On the eve of a big week…Stupid People.
October 31, 2005
On the eve of a big week for me, a week which is causing stress-beyond-what-I’ve-experienced-before (which is a wonderful feeling, really), I want to talk about stupid people.
The first photo is of the whiteboard on my door, and you’ll see the message that I’ve written to an anonymous person who I will be calling a “stupid person.”
In case you can’t read it, the person drew their version of a Jewish star and then wrote “Throwing Rocks at Jews = Fascism.” So I would argue that the person who wrote the bottom message is stupid for a variety of reasons:
- Anonymous statements and comments basically lose their legitimacy because of the very fact that they are anonymous - it is simply cowardly. Anonymous comments on blogs, anonymous letters, anonymous notes. They don’t deserve a response until the person who wrote them can claim them.
- Writing something like “Throwing rocks at Jews = Anti-Semitism” would have made a little more sense, but…fascism? Fascism is “State control of economics.” So, throwing rocks at Jews has nothing to do with economics.
- I think they may be referring to a poster that is below my whiteboard that says, “THIS WALL WILL FALL: Collective Punishment is a War Crime” (referring to the Wall in Palestine). Doesn’t show pictures of rock-throwing…not sure where that came from.
- I wrote a previous response to them, which they (I assume it was the author of the comment) erased.
So, I must obviously conclude that they are a stupid person. And now for the second photo:
This one is slightly harder to determine who the “stupid” person is. As I walked out to my car tonight, I found this note attached to the windshield, so they were obviously calling ME the stupid person. Basically, I parked my car in a spot and my left side was a foot away from the line, and my right side was on the line. But I would still argue that they are the stupid person for the following reasons:
- The parking in the Library lot of Princeton is bad - people invariably park VERY VERY close to you. I’ve barely been able to climb into my vehicle sometimes, and I’ve never left anyone a note calling them STUPID.
- I’ve parked in the spot the person who wrote the note had to park in, and it’s doable, even when someone IS on the line (as has been the case many times). Sure it’s a little irritating - but worth calling someone STUPID? That’s harsh.
So, while it “could” be argued that I was stupid here, I must still conclude that the other person was the stupid person.
And those, my friends, are some thoughts on stupid people, as I procrastinate studying for my midterm on Islam (which is a stupid exam, because it consists of 25 multiple choice questions - for a graduate level study of Islam. Hmm). Anyway, be looking for updates on the Emerging Church/Theological Education Caucus here at Princeton - and perhaps, just maybe, we’ll have some audio from the event. We’ll see…
Tags: Random
Posted in 
Adam Walker Cleaveland: 
November 1st, 2005 at 5:08 am
Wow, 25 multiple choice for Islam is nothing. I’m a high school student at Australia and we had to do 25 multiple choice, 15 short answer and 2 essay questions for our yearly exam. 77% is pretty good I think…
P.S. - This blog is awesome. Also opens my eyes to how a modern, young Catholic looks at things. Send me an email.
November 1st, 2005 at 6:11 am
“Anonymous statements and comments basically lose their legitimacy because of the very fact that they are anonymous - it is simply cowardly. Anonymous comments on blogs, anonymous letters, anonymous notes. They don’t deserve a response until the person who wrote them can claim them.”
“I wrote a previous response to them, which they (I assume it was the author of the comment) erased.”
But I thought anonymous comments “don’t deserve a response.” So why are you responding (twice)?
“You’re stupid. No, you’re stupid. No, you’re stupid.” That’s neat.
November 1st, 2005 at 8:47 am
Ugh. Sorry you’ve been the recipient of meanness lately. Don’t let it get you down.
November 1st, 2005 at 9:13 am
Sorry to hear about these events, Adam. The timing’s no good either. I’m praying for peace for you.
I also hope you’re able to take a step back from this stuff and grin: you’re experiencing seminary for sure now. It causes a person to navigate such fine points, with such a long history of bitterness on all sides of every precise (though usually non-essential) debate, that it’s inevitable for a seminarian to go through periods where he’s wound up so tightly that he can’t tell who’s worth punching and who to just let slide.
You’re there - I assume - because the Lord Jesus Christ has placed a loving and joyous call upon your life, and because something about what you’re learning and preparing to do is where you feel His pleasure. The debates and the learning are certainly important, and it’s a high form of worship to approach God with an ardent desire to learn Him and His ways. At the end of the day, though, He lives in your balls, not your brain.
Laugh at the silliness of seminary arguments. Look at the dopey comment written on your white board. And come on, how stressed out does a person have to be to take the time to call you stupid in a note they leave critiquing your parking job? Seminary. Not the easiest place to feel the love of God from the believers around you. Be patient - you’re all going through a clumsy growth phase, and it’ll be okay.
Enjoy the emergent conference - I’ll be eager to read/hear how it goes. In the meantime I will be praying, as I said, for peace in your soul and mind.
Pete
November 1st, 2005 at 12:50 pm
Sounds like you need to stroll over to Hodge Hall and read the statement inscribed on the floor, generation after generation…
November 1st, 2005 at 1:13 pm
Brian - thanks. I know.
“Don’t let the bastards get you down…”
November 1st, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Being called stupid is “harsh” but calling someone else a coward is not?
And your point about anonymous comments being illegitimate is ridiculous - if a point is valid, its valid regardless of whether or not the author signs their name to it. End of story. You can choose to ignore it, but that’s just a dodge on your part.
November 1st, 2005 at 6:03 pm
Don’t let Nathan get you down.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:22 pm
“And your point about anonymous comments being illegitimate is ridiculous - if a point is valid, its valid regardless of whether or not the author signs their name to it.”
Um…no Nathan…actually a signature‚Äîproof of one‚Äôs identity‚Äîis needed to support to argument. There needs to be legitimacy not only in regards to the argument but also in regards to the one making the argument. Anonymity refuses to support argumentation because it masks the identity of author. A signature helps reveal one‚Äôs experience, context and perspective regarding a certain issue.
It is “cowardly” in the sense that the author lurks in shadows of Adam’s life critiquing his political and personal views while also critiquing his parking ability without confronting the man. Anonymity says that the “point” is what is essential, and refuses to allow dialogue; thus making a comment illegitimate, since a comment implies dialogue.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:24 pm
PS-
“wb” is short hand for Wes Barry.
Not meaning to be anonymous.
November 1st, 2005 at 11:31 pm
Adam, so sorry, man! What a dumb f*@%!
November 2nd, 2005 at 8:31 am
Why is it Adam that you never seem to have problems with aliases and anonymous postings when the writer has their lips tightly sewed to your ass? (that is assuming that Existential Punk, petras, DRH, KP, and associate elder - all names taken from other postings- aren’t your readers given names) You have such a double standard for your readers. As long as people agree with you you never rasie an issue. And by the way, how do you know any of the names that get left are their real ones? You only have a “name it and claim it” mentality when someone has the audacity to challenge you.
As for these people that are “stupid”. I have to applaud your ability to turn the other cheek, to give them your coat as well. I mean seriously, is that your best response, calling them stupid and parading them out on your post? Well done pastor… And I’m also sorry that this comes at an inconvenient time for you. I’m sure had these people that so greatly wronged you only known your schedule they would have surely changed their mind. You need to grow up Adam.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:14 am
anon.,
I’m not sure what you intended by lumping me in a phrase that talked about readers whose lips are “sewed tightly to” Adam’s ass, but I for one have criticized Adam in the past (for instance, here or here, say), and my name is Kellen Plaxco, represented by the initials KP. The difference between my posting my intials and someone else writing “anonymous” and leaving a bogus email is that my criticism comes from someone Adam knows isn’t just ejaculating hatred onto his work, but from someone who cares enough to engage his thought critically. It’s hard to see that when someone reads what you write, carelessly crafts two sentences of short-toned acid, and then doesn’t have the fortitude to own it. It’s the difference between a slap in the face from a lover (owned and thoughtful criticism) and a drive-by shooting (impersonal hatred). Adam gets a lot of drive by’s, and unfairly to boot.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:18 am
seriously, what the hell is wrong with you people. dude is allowed to complain about things. yet you asshats get on his back because he finds something annoying. why do you all care so much what one dude thinks? simply cause he has a cool website, and all of you internet trolls have nothing better to do with your lives then act the big man/woman on here? and the reason anonymous posters only count when they are bitching should be obvious to anyone with any sense but let me explain for the slow
anyone complementing adam is not “hiding” why would they be? what they are saying is not hostile.
anyone who attacks, derides, or belittles but then does not have the guts to give some personal info is a freaking coward. that simple. someone who throws rocks and then hides needs to admit they are afraid to be in real conflict with adam.
now of course, anonymous attacks are not THAT important adam my boy, I would say don’t take um that seriously. remember, anyone unwilling to dialogue is worth your love and prayer, but not your care and fret. so say a quick prayer and move on. do theys uck? sure, but you gots bigger stuff to care about then these spineless ones.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:53 pm
Let’s all take some deep breaths, okay?
First, anonymous comments such as the ones that were given to Adam are never the best way to deal with situations. Rather than dealing directly with the issue, they usually just create more tension and conflict. For example, the person that was upset with Adam’s parking job probably did nothing to motivate him to attempt to park better next time by leaving the anonymous note.
Now, about Adam’s response. I would say that it probably wasn’t the best way to respond to the issue. However, this IS Adam’s blog. He has the right to respond to anything the way that he sees fit in this space. Regardless of whether or not his response was right or correct or valid, this is his space to do with as he pleases. If you don’t appreciate or approve, then you have every right not to read what he writes.
Of course, there is the opportunity for dialogue, and if you don’t agree or approve, you have every right to respond. Although, I don’t see how many of the responses did anything to further any sort of dialogue. Most of them were, to use KP’s wonderful quote, “ejaculating hatred” on the blog.
So, how about we stop this little downward spiral before it gets any lower, okay? Sure, someone doesn’t approve of Adam’s politics or parking and they responded in a less than appropriate manner. This negatively affected Adam and he chose to respond, as some would say in a less than appropriate manner, on his blog. This in turn negatively affected some of the people who choose to read his blog who then chose to respond in a less than appropriate manner. So, let’s just end the spiral there and move on to something that has to do with building up the Body of Christ and not tearing it down, okay? Sounds good to me, too.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:54 pm
Hi All,
DRH is my secret spy name. It has nothing to do with my given name. It just allows me to post without any sort of responsibility (read in the dripping sarcasm). And for the record, I have never had my lips sewed to Adam’s ass. Please don’t use me to challenge Adam. You don’t know me and I don’t know you, but I can’t help but be a little bit offended by your lack of respect. My question is: Do you know anything about what I think, beliefs that I have or interactions I have with Adam simply from a 2 dimensional post on a blog? We are more than just our comments, especially if we know each other’s names. I think the value of a site like this is to have continuous dialogue, even if we disagree on issues from time to time. I feel that I am totally capable of engaging in respectful discussion, I don’t know about Adam, but I think we would all be better off if that is what the baseline standard is. I don’t necessarily think it is cowardly to post anonymously, but I do think it reflects a lack of respect. It also points to an inability to trust that the conversation will result in some sort of growth in yourself or in the person you are engaging with. These are assumptions that never lead to mature things. They just show that you really don’t care about someone actually learning and growing from interacting with you. To me, that is sad and lonely and I don’t choose to be that way. If you choose to respond to any things that I post in the future, please do so knowing that this is how I approach my posts.
Peace,
Nothing anonymous here - David Hallgren
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:05 pm
I am willing to apologize to those of you whom I offended by lopping you into one category or another. And I agree, it’s Adam’s website and he can write what he desires. But when he is the face of Emergent on the Princeton Seminary campus and obviously wants to be the voice of it then he should expect people (internet trolls I think you called me) to respond. Adam makes no bones about telling us how many hits he has and who reads his blog so he is putting it out there for all to see. If he doesn’t want people to respond then he should take that option off. Like it or not, this is part of the dialogue.
I don’t see it as “ejaculating hate” to call someone out about their response when it seems unbiblical. And sure, Adam doesn’t know me from a whole in the wall so why should he listen. My argument is that if he takes all the praise from anonymous writers, should he not be willing to take a critique?
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Funny, seems that this argument arises everywhere where opinions are being shared. There is always going to be someone who feels that they much rather stay anonymous - for many reasons, not just cowardice. For instance, they may be close to the person they are speaking against, or affiliated with a group that may discredit their opinion without it being given due thought, or another countless reasons besides just cowardice.
I do however also agree that signing your name gives your argument strength, If you believe it - stand by it. But we should always take the anonymous ones seriously, because after all - the person may not always choose to be anonymous and if the opinions are there for all the world to see - then others can add to it.
I read on here because a lot of times the conversations make me think, evaluate, strengthen, weaken, etc. etc. my own viewpoints. Many, many times I do not write any comments or opinion myself - even when I have one. Not afraid to or too busy, I just simply don’t - which may be the case for many others. At least an anonymous post is a post.
Adam, you have a good forum for exchanging ideas and thoughts here. You ‘may’ be stupid, but then it could be argued that every single one of us (and everyone else) ‘may’ be stupid as well.
-Jose A. Gamero, Jr. of Miami (is that un-anonymous enough?)
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:14 pm
the conversation that unfolded in the wake of the post seems to miss the content of what you are reacting to. the sign on your car is funny more than anything, mostly because i am sure all of us have parked a bit too close to the line. you should have left that one out because it does paint you in a certain light. cleave, you invited the response. the obvious thing to say is that you probably shouldn’t have post this.
that being said, i validate completely your response. i fail to see how implying you are a facist (that is the implicit logic-throwing rocks=facism, so those who support the rock throwers=facists) is something that should not upset you. moreover, you seem to have taken the label well; your bone was with someone implying that you are a facist *anonymously* you asked to discuss this. i am hard-pressed to think of a better example of turning your cheek, or perhaps not casting a stone is a better allusion.
the conversation that unfolded in the wake of the post seems to miss the content of what you are reacting to. the sign on your car is funny more than anything, mostly because i am sure all of us have parked a bit too close to the line. you should have left that one out because it does paint you in a certain light.
there was an incident at pts a few years ago when someone anonymously offered his/her opinion about a worship service put on by the black community. there was rightfully outrage-the slogan written anonymously on the flier was racist. in the wake of that, the administration reminded the students that such comments were grounds for expulsion. the point is that while we are entitled to our opinions, hateful speech crosses a line. using words like stupid invites responses. using words like facism invites something far greater.
Forgive us-all of us-Father. We know not what we do.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:16 pm
Jamey.
Thanks for seeing the humor in the sign on the car. It’s just funny, and that’s why I blogged it.
The other thing - the fascist comment - it may have been made as a joke, but obviously after my summer in the middle east and dealing with some intense feelings and emotions of people who completely disagree with me on this issue….
So I take comments like that seriously. Even if it was meant as a joke.
November 3rd, 2005 at 2:44 pm
soory for saying asshat. I just thought it was funny. heheheh asshat
November 3rd, 2005 at 5:44 pm
“I do however also agree that signing your name gives your argument strength, If you believe it - stand by it. But we should always take the anonymous ones seriously, because after all - the person may not always choose to be anonymous and if the opinions are there for all the world to see - then others can add to it.”
Jose, good perspective. Anonymity may be essential in the situation of speaking as the oppressed. I was speaking with a friend regarding this post (see how things grow from being “funny/random” to meaningful dialogue by names being attached) about how the press will print anonymous sources. But my argument to that is someone, usually the editor, is aware of the source’s context and perspective thereby associating her/his name in place of the anonymous source’s name.
In regards to an oppressive situation I can see need for anonymity. However, there needs to be some identifying mark that reveals this person as someone speaking from the oppressed situation, otherwise their validity is diminished because we, as listeners, are unfamiliar with their experience, context and perspective.
November 3rd, 2005 at 8:53 pm
We really gravitate towards conflict don’t we? Why out of all of Adam’s provocative posts is THIS the one getting all the play? 22 comments? Give me a break.
Adam sorry people aren’t more patient. I personally tend to only use my blog to vent because pretty much only my mom and Liam read it so I guess this sort of thing just goes to show you how far and wide your influence really is :)
November 3rd, 2005 at 11:40 pm
adam…sorry dude…i did it. i drove out from the midwest the other day to see you, but was abducted by circus bears, so that’s why you didn’t see me. by the time i escaped, i had to get home. i left the note without my name because i thought we were close enough you would recognize my handwriting…you know, how i always trace over what i write a second time and confuse fascism and anti-semitism…
from one stupid to another
November 3rd, 2005 at 11:52 pm
Jessie kind of hit what I was getting at in my previous comment right on the head.
I’ve noticed the posts that always get the most comment (and the most heated debate) are some of the most frivolous ones. If we need further proof, do any of you remember Adam’s post with the picture of alcohol and a hookah? Remember at the fallout from that? And yet, posts that deal with great topics to discuss, such as the Emerging Church, get only a few comments. How come people come out of the woodwork when they’re trying to discredit someone, but when they have the opportunity to uplift and support a brother, they are oddly quiet?
Kinda sad and unfortunate.
November 29th, 2005 at 1:56 pm
No comment on the parking one, I have to admit my own parking is pretty much beyond stupid at times.
But as for the reference to antisemitism or facism on your door it really should not surprise you.
While you are entitled to your own political views ‘the wall’ you call to be taken down has saven untold lives. Suicide bombings in Israel keep being tried but with the security barrier many many fewer are taking place.
When you are against walls in general this is not anti semitism. When the only wall you take offense to is one that stops Jews ( and innocent civilians in general ) from being killed someone might see you as an anti semite.
This is not your intent of course, but its a valid opinion even tho it wasn’t signed.
One reason I check this blog sometimes is because I know you have a different view of the Israel confict and I find it interesting to see the conclusions.
The graffit on your door was not the best way to express an opinion to say the least, but I do agree with the premise.