If I can be allowed a moment's indulgence...this won't take much longer than
that.

This whole discussion began when someone posted a message noting that some of
my messages of late have not been as chipper as those posted in earlier days.
I responded, and in some considerable detail, pointed out some of the
shortcomings and problems in being on-line.

Never once in that note, or any of those that followed, did I say one word
about not wanting criticism. Not wanting to be stalked, sure, not much liking
it when I get deliberately sandbagged or lied about or ambushed, absolutely.
But not one word about criticism. I did not ask for changes in the moderated
group, did not ask to have anyone booted, did not ask for a new charter or
group, did not suggest that criticism be eliminated...did not do any of those
things. I have only said that, because of the problems that exist, after B5 is
over, I would be pulling back (though not eliminating) my online presence,
which is, after all, my right. There is no written contract requiring that I
remain on the firing line forever...let the next guy take his or her turn in
front of the sniper nests for a while.

But it's nothing to do with honest, fair criticism.

For six years, I have answered honest criticism fairly, evenhandedly, and as
objectively as I could.

Those raising the flag in this current fracas, however, do not seem so
inclined.

It's like this: do I, or do I not, share the same right to free speech as
anyone else here, especially those who raise that particular banner at a
moment's notice?

If so, then do I not have the same right to express a critical opinion as
anyone else here?

I have, for six years now, announced to anyone within listening range the
benefits and the positive aspects of being on the nets. I am not, however,
blind to the faults and flaws of said correspondence, and said so, when someone
asked.

I raised a critical opinion.

And for that, any number of folks have jumped up and down loudly announcing
that this is somehow unfair, or a sign of censorship, or just generally, garden
variety wrong...dumping all over that original message.

Or, to quote Franklenstein's monster, "Criticism good. Criticism of criticism:
bad."

So it seems to me that we have a logical contradiction going on here, in which
it's okay for people to voice critical opinions of me or the show or anything
B5...but it is NOT as right to voice a critical opinion of the nets and/or some
of the people and/or gatekeeping processes involved. Frankly, if I had been as
brittle and quick to fire off flames in response to simple criticism as those
here have done in answer to my opinion about the nets, I wouldn't have lasted
five minutes.

So I would suggest that these same individuals try to apply a little of the
patience toward criticism that I have had to show. I've had to put up with
positive and negative comments for six years, surely you can do so for a few
days, in relation to the nets. Or should no one criticize these things?

It's real simple. Either I have the same right to a critical opinion as
everyone else, and the same right to express same, or I don't. If I do, then
those who argue in favor of open criticism should have nothing to complain
about...unless they're upset because it's their ox being gored instead of mine
for a change. If I don't...then I would suggest that that is massively unfair
and totally inappropriate to a free and open exchange of ideas.

It's either a level playing field, or it's not.

Let me know when you've decided.

jms

From: (jmsatb5@aol.com)
B5 Official Fan Club at:
http://www.thestation.com