Chasing Eris

[Placid Dingo]

Personally, I think the reason this kind of upsets me is because I was very interested in this project, and really would have liked to participate; and I don't think I'm alone in this.  So the insistence to include Uncle BadTouch, who (if nothing else) is simply another in a long line of Pinealists and plagarists (and there is plenty else), is at the expense of a group of Discordians who, as far as I can tell, have created a surprisingly new branch of Discordia, mostly out of whole cloth.

Thus, the decision to include one person deprives the work of an entire movement.


Sure, that sounds big-headed and pretentious; but in your travels, have you found any Discordians like the ones at PD.com?

It seems to me that the book was intended to capture "classic" Discordianism.

No slam on Swabey or anyone.  There's still something to be said for that approach.  But I think that trying to shove everyone in the book would be like asking Martin Luther if he minded if the Vatican would be involved.

So a choice had to be made.  For some reason, the choice made was "Uncle BadTouch uber alles".

This is not an attempt to record any one genre of Discordianism. It is an attempt to take a snapshot of the broader egragore of Discordia and the lives of Discordians. 

You say a choice had to be made. In fact the whole cause of much of the upset is that I do not think that any kind of choice DID have to be made. Therefore anyone who felt I did need to choose between them and Uncle BadTouch (or, had it come to it, anyone else) was left out of the interviews. 

[Placid Dingo]

To be perfectly, painfully, glaringly clear; I do NOT and never have taken the position that everyone else is trying to control my work. I DO take the position that had I agreed to do interviews that would leave me unable to choose for myself what content I did or did not include (meaning if using the interview meant I had to promise not to involve Uncle BadTouch or any other figure or otherwise impose conditions on what I wrote) that I would not feel I had full control over what I was writing.

That's FINE. You could and DID choose who you were going to write about.

But people refusing to participate because you involved some David Koresh knockoff is NOT trying to "control your work", it's just refusal to participate.  Which is something YOU can't and shouldn't be able to control.

I don't and did not believe anyone was trying to control my work.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This is not an attempt to record any one genre of Discordianism. It is an attempt to take a snapshot of the broader egragore of Discordia and the lives of Discordians.

Then it failed.

You say a choice had to be made. In fact the whole cause of much of the upset is that I do not think that any kind of choice DID have to be made. Therefore anyone who felt I did need to choose between them and Uncle BadTouch (or, had it come to it, anyone else) was left out of the interviews.

Yes, it did have to be made.  I am not going to lend legitimacy - however vanishingly small - to Uncle BadTouch and his kiddie-fucking ways as representing my religion.  Especially since he has contributed NOTHING to said religion, relying instead on sneaky fucking theft of other peoples' work.

You felt the need to take a stand.  Well done, that man.  You stood with a pedo.

[Placid Dingo]

And you also can't control how much some of us resented your choice of who you wanted to include.

I don't have a need to control people's reactions. I've explained my POV, and as long as people aren't coming out with straight up untruths, I don't mind what they say.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

To be perfectly, painfully, glaringly clear; I do NOT and never have taken the position that everyone else is trying to control my work. I DO take the position that had I agreed to do interviews that would leave me unable to choose for myself what content I did or did not include (meaning if using the interview meant I had to promise not to involve Uncle BadTouch or any other figure or otherwise impose conditions on what I wrote) that I would not feel I had full control over what I was writing.

That's FINE. You could and DID choose who you were going to write about.

But people refusing to participate because you involved some David Koresh knockoff is NOT trying to "control your work", it's just refusal to participate.  Which is something YOU can't and shouldn't be able to control.

I don't and did not believe anyone was trying to control my work.

Boy, it's a good thing I'm senile, eh?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

And you also can't control how much some of us resented your choice of who you wanted to include.

I don't have a need to control people's reactions. I've explained my POV, and as long as people aren't coming out with straight up untruths, I don't mind what they say.

Conservapedia feels the same way, when they change events to suit their own vested interests.

[Placid Dingo]

Firstly. I did not and do not insist on including Uncle BadTouch. I insist on being the one to make that choice.

Revisionism.

You said "No discussion about Discordianism would be complete without Uncle BadTouch."

I don't remember saying that, and it's not my point of view. Feel free to link me to where I said that.

[Placid Dingo]

Indeed.

Dingo, since we're playing with semantics here, I rewrote the above quote, and came up with:

"I insist on being the one choosing to include Uncle BadTouch."

And trust me, no one's going to take that from you.  Because no one wants to.

That is correct. I do insist on being the one choosing to include Uncle BadTouch.
I also insist on being the one to exclude Uncle BadTouch.
The same is true of every single person I have interviewed. I will decide was is and is not included and that choice will be made in the editing process.

[Placid Dingo]

I am not creating a Public Relations document to promote Discordia. I am endevoring to take a snapshot of Discordia as it manifests today. This means showing all aspects.

Which, boiled down, means "the creepy bits as most important".

I don't regard anything much as inherently more important other than the fundamental details of where Discordianism comes from, to give context.

Edit: I've learned from experience that the slightest ambiguity on what I say seems to lead to pretty wild accusations. Therefore I will post here where I was challenged on this comment, and my response.

I don't regard anything much as inherently more important other than the fundamental details of where Discordianism comes from, to give context.

Let's just unpack that:

The author of 30 Days of Eris is not more important than the guy who invented the "Shamlicht Body Shake".

Well done.

Not what I mean to say.

Allow me to rephrase.

I did not start with any assumptions about who or what was essential to my book. I decided to do interviews with those who would give them, and make choices on content in editing.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Firstly. I did not and do not insist on including Uncle BadTouch. I insist on being the one to make that choice.

Revisionism.

You said "No discussion about Discordianism would be complete without Uncle BadTouch."

I don't remember saying that, and it's not my point of view. Feel free to link me to where I said that.

FB, IIRC.

But then here you said:

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32728.msg1223251.html#msg1223251

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That is correct. I do insist on being the one choosing to include Uncle BadTouch.
I also insist on being the one to exclude Uncle BadTouch.

Well, let us know how your dick measuring activity works out.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't regard anything much as inherently more important other than the fundamental details of where Discordianism comes from, to give context.

Let's just unpack that:

The author of 30 Days of Eris is not more important than the guy who invented the "Shamlicht Body Shake".

Well done.

[Placid Dingo]

Firstly. I did not and do not insist on including Uncle BadTouch. I insist on being the one to make that choice.

Revisionism.

You said "No discussion about Discordianism would be complete without Uncle BadTouch."

I don't remember saying that, and it's not my point of view. Feel free to link me to where I said that.

FB, IIRC.

But then here you said:

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32728.msg1223251.html#msg1223251

The link is to where I said

Repost from Facebook.

Regarding Reverend Uncle BadTouch.

My intention with Chasing Eris is and always has been "to document contemporary Discordia". I am not interested is writing a propoganda piece endorsing our culture (though if I didn't have personal reasons for valuing Discordia, I would not be, as I am, a Discordian), but rather presenting the whole spectrum of Discordia as it is. As a result I am not interested in cherry picking individual Discordians on the basis of whether they make the culture look good or bad. I am interested in letting those who identify with Discordia lend their voices to the project and speak for themselves in regards to their personal Discordia.

Uncle BadTouch is part of the community, and as the recent conversations have shown, has a large and very emotional impact on a number of Discordians. My interest is in presenting this tension as it is, not to cover it with a tablecloth and try to pretend that it does not exist.

I've spoken previously with individuals concerned that their name will be associated with Reverend Uncle BadTouch. My answer then and now was this; I am presenting contemporary Discordia, not publishing an endorsement. I intend to be emphasising the extent to which Discordians differ in their views, and will not be implying that any one individual speaks for any other. I am very comfortable allowing individuals to express personal concerns regarding differences of views within the community itself.

I will not be meeting Reverend Uncle BadTouch in person but I will be publishing extracts from conversations online.

That has remained my position. Edit; except replace that last 'will' with a 'may.'

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Firstly. I did not and do not insist on including Uncle BadTouch. I insist on being the one to make that choice.

Revisionism.

You said "No discussion about Discordianism would be complete without Uncle BadTouch."

I don't remember saying that, and it's not my point of view. Feel free to link me to where I said that.

FB, IIRC.

But then here you said:

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32728.msg1223251.html#msg1223251

The link is to where I said

Repost from Facebook.

Regarding Reverend Uncle BadTouch.

My intention with Chasing Eris is and always has been "to document contemporary Discordia". I am not interested is writing a propoganda piece endorsing our culture (though if I didn't have personal reasons for valuing Discordia, I would not be, as I am, a Discordian), but rather presenting the whole spectrum of Discordia as it is. As a result I am not interested in cherry picking individual Discordians on the basis of whether they make the culture look good or bad. I am interested in letting those who identify with Discordia lend their voices to the project and speak for themselves in regards to their personal Discordia.

Uncle BadTouch is part of the community, and as the recent conversations have shown, has a large and very emotional impact on a number of Discordians. My interest is in presenting this tension as it is, not to cover it with a tablecloth and try to pretend that it does not exist.

I've spoken previously with individuals concerned that their name will be associated with Reverend Uncle BadTouch. My answer then and now was this; I am presenting contemporary Discordia, not publishing an endorsement. I intend to be emphasising the extent to which Discordians differ in their views, and will not be implying that any one individual speaks for any other. I am very comfortable allowing individuals to express personal concerns regarding differences of views within the community itself.

I will not be meeting Reverend Uncle BadTouch in person but I will be publishing extracts from conversations online.

That has remained my position.

Fantastic.  Just so long as I am left out of it entirely.

[Placid Dingo]

I don't regard anything much as inherently more important other than the fundamental details of where Discordianism comes from, to give context.

Let's just unpack that:

The author of 30 Days of Eris is not more important than the guy who invented the "Shamlicht Body Shake".

Well done.

Not what I mean to say.

Allow me to rephrase.

I did not start with any assumptions about who or what was essential to my book. I decided to do interviews with those who would give them, and make choices on content in editing.