[Vision2020] Am I A "Pollyana?" was: This hook is going to tear my jaw

[Ted Moffett]

Chas et. al.

Occasionally I misinterpret, about once every 20 years (OK, more like every
20 minutes).  But in this case, given the prior comments on Vision2020 about
Vision2020 by Walter whoever she/he is, my post about Walter's disparaging
views of Vision2020 are not a complete misinterpretation, though I was
unaware of the specific interpretation of "VisionCrack" that you offered.  I
did ponder, before I commented on the "VisionCrack" comment, that it could
be interpreted as referring to addiction from crack cocaine, but either way,
"VisionCrack" like an addictive substance, or "VisionCrack" as in the
"craziness" of the list, I think my comments worth pondering. Consider my
explanation below:

Walter wrote Sat. April 14:

http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2007-April/043305.html

I am indeed hiding
behind a cloak of anonymity, since this forum seems to nothing but destroy
those willing to talk, and I have no suicide wish.
-----
And again Sat. April 14:

http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2007-April/043323.html<http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2007-April/043323.html>

Yet this
matter, along with the Archies issue, convinced me of the need to respond
here, despite my burning desire to not be associated with vision2020.
-----

And on Mon. April 16:

http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2007-April/043372.html

In all truth, the only
reaction I have to much of what takes place on vision2020 is anger,
------

My post about the "VisionCrack" comment was based in large measure on these
prior comments.  While Vision2020 has it's share of abusiveness, I do not
agree that it does "nothing but destroy those willing to talk," not that
participation implies a "suicide wish."  I have found mostly positive
responses to my posts over the years I have participated.  In fact, I have
been surprised I have not received considerable more Internet abuse, given
my strong opinions on some issues.

Also, given that Walter has a "burning desire to not be associated with
vision2020," even given the interpretation of "VisionCrack" in the context
of addictive behavior, in referencing psychiatrist Fritz Perls, the founder
of Gestalt Therapy, was my post perhaps relevant?  Consider this suggestion
in the context of Walter's statement that "the only reaction I have to much
of what takes place on Vision2020 is anger," and perhaps projection in light
of Fritz Perls comment on this psychological process is a concept worth
considering, given Walter thinks Vision2020 does "nothing but destroy those
willing to talk."

I understand that Walter apparently feels a need, despite his antipathy to
Vision2020 content, to correct the shortcomings of the list via direct
participation.  This might be interpreted as a noble self sacrificing effort
to reform Vision2020 from a person who cannot reveal their identify for a
good reason(s). For the most part, Walter's posts are thoughtful, and I find
I am in agreement with many of her/his ideas.  But I am becoming less
accepting of anonymous subscribers.

A well rounded view of Vision2020 reveals, I think, that it is not as
nefarious an influence as Walter implies. Perhaps I'm not aware of how
destructive Vision2020 really is, and I am engaging in wishful thinking that
it plays a more positive role than Walter's comments suggest.  My projection
would thus be that of a naive Pollyanna:

Excerpt from web link below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollyanna

Through the success of the book, the term "pollyanna" (along with the
adjective "pollyannaish" and the noun "Pollyannaism") entered the language
to describe someone who is cheerfully optimistic and who maintains a
generous attitude toward the motives of other people. It then became by
extension (and contrary to the spirit of the book) a derogatory term for a
naïve optimist who always expects people to act decently, despite strong
evidence to the contrary.

------------------------------
I try to avoid all psychoanalyzing of Vision2020 subscribers, wishing to
focus on ideas and issues, not personalities or ad hominem arguments, which
is perhaps one reason I have not been attacked as much as I might as a
result of my Vision2020 posts.

I am breaking my own rules of participation in this post.  And inviting
attack.

My bad!

Ted Moffett

On 4/20/07, Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/20/07, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Please leave the list if you think it is "VisionCrack."
>
> Ted, you misinterpreted here.  The term VisionCrack refers to the
> addictive nature of Vision2020, not anything disparaging.  It stems
> from Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games, (MMORPGs) such
> as EverQuest, which was ruefully referred to as EverCrack due to its
> addictiveness.
>
> Chas
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070421/a44c3d24/attachment.html