Re: Future of online fora

On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 12:07:00 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 4/3/2025 10:42 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 4/3/2025 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 4/3/2025 11:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 4/3/2025 9:54 AM, John B. wrote:

On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:12:46 -0500, AMuzi
<am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>

The forum LFGSS (London Fixed Gear and Single Speed) is
among the early casualties of The Planners in the UK nanny
state.  Under the well invoked principle, "Everyone ought
to, because I say so", newly enacted internet regulation
makes online providers fully responsible for online
content
including purported crimes of "revenge [whether
personal or
by class], extreme pornography, sex trafficking,
harassment,
coercive or controlling behavior and stalking."
>
Since interpretation of those can be highly subjective*
and
in light of the huge volume of content, every word of
which
is a possible offense, providers such as Microcosm, who
wrote the popular group forum software, have deleted all
activity and more have followed.
>
>
>
*c.f. plentiful examples of the last three right here on
RBT. Or not. That's the nature of subjective evaluation.

>
A week or so ago I read a notice that both Tom Sawyer
and Alice in
Wonderland had been blacklisted by some group or another.
>
Alice for the term "evil witch" or something similar.
>
As for Tom I can only assume that any reference of the
Civil war will
soon be unmentionable in polite society.

>
Yes, there's that.  And a greater loss, which is the
nearly complete obliteration of Huckleberry Finn, a far
superior volume to the forced and anemic Tom Sawyer. 
It's among the most powerful anti racism works ever
published, but it's been banned in schools for decades.

>
Hmm. I just reread it a month or so ago. I thought the
portrayal of Jim was too cartoonish. I also thought the
ending was weak.
>
Yes, just a subjective evaluation.

 
Further consideration (and apologies for responding to my
own post):
 
Maybe I just engaged in a bit of "presentism" - that is,
judging past actions by standards of the present, which is
often unjust.
 
I don't doubt that Mark Twain's writing and his portrayal of
Jim was groundbreaking in his day. The fact that a black
slave (Jim) was shown as emotional, industrious, courageous
and reasonably intelligent was probably shocking and eye
opening to Twain's audience at the time. That's true even if
the portrayal had a long way to go by present standards.
 
I reread _Huckleberry Finn_ as sort of prep work for the
current novel _James_ which is, reportedly, the same story
told from the slave's perspective. It's coming up soon on my
list of books to read.
 

>
Back to the issue, would you consider it appropriate for
grammar school age children or not?

I do. I read them both when I was very young, with the encouragement
of my mother.

I also read East of Eden as a child. I was raised on a farm and
understood all that "stuff" at a very early age, probably about 9 or
ten. The part of E of E that stuck in my mind was when they pulled the
old car out of the water and saw the dead bodies. The sexual related
stuff was not a big deal.

--
C'est bon
Soloman