so because they believe they must, often because they believe that harm may come to those who approach unprepared. This may or may not be wrong in fact (argue it out on a different thread), but it is the opposite of uncaring. It is the same impulse that causes someone to say, "You probably don't want to be taking that Tylenol at the same time you're having wine."
You may disagree with their facts, but should not impugn their motives.
It seems to me that there's been a lot more irritability since lock down started.
This virus situation has likely made things worse, but the tone of the Ship has been in decline for some time, IMO. Likely mirroring the general frustrations in the rest of people's lives.
I agree about the decline. IMO, it started before Trump and Brexit. .way before. I don't have access to stats, but my general impression is that the demographic is aging here. And speaking as a retired person, life often presents challenges in retirement years that can distract from light-heartedness and general tomfoolery which was the tone of the ship when I joined 18 years ago. There were days when I laughed until my ribs hurt.
Not doubting your thoughts, but noting the sharpest change in the Ship that I noticed was in the transition from the old to the new one. No only in losing members, but attitudes generally just seemed to change.
I don't know, though, memory is a strange thing and much more changeable and variable than most think. Even those who are aware can fall prey to its vagaries.
Yes, agree that the tone also changed with the new format.
But some of the voices we've lost here on the Ship are those voices that don't want protestants at their communion rail.
Speaking as a Lutheran, this is intensely wrong and rude as well. Our Catholic brothers (Orthodox, etc. etc. etc.) do not practice closed communion because they don't "want" someone at their communion; they do so because they believe they must, often because they believe that harm may come to those who approach unprepared. This may or may not be wrong in fact (argue it out on a different thread), but it is the opposite of uncaring. It is the same impulse that causes someone to say, "You probably don't want to be taking that Tylenol at the same time you're having wine."
You may disagree with their facts, but should not impugn their motives.
The ship has always been progressive and feisty, which was fun back in the George Bush presidency, a good place to test ideas and views. I came to associate this with the old forum software. There were funny quirks with the old system, like post-counts but overall it had a homely, winsome feeling. So I returned recently after a few years away and saw the awful new software, discovered some odd rule change, but reassuringly some of the same names and interlocutors. But the software feels like an ugly new office building, efficient and soulless. In addition the old no-holds barred discussions were gone, one of my favourite boards dead-horses was closed, replaced by the mine-field that is Epiphanies.
Until as a civilisation we get a better system than vertical-scrolling social-media feeds, we need forums like Ship of Fools to sustain discussion. I hope the software is improve and the old feistiness restored.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
Politics is deadly serious and is not a game, but I very much disagree with this sentiment even as it applies to life outside the ship. I think the paragraph deserves a separate thread, so I shall just limit my criticism to ship-related matters.
Talking about politics on the ship is not the same as talking about it on social media, or practicing it in the real world. This is a community, and we are discussing things in a forum that has little impact upon those who are not part of the community. It is unlikely that we will change people's minds. We might educate them, or introduce new factors or perspectives, and if people approach the forums in the right frame of mind we might have an impact on them.
But if you look at a shipmate's post and think, "you look evil" then that is a massive problem. Its the problem of the person thinking that too, not the person posting.
Not doubting your thoughts, but noting the sharpest change in the Ship that I noticed was in the transition from the old to the new one.
I blame the font.
Also, no emojis.
The transition to the new software gave us a lot - not least a platform that functions and isn't constantly on the verge of collapse. But, we did lose some features because there wasn't a viable platform upgrade that allowed us to keep them - the custom smilies were one of those things we lost. From an admin point of view we were more concerned that there was a lot of user personalisation that we couldn't bring over - the custom titles, sig lines, more extensive profiles that allowed members to express themselves over and above what they contribute to specific discussions; and also the link to the history of prior interactions, everyone came over with the appearance of a newbie whether they had joined a week before the move or had been here since 1998, especially for those who chose to change their displayed name. It was something we thought long and hard about as we reviewed the various options we had, what we've got isn't perfect and it's a different imperfect from the old boards.
In addition the old no-holds barred discussions were gone, one of my favourite boards dead-horses was closed, replaced by the mine-field that is Epiphanies.
hosting
This thread isn't the place to critique Epiphanies. Take any problems you might have with Ship policy to the Styx. @Captain_Valmania, you have been directed HERE already but you might want to refresh your understanding of how and why Dead Horses became Epiphanies.
Reminding Shipmates too that Hell is at your disposal and waiting...
Not doubting your thoughts, but noting the sharpest change in the Ship that I noticed was in the transition from the old to the new one.
I blame the font.
Also, no emojis.
The transition to the new software gave us a lot - not least a platform that functions and isn't constantly on the verge of collapse. But, we did lose some features because there wasn't a viable platform upgrade that allowed us to keep them - the custom smilies were one of those things we lost. From an admin point of view we were more concerned that there was a lot of user personalisation that we couldn't bring over - the custom titles, sig lines, more extensive profiles that allowed members to express themselves over and above what they contribute to specific discussions; and also the link to the history of prior interactions, everyone came over with the appearance of a newbie whether they had joined a week before the move or had been here since 1998, especially for those who chose to change their displayed name. It was something we thought long and hard about as we reviewed the various options we had, what we've got isn't perfect and it's a different imperfect from the old boards.
I did not initially like the change. Not because the new design is bad, indeed the old one was dated in many ways. But the old was comfortable. It was familiar. And there are parts of my psychological makeup that don't easily take change to particular things. I don't think I was the only one and I do think this might have had an effect, at least to some degree for some people.
But the changes in form and function are not what I was addressing. I remember an increase in the level of tension between the Crew and Shipmates, especially in Styx, during the transition. Understandable and perhaps not long lasting. But the ship entire felt...diminished. At least as far as the tone of participation.
The shipped transitioned in a turbulent time, so that might be part of the issue. It just felt rather sudden, as if the change caused a revaluation even for those who stayed. And part of the something that left never came back. At least this is my impression.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
This very binary assumption gets to the heart of the matter, I think. It's the assumption that anyone who doesn't hold to our own particular viewpoint - whether politically or ideologically or any other way - must therefore be guilty of bad faith. People can't be Conservative, say, because they believe it to be right or even that they are sincere but misguided. They must be morally wrong. They must be evil.
It's a form of fundamentalism, a new Puritanism. Taken to an extreme it's the voice of the jihadist and the Crusader.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
This very binary assumption gets to the heart of the matter, I think. It's the assumption that anyone who doesn't hold to our own particular viewpoint - whether politically or ideologically or any other way - must therefore be guilty of bad faith. People can't be Conservative, say, because they believe it to be right or even that they are sincere but misguided. They must be morally wrong. They must be evil.
It's a form of fundamentalism, a new Puritanism. Taken to an extreme it's the voice of the jihadist and the Crusader.
I'm not saying *is*, I'm saying *looks*. Appearing to treat it as a game *looks* like callous disregard for the people affected.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
This very binary assumption gets to the heart of the matter, I think. It's the assumption that anyone who doesn't hold to our own particular viewpoint - whether politically or ideologically or any other way - must therefore be guilty of bad faith. People can't be Conservative, say, because they believe it to be right or even that they are sincere but misguided. They must be morally wrong. They must be evil.
It's a form of fundamentalism, a new Puritanism. Taken to an extreme it's the voice of the jihadist and the Crusader.
I'm not saying *is*, I'm saying *looks*. Appearing to treat it as a game *looks* like callous disregard for the people affected.
Sure, but who is treating politics as if it is a 'game'? I don't see anyone, left, right or centre here who seems to be doing that. Who are they? Who is treating it like a game?
Or is it simply the case that you think that if people don't agree with you politically then it must imply that they don't take it as seriously as you do?
And of course
Over time, we have different combinations of people who like to bicker
Equally, over the years we have had different people who kinda roll up their sleeves, stride into the fray and
Either
Knock heads together
Or
slowly browbeat into submission.
Tbh maybe it takes a certain type who can skilfully call to heel, but with charity and care.
If I may shift focus. At the communion rail, we all stand together and I invite fully I disagree with many of my fellow communicants. I disagree with many of you in the same spirit.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
This very binary assumption gets to the heart of the matter, I think. It's the assumption that anyone who doesn't hold to our own particular viewpoint - whether politically or ideologically or any other way - must therefore be guilty of bad faith. People can't be Conservative, say, because they believe it to be right or even that they are sincere but misguided. They must be morally wrong. They must be evil.
It's a form of fundamentalism, a new Puritanism. Taken to an extreme it's the voice of the jihadist and the Crusader.
I'm not saying *is*, I'm saying *looks*. Appearing to treat it as a game *looks* like callous disregard for the people affected.
Sure, but who is treating politics as if it is a 'game'? I don't see anyone, left, right or centre here who seems to be doing that. Who are they? Who is treating it like a game?
Or is it simply the case that you think that if people don't agree with you politically then it must imply that they don't take it as seriously as you do?
No, I'm saying people who think politics is just a matter of different but essentially interchangeable views are treating it as a game. And that makes them appear careless of the practical consequences of some of the policies being enacted. It's an exercise in false balance.
As I said earlier, the change in software resulted in gains and losses. In relation to emoticons we gained a larger number of available emoticons, but we lost the handy "instant smilie" button and the ability to add in smilies of our own (which at least means we don't have the complaints we had when we inserted some new smilies in the list ... but had to take others out). The result is that it's not as obvious what emoticons are available or how to insert them, and hence they are less widely used. Personally I'm OK with that, I was never a big user of them anyway, but recognise that others like to include them.
Of course, how to insert emojis is described in the FAQs, including a link to a list of available emojis
But some of the voices we've lost here on the Ship are those voices that don't want protestants at their communion rail.
Speaking as a Lutheran, this is intensely wrong and rude as well. Our Catholic brothers (Orthodox, etc. etc. etc.) do not practice closed communion because they don't "want" someone at their communion; they do so because they believe they must, often because they believe that harm may come to those who approach unprepared. This may or may not be wrong in fact (argue it out on a different thread), but it is the opposite of uncaring. It is the same impulse that causes someone to say, "You probably don't want to be taking that Tylenol at the same time you're having wine."
You may disagree with their facts, but should not impugn their motives.
No rudeness intended, LC. I meant "want" in the sense of "think proper".
And don't have any difficulty in seeing closed communion as a view that can be held in good faith with good intent by an intelligent person.
Despite my own belief, speaking as someone who lives in Ireland, that the world would be a better place without it.
There's a notable decrease in shipmeets, too. As in, there's hardly any anymore.
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
There's a notable decrease in shipmeets, too. As in, there's hardly any anymore.
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
Social media provides a quick interaction with people who agree with one's POV. If there is an anti-christ, it is social media.
There's a notable decrease in shipmeets, too. As in, there's hardly any anymore.
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
Social media provides a quick interaction with people who agree with one's POV. If there is an anti-christ, it is social media.
That may be one factor, but the change in access device also has an effect.
There's a notable decrease in shipmeets, too. As in, there's hardly any anymore.
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
Social media provides a quick interaction with people who agree with one's POV. If there is an anti-christ, it is social media.
That may be one factor, but the change in access device also has an effect.
It does. IME, interacting on a forum is more of a PITA on a mobile and people access their mobiles in situations where they are not likely to be in the frame of mind to engage the same way they might at a laptop or desktop.
I still think social media has changed the way most people interact online and not in a good way.
There's a notable decrease in shipmeets, too. As in, there's hardly any anymore.
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
Social media provides a quick interaction with people who agree with one's POV. If there is an anti-christ, it is social media.
...
I still think social media has changed the way most people interact online and not in a good way.
I completely agree. I read a few comments and wonder if the posters have got the Ship confused with the Twitter badlands.
Fixed (I think) broken quoting code. BroJames Purgatory Host
The Ship is still a good deal better than most Twitter or Facebook commentary. But it used to be exceptional in its level of courtesy and respect. I seem even to remember the occasional thread (not that frequent) in which people actually changed their minds as a result of reasoned argument. But perhaps that is a trick of rose-tinted memory.
I do perceive a downwards trend over the past twenty years. But then "do not ask why the old days were better than these, for that is a foolish question" (Ecc. 7:10)
Even when squinting through my own rose-tinted spectacles , I am forced to admit that we have in the past had a series of veritable hard hitting fall outs. This question is not new.
At times I think we keep it all together and will be ok. Then I see yet more outrage at another’s point of view.
To quote from the What’s It All About bit:
“We’re here for people who prefer their religion to be disorganised.
Our aim is to help Christians be self critical and honest about the failings of Christianity, as we believe that honesty can only strengthen faith”
I like that.
And remember it, when tempers run high.
I first dipped my toe in the water around the millenium and first signed up in 2001 so I've been around for a long time. But if the truth be told, I haven't been much more than a sporadic contributor since 2005. That was when children arrived, and from then on I simply didn't have the time or energy (or either) to fight my corner in Purgatory, which has always been the board I enjoyed most. For the last decade I have had longish periods of inactivity and after the Brexit referendum I pretty much stopped visiting.
Coming back is interesting. There are some new names, but I notice the lack of a great many others. I agree with much of what has been said above: the heavyweight academic Catholic and Orthodox voice is much, much quieter, the conservative Evangelicals gone, the Pentecostals / Charismatics long gone (although I think they were going when I first joined up). I look for, and miss, those voices. The liberal / progressive voice is stronger, but only because it hasn't declined as much. I also do not see any of the full-time contrarians who I now realise made the hosts' lives a misery, but who (for me at least) contributed to the richness of the place. Finally - and I could be grossly unfair here - I do not feel the presence of people who aren't white English / north American / Antipodean.
I also agree that (in Purgatory at least) theological issues have been pushed out by political and social issues. That's surely a sign of the times in various ways: declining belief, at least in the mainstream churches, the increasing factiousness of politics, and the changing (and very much worsening) of debate on the Internet. Also, as someone said above, a lot of the big theological issues have been 'done'. I remember back in the 1990s, the thrill of discovering a Usenet group where anyone could come and discuss the Ontological Argument or whether the universe had a necessary first cause: it was no longer necessary to be at university or find a dusty book at the back of a public library. The Internet was a lot less impersonal back then too - strangers genuinely met each other and formed friendships in a way that would be unthinkable and perhaps stupid now. The Ship was very much part of that time, and while it has moved on in some respects, it still has the personal feeling of the early Internet.
Coming back here now makes me realise just how much time has passed, and how much has - inevitably - changed, but it's still every much the Ship, with the culture that it has always had. I cannot think of any other site I have spent time on with a higher standard of debate, although I will say that I have got bruised here far more than anywhere else. I think there was a higher standard of courtesy, but that was only until the novelty wore off, which I think it quickly did. I would like to contribute more regularly and now that my children are older, perhaps I will, but despite my greying hair the prospect still daunts me.
But my main reflection is that, all things considered, how well the Ship has lasted. For it to continue two decades on, and as strongly as it is, in my view is a phenomenal achievement and an enormous credit to the people who have run it.
I hesitate to ask, but what was the mutiny that someone mentioned upthread - or is this too sore a point to raise?
I first dipped my toe in the water around the millenium and first signed up in 2001 so I've been around for a long time. But if the truth be told, I haven't been much more than a sporadic contributor since 2005. That was when children arrived, and from then on I simply didn't have the time or energy (or either) to fight my corner in Purgatory, which has always been the board I enjoyed most. For the last decade I have had longish periods of inactivity and after the Brexit referendum I pretty much stopped visiting.
Coming back is interesting. There are some new names, but I notice the lack of a great many others. I agree with much of what has been said above: the heavyweight academic Catholic and Orthodox voice is much, much quieter, the conservative Evangelicals gone, the Pentecostals / Charismatics long gone (although I think they were going when I first joined up). I look for, and miss, those voices. The liberal / progressive voice is stronger, but only because it hasn't declined as much.
ISTM, the lessening of conservative voices is, at least in part, because of social justice. Whilst conservatives can care for social justice, conservative policy doesn't.
Finally - and I could be grossly unfair here - I do not feel the presence of people who aren't white English / north American / Antipodean.
There are Black and Brown people here, but overall, this place is as white as a sheet of white paper on freshly fallen snow on a cloudless day at noon. The White privilege thread could not exist as it does now without the death of George Floyd and the subsequent reaction. I know, I have tried and the issue didn't have nearly the traction.
But I don't see the colour mix as a change, I have never felt the presence of more than a few non-white people here.
ISTM, the lessening of conservative voices is, at least in part, because of social justice. Whilst conservatives can care for social justice, conservative policy doesn't.
I think the response referred to theological, rather than political, conservatism - they don't necessarily together. I do think that conservatives have had a torrid time here, partly because they seem to be categorised as fundamentalists, which isn't (necessarily) the same thing. I also think that, tending to prize traditional views of gender and sexuality, they tend to become the target of much criticism here and find themselves into an uncomfortable place, branded as homophobic dinosaurs. While I no longer hold these views, I think it is a shame that these voices can't be heard, even if only to offer an alternative hermeneutic to the one that seems to be common on this esteemed vessel.
ISTM, the lessening of conservative voices is, at least in part, because of social justice. Whilst conservatives can care for social justice, conservative policy doesn't.
I think the response referred to theological, rather than political, conservatism - they don't necessarily together. I do think that conservatives have had a torrid time here, partly because they seem to be categorised as fundamentalists, which isn't (necessarily) the same thing. I also think that, tending to prize traditional views of gender and sexuality, they tend to become the target of much criticism here and find themselves into an uncomfortable place, branded as homophobic dinosaurs.
Not seeing how this is not covered by my statement.
"Liberals don't listen" is often a charge levelled, but for some issues, there is no middle ground.
A fiscally conservative person might find common ground with a fiscally liberal person. But on some social issues, there is acceptance or not, the middle ground doesn't exist. For instance homosexuality and gender. A conservative isn't going to want to hear that their "god loves gayz, but it's still kinda wrong" message is rejecting homosexuals and isn't actually very accepting or loving.
So I can imagine that a person who sees themselves as loving and caring, but still cannot let conservative POV go, might not want to hear that.
I'm not sure how long that kind of cognitive dissonance - which boils down to "I'm not homophobic/sexist/transphobic, but God is, so he ends up calling the shots" - can last, really. While you can still convince yourself there's some harm in it you can maintain a sort of "love the sinner, hate the sin" vibe for a long while, but when it becomes clear there really is no rational basis for any of these -isms, it falls apart.
I'm not sure how long that kind of cognitive dissonance - which boils down to "I'm not homophobic/sexist/transphobic, but God is, so he ends up calling the shots" - can last, really. While you can still convince yourself there's some harm in it you can maintain a sort of "love the sinner, hate the sin" vibe for a long while, but when it becomes clear there really is no rational basis for any of these -isms, it falls apart.
Comments
Strong and stable was what we got instead of a coalition of chaos in 2017.
I agree about the decline. IMO, it started before Trump and Brexit. .way before. I don't have access to stats, but my general impression is that the demographic is aging here. And speaking as a retired person, life often presents challenges in retirement years that can distract from light-heartedness and general tomfoolery which was the tone of the ship when I joined 18 years ago. There were days when I laughed until my ribs hurt.
I don't know, though, memory is a strange thing and much more changeable and variable than most think. Even those who are aware can fall prey to its vagaries.
Oh right. I forget which bollocks the Tory party machine talks at each election. What did we get instead of chaos with Miliband then?
I think you're right that the sense that what unites us is greater than what divides us is being lost. The sense that however great our disagreements, they're not of ultimate importance.
Systems and movements we politically dislike, getting labelled as an Axis of Evil, for example, show a loss of perspective.
But some of the voices we've lost here on the Ship are those voices that don't want protestants at their communion rail.
And I'm wondering if there's a sense in which we don't mind what people think as long as they don't have the power to do anything about it.
That's not a remotely fair characterisation of anything happening on the ship that I can see.
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue? Some people see politics as a game with teams and personal preferences and generally All In Good Fun. Others see it as being deadly serious, about the lives of millions of people and the suffering caused by certain policies and ideologies. If you're in the first category people in the second look rude, if you're in second people in the first look evil.
Speaking as a Lutheran, this is intensely wrong and rude as well. Our Catholic brothers (Orthodox, etc. etc. etc.) do not practice closed communion because they don't "want" someone at their communion; they do so because they believe they must, often because they believe that harm may come to those who approach unprepared. This may or may not be wrong in fact (argue it out on a different thread), but it is the opposite of uncaring. It is the same impulse that causes someone to say, "You probably don't want to be taking that Tylenol at the same time you're having wine."
You may disagree with their facts, but should not impugn their motives.
Yes, agree that the tone also changed with the new format.
Yes, indeed
Until as a civilisation we get a better system than vertical-scrolling social-media feeds, we need forums like Ship of Fools to sustain discussion. I hope the software is improve and the old feistiness restored.
I blame the font.
Also, no emojis.
Politics is deadly serious and is not a game, but I very much disagree with this sentiment even as it applies to life outside the ship. I think the paragraph deserves a separate thread, so I shall just limit my criticism to ship-related matters.
Talking about politics on the ship is not the same as talking about it on social media, or practicing it in the real world. This is a community, and we are discussing things in a forum that has little impact upon those who are not part of the community. It is unlikely that we will change people's minds. We might educate them, or introduce new factors or perspectives, and if people approach the forums in the right frame of mind we might have an impact on them.
But if you look at a shipmate's post and think, "you look evil" then that is a massive problem. Its the problem of the person thinking that too, not the person posting.
hosting
This thread isn't the place to critique Epiphanies. Take any problems you might have with Ship policy to the Styx. @Captain_Valmania, you have been directed HERE already but you might want to refresh your understanding of how and why Dead Horses became Epiphanies.
Reminding Shipmates too that Hell is at your disposal and waiting...
hosting off
Purgatory host
MaryLouise
But the changes in form and function are not what I was addressing. I remember an increase in the level of tension between the Crew and Shipmates, especially in Styx, during the transition. Understandable and perhaps not long lasting. But the ship entire felt...diminished. At least as far as the tone of participation.
The shipped transitioned in a turbulent time, so that might be part of the issue. It just felt rather sudden, as if the change caused a revaluation even for those who stayed. And part of the something that left never came back. At least this is my impression.
This very binary assumption gets to the heart of the matter, I think. It's the assumption that anyone who doesn't hold to our own particular viewpoint - whether politically or ideologically or any other way - must therefore be guilty of bad faith. People can't be Conservative, say, because they believe it to be right or even that they are sincere but misguided. They must be morally wrong. They must be evil.
It's a form of fundamentalism, a new Puritanism. Taken to an extreme it's the voice of the jihadist and the Crusader.
I'm not saying *is*, I'm saying *looks*. Appearing to treat it as a game *looks* like callous disregard for the people affected.
Sure, but who is treating politics as if it is a 'game'? I don't see anyone, left, right or centre here who seems to be doing that. Who are they? Who is treating it like a game?
Or is it simply the case that you think that if people don't agree with you politically then it must imply that they don't take it as seriously as you do?
And of course
Over time, we have different combinations of people who like to bicker
Equally, over the years we have had different people who kinda roll up their sleeves, stride into the fray and
Either
Knock heads together
Or
slowly browbeat into submission.
Tbh maybe it takes a certain type who can skilfully call to heel, but with charity and care.
And we have less of Those for sure
No, I'm saying people who think politics is just a matter of different but essentially interchangeable views are treating it as a game. And that makes them appear careless of the practical consequences of some of the policies being enacted. It's an exercise in false balance.
Since when?
What arcane devilry is this??
Just type a colon followed by any letter, orfeo. Loads of emojis but no animated ones. We all miss two faced and hilarious laughter.
But you can do this.
(Click on mrgreen)
Of course, how to insert emojis is described in the FAQs, including a link to a list of available emojis
No rudeness intended, LC. I meant "want" in the sense of "think proper".
And don't have any difficulty in seeing closed communion as a view that can be held in good faith with good intent by an intelligent person.
Despite my own belief, speaking as someone who lives in Ireland, that the world would be a better place without it.
(Nothing hidden behind that one).
Yes, quite sad, actually.
Every type of discussion site relies of a stream of new users to replace older ones who have moved on or gone inactive for various reasons - I'm willing to bet that the number of new registrations to the ship have been in steady decline for some time.
Additionally, in a world where an increasing number of people access the internet via mobile devices, quick take sites like the socmed ones predominate.
Usenet also used to have great places for debate - these days its mostly just a wasteland.
That may be one factor, but the change in access device also has an effect.
I still think social media has changed the way most people interact online and not in a good way.
I completely agree. I read a few comments and wonder if the posters have got the Ship confused with the Twitter badlands.
Fixed (I think) broken quoting code. BroJames Purgatory Host
I do perceive a downwards trend over the past twenty years. But then "do not ask why the old days were better than these, for that is a foolish question" (Ecc. 7:10)
At times I think we keep it all together and will be ok. Then I see yet more outrage at another’s point of view.
To quote from the What’s It All About bit:
“We’re here for people who prefer their religion to be disorganised.
Our aim is to help Christians be self critical and honest about the failings of Christianity, as we believe that honesty can only strengthen faith”
I like that.
And remember it, when tempers run high.
Coming back is interesting. There are some new names, but I notice the lack of a great many others. I agree with much of what has been said above: the heavyweight academic Catholic and Orthodox voice is much, much quieter, the conservative Evangelicals gone, the Pentecostals / Charismatics long gone (although I think they were going when I first joined up). I look for, and miss, those voices. The liberal / progressive voice is stronger, but only because it hasn't declined as much. I also do not see any of the full-time contrarians who I now realise made the hosts' lives a misery, but who (for me at least) contributed to the richness of the place. Finally - and I could be grossly unfair here - I do not feel the presence of people who aren't white English / north American / Antipodean.
I also agree that (in Purgatory at least) theological issues have been pushed out by political and social issues. That's surely a sign of the times in various ways: declining belief, at least in the mainstream churches, the increasing factiousness of politics, and the changing (and very much worsening) of debate on the Internet. Also, as someone said above, a lot of the big theological issues have been 'done'. I remember back in the 1990s, the thrill of discovering a Usenet group where anyone could come and discuss the Ontological Argument or whether the universe had a necessary first cause: it was no longer necessary to be at university or find a dusty book at the back of a public library. The Internet was a lot less impersonal back then too - strangers genuinely met each other and formed friendships in a way that would be unthinkable and perhaps stupid now. The Ship was very much part of that time, and while it has moved on in some respects, it still has the personal feeling of the early Internet.
Coming back here now makes me realise just how much time has passed, and how much has - inevitably - changed, but it's still every much the Ship, with the culture that it has always had. I cannot think of any other site I have spent time on with a higher standard of debate, although I will say that I have got bruised here far more than anywhere else. I think there was a higher standard of courtesy, but that was only until the novelty wore off, which I think it quickly did. I would like to contribute more regularly and now that my children are older, perhaps I will, but despite my greying hair the prospect still daunts me.
But my main reflection is that, all things considered, how well the Ship has lasted. For it to continue two decades on, and as strongly as it is, in my view is a phenomenal achievement and an enormous credit to the people who have run it.
I hesitate to ask, but what was the mutiny that someone mentioned upthread - or is this too sore a point to raise?
There are Black and Brown people here, but overall, this place is as white as a sheet of white paper on freshly fallen snow on a cloudless day at noon. The White privilege thread could not exist as it does now without the death of George Floyd and the subsequent reaction. I know, I have tried and the issue didn't have nearly the traction.
But I don't see the colour mix as a change, I have never felt the presence of more than a few non-white people here.
A fiscally conservative person might find common ground with a fiscally liberal person. But on some social issues, there is acceptance or not, the middle ground doesn't exist. For instance homosexuality and gender. A conservative isn't going to want to hear that their "god loves gayz, but it's still kinda wrong" message is rejecting homosexuals and isn't actually very accepting or loving.
So I can imagine that a person who sees themselves as loving and caring, but still cannot let conservative POV go, might not want to hear that.
Like this
https://youtu.be/RJy2UucDcDw
Speaking from experience here.
I've been through the same awakening, if that's not too grandiose a word.
It would overstate the truth to say that there's always middle ground. But there often is.
We're living through polarised times, in which middle ground gets lumped in with the other side in a "those who aren't with us are against us" way.
Pointing out what's wrong with the prevailing victim-culture narrative gets one lumped in with the hatemongers.