2013 feedback to the BMorg

[theCryptofishist]

Corrupt?

[BBadger]

BBadger, I think I finally understood something. It's the old child psychology thing, isn't it: We don't tell a child "you are stupid". We tell the child "you did something stupid". (Still not the best way, but... the concept.) If that's the idea you have been trying to get thru to me, then I finally "got" it. And I agree. People should not be pigeonholed.

No, you're still not getting it. You're still getting up in someone else's business on subjective matters.

I am fully behind the idea of getting up in peoples' business for concrete problematic actions -- MOOPing, thievery, vandalization, harassment, etc. For everything else, concentrate on your own stuff.

"A lecher" should be "an average nice man currently appearing to be engaged in lechery". Am I getting closer?

No, a "lecher" is someone that doesn't meet your subjective standard of sexual desire. The roles could even be reversed: the "lecher" could label you a stuck-up old Puritan caught up in old Christian theological thinking. Regardless, neither label implies an actionable offense. This is different than, say, someone engaging in sexual harassment -- which is a crime and hinges on how the victim feels.

In the same way, making the assessment that someone is just a "tourist" or a "spectator" is really just some subjective assessment of the observer. That observation also does not contain all the facts. You don't know what the person has been doing the other days of the week, or before the event, or even their relationship to people who find that person important. In effect, you've made an unqualified assumption about that person, but in using that label you're presenting as a fact.

But all this goes even further. Assume that you somehow do know "everything" about the person is doing. If that person is not harming things in concrete ways (e.g. MOOPing, vandalizing, harassment etc.), what really are you achieving by foisting your standard of "participation", etc. on them? Their burn is not your burn. Their standards are not your standards. Perhaps just be content that you're getting more out of the experience -- in your opinion -- than they are.

To the point: don't project your views of participation on others expecting the same response, and don't throw around these flimsy, unqualified labels like "tourist" and "spectator" expecting them to be universally accepted or even grounded in facts, when they're not.

Let people do what they want with their burn within the limits of concrete harm. The event is a blank slate. People will get what they want out of it. "Participation" is something people do because it makes themselves feel good -- or for material compensation. There will always be people who want to host their own project or event for burn (like yourself), and those for whom it isn't a big deal. Regardless, it's not for you to decide except for yourself.

[Elliot]

BBadger, thank you for spelling this out for the third or fourth time. I know I can be slow on the uptake, but I seem to better understand your meanings each time. And...

Perhaps just be content that you're getting more out of the experience -- in your opinion -- than they are.

...I love this. I think you have measurable improved my enjoyment of all my future burns. (Even if there is a bit of egoism, narcissism and schadenfreude in this concept. )

I also very much liked how you turned the tables and had the "lecher" view me as a "puritan". Valuable concept, that.

What seems missing in your approach, is any recognition of what I might call human judgement. As an example, I have a mental visual image of a group of young men I rode past a couple of years ago, while I was in the company of a lady wearing typical scanty BM costume. To me, everything about those young men screamed "frat boys".
Now, I've been on this planet 61 years, and I like to think I have acquired some ability to "read" facial expressions, body language, and so forth. I am convinced those fellows were not "temple builders" having the afternoon off. They looked frightened and confused. They were standing still in a row, facing the street, in an area where nothing was going on except passing traffic. (I noticed them for a long time while we were approaching.) As we passed them, with my female companion within "close examination range", I swear their confused faces turned into leers. And the comments I overheard were decidedly non-gentlemanly.
Is it realistic that I was utterly wrong in this judgement?

[BBadger]

BBadger, thank you for spelling this out for the third or fourth time. I know I can be slow on the uptake, but I seem to better understand your meanings each time. And...

Perhaps just be content that you're getting more out of the experience -- in your opinion -- than they are.

...I love this. I think you have measurable improved my enjoyment of all my future burns. (Even if there is a bit of egoism, narcissism and schadenfreude in this concept. )

That's how you should feel! The best revenge is to live well, right?

It's like sleeping in a tent versus renting an RV (something people often equate to "participation"): at the end of the day the tent-sleepers have more money in their pockets or to spend on other aspects of the burn. That really should be enough. For myself, I'll be first to admit that an air conditioned RV would be nice, but I've made my decisions and benefit in other ways -- and I'm not going to resent others for their decisions so long as they're not ruining things for others. I'm already ahead of the game (for my standards and means) without needing to judge what other people are doing to get out of their burn.

And for your bike repair camp: awesome, you're also ahead of the game! How many people get to apply their expertise to the burn? How many services are not just camp-centric (like a camp MV) rather than playa-centric (your bike service)? How many camp events/services are hands-on work, not just knowledge transfer? In the end, you've got good things going for yourself, and nothing anyone else does, or does not, do for their own burn matters (again, within the limits of concrete harm).

What seems missing in your approach, is any recognition of what I might call human judgement. As an example, I have a mental visual image of a group of young men I rode past a couple of years ago, while I was in the company of a lady wearing typical scanty BM costume. To me, everything about those young men screamed "frat boys".

Now, I've been on this planet 61 years, and I like to think I have acquired some ability to "read" facial expressions, body language, and so forth. I am convinced those fellows were not "temple builders" having the afternoon off. They looked frightened and confused. They were standing still in a row, facing the street, in an area where nothing was going on except passing traffic. (I noticed them for a long time while we were approaching.) As we passed them, with my female companion within "close examination range", I swear their confused faces turned into leers. And the comments I overheard were decidedly non-gentlemanly.
Is it realistic that I was utterly wrong in this judgement?

I'm not saying that we should not pass judgement. There's nothing wrong with that, nor should we pretend that we do not pass judgement. We all have standards, and we're entitled to speak for those standards from what we observe.

What is to be remember, however, is that these are your observations based on your viewpoint. You should take ownership of these views, not put them up as objective statements of fact (unless they are qualified). When using labels such "lech" or "tourist" you've made the jump from an observation to a statement of fact. Now the onus is upon you to qualify such labels. Branding someone a thief is slanderous without proof. Though dubbing someone a "tourist" will not earn you a civil suit, it is still a label that should be qualified. Otherwise, you're just observing someone at a certain point in time who is not "participating" by your standards. Simply leave it at that.

As for the "frat boys"... maybe those guys were frat boys, and maybe they weren't? Does your assessment qualify the label? I dunno. Maybe they were just dazed burgins taking in a new environment and they saw something they normally don't get to see (or don't know how to react). Maybe "leering" is not a damning offense (depending on the standard), especially in a more sexually charged environment like Burning Man, where people are dressed in certain ways that attract attention. Maybe your observation was just wrong because of a lack of facts? Maybe it was correct, but only from your viewpoint? In the end, it's really hard to qualify the assessment -- and in the end, what does it matter? Where's the actionable offense? Unless there was an invasion of privacy, leering isn't harming anyone (maybe a little discomfort, but that'll happen anyway). The best thing to do is just concern yourself with your own burn so long as others aren't ruining things.

Now if one of those guys did something like groping your lady friend -- that is a crime, and their actions have qualified the "sexual harasser" label (and some punishment). The incident with that dude who flicked his cigarette and told you he didn't care much about the burner "ethos" -- yeah, he was a MOOPer and a harmful influence on the playa at the time. What to do in each case? In the former, that's a crime and measures should be taken to ensure it doesn't happen again. In the latter case... well, let's hope he changes, or at least that his example serves to teach others. But don't infer more if you don't have the proof: that person is an individual, not an archetype. Don't build a policy around the actions of a few exceptional cases.

That last point is where I took the most offense earlier on. We'll destroy ourselves if we allow these "bad apples" to change how we conduct a burn. It's like terrorists changing our way of life -- not by their actions -- by our own reactions. That's where the real damage comes from. If we believe in a "Burning Man ethos" we must first believe that it's strong enough to weather these small, negative influences. Invoking an "immigration policy" on the burn will kill its dynamicism -- causing far more harm than a few "frat boys", "tourists", or MOOPers ever will.

Finally, I'm no saint either. I jump to judgements without proof, and I label as well. Call me out when I don't practice what I preach -- or get preachy when I don't practice. I need to be set straight at times as well.

[Elliot]

One little nuance about our primary sticking point:
I do not feel that a "bad apple" would make me change how I conduct my burn. It is more like a "bad apple" contaminates the atmosphere in which I conduct my burn, thus reducing my enjoyment of my burn. This is similar to industrial air pollution in an otherwise wonderful city -- everyone suffers a little bit, without regard to what they are doing. It is such "air pollution" I wish to minimize in BRC.

BBadger, I want to thank you for an excellent conversation. You have made many good points which I will keep in mind. Hope to meet you in person next year.

[BBadger]

Likewise!

Plus, I might need your help if I bring that bike I brought last time.

[Elliot]

Likewise!

Plus, I might need your help if I bring that bike I brought last time.

We'll fix you right up, or put you on a better bike if need be. We will probably be on the 5:00 spoke between G and H like the last two years. Look for the bus with the big eyes painted above the windshield.

[FIGJAM]

[delle]

.We will probably be on the 5:00 spoke between G and H like the last two years. Look for the bus with the big eyes painted above the windshield... Hopefully with Tiny's van on the shade side again.

There. Fixed to say what just can't be said enough....

Your little corner of the world was a real happy place for me... with Tiny and Mary and Figgy and Geospider and Unjohn and the abortion clinic and that guy with the scarves who was so cool to talk with...

sigh.

[gyre]

Love the bus.

[ygmir]

.We will probably be on the 5:00 spoke between G and H like the last two years. Look for the bus with the big eyes painted above the windshield... Hopefully with Tiny's van on the shade side again.

There. Fixed to say what just can't be said enough....

Your little corner of the world was a real happy place for me... with Tiny and Mary and Figgy and Geospider and Unjohn and the abortion clinic and that guy with the scarves who was so cool to talk with...

sigh.

I wish I'da made it up the street more............such a great neighborhood there.
maybe next year.

[ranger magnum]

Elliot and Badger:
This has been an amazing thread to read. You are both extremely well spoken, and your replies to one another show true respect.
Kudos

[Elliot]

Just a normal productive conversation between two people who are not illiterate nor deranged. Sad if this stands out as unusual on ePlaya.
.
.
.
.
.

Did I just call a bunch of my friends illiterate and deranged?

It's simply about taking just a moment to think before typing.

[FIGJAM]

I'll be illiterate if Ygmir will be deranged!

[ygmir]

I'll be illiterate if Ygmir will be deranged!

already there FJ!!

[media]