An open letter to all who post here ...

[Jerry Freeman]

Dear friends,

I've been stewing about whether or not to post something about the nature of community and the difference between "pseudo-community" and true community.

This line of thinking comes from _The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace_, written by M. Scott Peck, M.D., who also wrote the bestseller, _The Road Less Traveled_.

Dr. Peck defines pseudo-community as a state of affairs where most people are more or less polite and get along reasonably well, but there is rarely any interaction that goes deep enough to reveal people's real feelings or to expose the real differences between people. Pseudo-community, he contends, is the nature of most groups, whether the connections are municipal, academic, professional, religious, or whatever.

Dr. Peck describes a process that communities of various kinds can, and occasionally do, go through where something drives the interactions among the members beyond the superficial level and gets them involved with each other in ways that are more "real."

In the process, all kinds of differences get unmasked -- differences that are irreconcilable and which many of the participants would have judged "unacceptable" before having to come to terms with them among the people of their community.

A period of "chaos" (Dr. Peck's word of choice) ensues where people who had been getting along reasonably well fall into disagreement and controversy, one hallmark of which is that everyone tries to convert or persuade every one else to his or her way of thinking.

Eventually, it becomes obvious that this can never happen, that the differences truly are irreconcilable, and a sense of hopelessness sets in.

If there is to be transformation from pseudo-community to true community, that period of hopelessness is a good sign, because it means that those involved have given up the idea that they are going to change the people around them. At that point, there are two possible paths to take:

1. Go stomping off shaking one's head, muttering, "These people will never learn. I'm out of here," or

2. Stick around and see what happens next.

One of the things that can happen next, is a natural result of a significant number of members of the community having actually given up hope of getting along or agreeing with the others.

So now what?

Well, they can figure out that they still really like and care for the people with whom they have found themselves in irreconcilable disagreement. In fact, they may find that those people with whom they have irreconcilable disagreements are, if anything, more likeable and more important to them than before they discovered how deeply they disagreed.

If such an awakening is to occur, there must be an underlying willingness among enough of the participants, to approach their counterparts with a modicum of openness and respect. The particularly profound element of this development is the fact that there can be a greater sense of connectedness and a greater sense of the value of the other than there had been before the discovery that there were differences that could never be resolved.

Why should that be?

I think it is because -- even though there is profound disagreement -- the result of facing the others, exploring the attitudes and beliefs, and unmasking the differences, is that one knows the other far more deeply. All of the parties to the process have exposed themselves on levels more personal and more vulnerable than before. They know each other better, and having invested the time and effort to accomplish that, discover that the other has become more, not less, valuable than before.

I believe that by now, most of us should be able to see that there are differences among us that we will never resolve by debate.

I believe that we should also be able to see that we are sharing in an experience of world events that is profound and will likely have a powerful effect on all of us.

And I believe we should be able to see that most of us care very much about the issues involved in those world events, even though we may disagree about what is the correct course of action or point of view.

That, I believe, is as far as we will be able to go. We will always disagree, but we will always, nonetheless, be more the same than we are different. Knowing each other well enough to understand, to whatever degree we are able, how the others think, what the others are experiencing, what are the others’ concerns, can be enough, even in the midst of disagreement.

This is not simply a grudging “agreeing to disagree,” which implies a shutting off of receptiveness to the others’ points of view. It’s more respectful than that, and I believe many members of this forum are capable enough of the kind of respect and appreciation for others of differing viewpoints, to be able to accomplish and maintain the sense of true community.

I particularly like this forum because the participants reveal themselves as individuals. They/we talk about whatever matters to us, out in the open where all can see, take it or leave it. This is important to me because in my world, community and connectedness are more important than just about anything else.

Whistles are important, but they are so much more important if they can create a pretext for people to connect as people, and not merely as dispensers of more or less random snippets of information.

I like this forum because Dale has accomplished something, in my opinion, masterful -- even magical -- in the way he has set it up with such lightheartedness, in the midst of so much respect for individual expression and for whatever matters in the world.

I prefer this format, where all the discussions are out in the open, where I can have an overview of everything going on in this community, including the debates, if I care to, because I want know the people with whom I am involved.

I care about you all, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for sharing your thoughts here.

With my sincere best wishes,
Jerry

[ErikT]

Thanks for your post, Jerry, but I've got to agree to agree.

Oh, wait. There I was on the defensive I mean, I agree! I've always liked the community aspect of Chiff and Fipple; not the sanitized version, but the one in which we talk and agree and disagree and then become friends.

Erik

[spittin_in_the_wind]

Awesome, couldn't have said it better:

From the chiffy dust,
Camaraderie abounds;
Our whistles we hoist!

Robin

[Paul]

Jerry, yes.

[madguy]

I almost gave up reading Jerry's post about half way through (the tiny print on this new format is the only thing I don't like about it ), but I'm glad I stuck with it and read it through. Perhaps it's just me, but the words and explanations offered had a calming effect on me, and again renewed my belief that C&F shall continue and possibly grow even stronger in the time ahead.

~Larry

[Zubivka]

This IS impressive, Jerry.
Thanks.

[kevin m.]

Well said Jerry. The current state of affairs in the world has had an effect on the board,and the O.T. threads it has generated has caused an aweful lot of strife (I WILL NOT be involved in political debate on this board-I do not consider a whistle board to be the appropriate forum for that sort of discussion- yes,I know the politilogues can argue that politics is part of the sphere of all human doings and affairs!) The recent political/world affairs/war spats have revealed that some board members whose posts I have enjoyed in the past,have different political outlooks to my own.This is to be expected in any group of people.Whilst I may not agree with these peoples political stance,I certainly STILL respect them, and still enjoy their musical commentary and continueing input to this board.To me,music is one of the most life enriching things in this world,and it has the power to bring disparate people together.Let' s all put our differences aside and try to act as the CHIFF COMMUNITY.

[brewerpaul]

First rate Jerry!
The anonymity of the Web sometimes prompts people to act/talk more outrageously or thoughtlessly than they would if talking face to face and this often leads to bitter rancor. A topic as peaceful and benign as whistles becomes a hotbed of emotions. I've seen this on quite a few message boards on topics as diverse as cars, homebrewing, instrument making, etc.
Best course of action, I believe, is not to rise to the bait. Remain calm and rational in the face of flaming, and don't try to respond to inflammatory postings. You won't win.
I know that several good people have lost interest in C&F because of this, and that is truly too bad. Let's keep it civil, folks.

[ScottStewart]

You have made a good point. The process you described is valuable to creating our unique community. There is one dynamic I see occuring more than I'd like to, though. Often times thoughts or beliefs are discussed and judgements are made about the people who hold to them. One example would be "All so and so's are ___________(fill in the blank). I've seen people described on this board as everything from idiots to slaves just for holding to a certain belief or thought. Regardless of what Dr. Peck wrote, such statements are anti-community. They are made out of ignorance or a desire to demean an entire group of people. Now, I'm a big boy and I can take name calling, but I believe such actions close down the growth of community. In other words, it tells folks that such thoughts or beliefs are considered invalid and are unwelcome in the discussion of events. If a brave soul continues to give their opinion colored by their thought or belief after being categorized, they are often shouted down, so to speak. That is not productive as no discussion is made to merits of the differing sides. In fact, I've observed that when such name calling occurs, it usually means the one doing it can no longer support their argument against that belief and feels they must resort to a baser type of communication to gain the upper hand. Sadly, it usually works. It appeals to emotion rather than logic.
As an example, I could give four or five statements describing me and my life that would leave me open to that type of categorizing. Everything I say could then be judged as invalid with the kind of stereotyping statements I've seen here. My life defies much of what is considered conventional today, and yet I don't think that invalidates what I could contribute to this community. I have been on this board (and many incarnations of it) for years now, and have seen many folks with valuable views leave due to being shouted down or name calling.
I guess what I'm saying is that if we want to have a discussion, then have it, but don't use demeaning statements to describe folks because that's where the discussion ends.

[The Weekenders]

First rate Jerry!
The anonymity of the Web sometimes prompts people to act/talk more outrageously or thoughtlessly than they would if talking face to face and this often leads to bitter rancor. ..
Best course of action, I believe, is not to rise to the bait. Remain calm and rational in the face of flaming, and don't try to respond to inflammatory postings. You won't win.
I know that several good people have lost interest in C&F because of this, and that is truly too bad. Let's keep it civil, folks.

Jerry: Thanks for interesting post. I am quoting bpaul above because: Its only happenstance that I don't use my real name on board. My name was taken tho that poster has not contributed since I joined.

I am very honest on the Forum and I bore people in person with the exact same mixture of knowledge, crackpot theories and over-the-top conclusions as I do here.

I like honest and bluntness though it can cause discomfort. I think that passive-aggressive behavior is one of the scourges of mankind. Trouble is, when you refuse to use it, sometimes the room gets too small, so to speak and some find others presence intolerable.

After a dust-up, you will find those who choose to stay with their rage or sense of insult (because it gives them some form of self-identity and comfort) and those who can accept an apology and move on.

But as you said, its all part of a community, which is after all, an extension of the family, where you often break bread with those who you can barely get along with.

And one other guiding principle that I keep in mind is this, which I learned in retail business.

You are always an @#$hole to somebody in this world, hopefully that person is the least important to you and the community of people who you value.

I learned this because I observed bosses in retail who were really good people but had to occasionally fire or discipline recalcitrant, lazy or thieving employees. The employees might be likable folk, who "hated that @#$hole", but in the end, the boss had to do the correct thing to survive in business. But not before everyone was sucked into some little drama surrounding the employees' tendencies and exchanges.

Sincerely,
Lance (The Weekender)

[Nanohedron]

Ah, Jerry! I can always look to you (and so many others here) for a firm sense of humanity. It is for the points you raised that I stick around here, and I'm glad you took the time to hold them up to us for our reflection.

Can we have a flame war now?

Best,
N

[Jack]

edit

[Wombat]

Nicely put Jerry. As I read your post what impressed itself on me was not so much what you were saying, not that I disagreed with it, but how you were saying it. Whether or not your theory is exactly right is insignificant compared to the evident fact that you care.

If this board is in the doldrums, it will be rebuilt by people who care, for the music, for their own dignity, but most of all for eachother and the sense of community we have when we are at our best.

[elendil]

As a relatively new poster, I was quite surprised at the range of issues covered on this board--especially at the outrageousness of some of the early war threads. However, I have to say that I think that for the past week or so people have engaged in more productive styles of discussion--which to me suggests a considerable measure of good will. After my initial surprise, I guess I kinda enjoy some of the free wheeling discussion, as long as it's halfway intelligent and doesn't descend into outright name calling.

[Ridseard]

Now, I'm a big boy and I can take name calling, but I believe such actions close down the growth of community.

Trying to demonize or otherwise discredit an opponent is usually a departure from the topic of discussion and is a symptom of frustration when one's rational arguments have failed to produce the desired effect. It is a perfectly natural phenomenon within any community in which there are varying levels of emotional maturity.