I'm working away from home at the moment and behind a client's eccentric firewall (one of the reasons why I am reluctantly operating comment moderation at the moment) so I'm not able to post as much as I would like. This post comes from an internet cafe in London.
Earlier this year a code of practice was discussed for Methodist blogging. To be honest I'm not certain I know what the final outcome was. I do know though that there was a bit of a moral panic about the way some discussions on some blogs were conducted.
In recent weeks the Methodist blogsphere has been enlivened by contributions form several other bloggers who actually know quite a bit more than the average Methodist about the issues surrounding Israel and Palestine.
One of those contributors has been Alec. Now I don't know if Alec is a Methodist or even a Christian but I have seen him develope some very interesting arguments. He has, on occasions disagreed with me. He has always been polite. He contributed to the outstanding discussion that developed on Dave Warnock's site (ignore the first five or six posts).
Which brings us to today. I'm not certain I followed the entire discussion but I was very disturbed by a reference to Alec on the semi-official anti-Israel, anti-Zionist Connexions site.
Alec had made a point and the Reverend Kim Fabricius responded (comment 40):
Alec is a very confused individual. As well as not knowing his ass from his elbow, he doesn’t know you from me........ [This] business demonstrates just how monomaniacal poor Alec is. Let’s put him on our prayer lists for the intellectually ill.
What an insulting way to speak about someone trying to engage in intelligent debate.
And what a blasphemous misuse of the word "prayer".
Now Kim Fabricius is the effective co-editor of the Connexions site. I gather that Richard, the blog owner, was one of the chosen few to comment on the proposed code of conduct.
Yet here we have a very unpleasant example of cyber abuse and bullying. As worrying is the misuse of the word "prayer" by a Minister of a Christian church to abuse someone who may be a non believer.
Now possibly Kim and Richard see this all as one great enormous joke. When I have dealt with abuse and bullying as a trade union official the perpetrators always say "I was only joking", "can't she take a joke?", "some of my best friends are Jews/Blacks/gay" etc.
I believe this nasty language is totally inappropriate and merely serves to bring Methodist blogging into disrepute. Sooner or later the behaviour of our professional blogger will have to be called to account.
Meanwhile Alec, you are welcome on the Methodist blogsphere and thank you for your thoughtful and insightful contributions.
God bless you. You and Joseph have been an answer to prayer. And I mean that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Hello David
Can you please stop attacking Richard Hall and the Connexions blog? They are not anti-Israel and they are not anti-Zionist and Richard is not a professional blogger. The process which the Methodist Church went through for the Social Media Guidelines - not a bloggers code of conduct at all - was open to all people who wanted to take part in it. You could have had your say and it is simply false to say Richard was one of the chosen few to comment. That's simply a lie.
It's really important to get your facts straight - especially when we start talking about other people. None of us has the right to speak for the Methodist blogosphere or to call judgment down on other people/bloggers or to bear false witness against them? Indeed we are called to think of them before ourselves.
I think that one of the best ways for Methodist blogging to be improved would be for all Methodist bloggers, including you, to stop attacking people through their blogs. Instead of focussing on other people's faults, we should be focussing on what is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent and praiseworthy.
Pete - in my private capacity as a human being trying to live a connected life
Thanks Peter, your comments are always welcome and you are someone for whom I have respect because I do believe you are sincere and genuinely want the best.
However I don't always agree with you and on this one you are wrong.
You finish your reprimand by saying "we should be focusing on what is true, noble, right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent and praiseworthy."
Agreed.
That is the point I am trying to make. I cannot see how saying of a non-Christian "Alec is a very confused individual. As well as not knowing his ass from his elbow, he doesn’t know you from me........ [This] business demonstrates just how monomaniacal poor Alec is. Let’s put him on our prayer lists for the intellectually ill." is "true, noble, right, pure, lovely, etc".
This is just the latest in a very long line of thoroughly offensive and gratuitous comments that Richard Hall and Kim Fabricius have made about several people and groups of people.
Now I appreciate that both Hall and Fabricius, like you, are ordained Ministers. There is a protocol about what a Minster says about another Minister. You feel you have to observe that protocol so I appreciate that you will not be saying anything in your personal capacity or otherwise. But that does beg the question as to why you are attacking the non-ordained messenger rather than look at the message?
You say that Richard is not a professional blogger or semi-official. In my real job I manage people whose work includes writing and contributing to newspapers, leaflets and (nowadays) social media. I've undertaken this sort of work for about 40 years. Looking at the frequency - and sometimes the quality - with which Richard blogs and his intervention in online debates plus the supporting work on facebook and twitter I have absolutely no doubt that his blogging and other social media work is effectively his full time job.
Social media leaves a very hefty audit trail and it would not be difficult to prove the case were it, for example, to come to disciplinary procedure or IT. I've been involved in such investigations over the last ten years and seen other businesses take a dim view of time misused on the internet.
Now a case can be made for having someone in the Methodist Church who does understand social media. If Richard is undertaking that work then it should be out in the open. If not, then I cannot see how we the Methodist Church, as an employing organisation, are getting value out of the £45-50,000 a year we commit to his continuing employment.
I think that's enough for now, I shan't take up the other points you raise.
I will however point out to readers that whilst you write in your personal capacity you are also the Secretary of the Methodist Church Faith and Order Committee.
Finally I look forward to your public rebuke to Richard Hall and Kim Fabricius for their vile comments.
I think I may have a long wait.
Friday, 12 November, 2010
Post a Comment