Way, way back, on October 7, I wrote a little post about a fellow blogger calling himself “the Civil Discourse Bustard.” A brief recap of that post: he linked to me in a post on his blog, but he got my URL wrong. I sent him an e-mail to correct the listing. He replied to my e-mail, but still had not fixed his link. That’s where things stood on October 7.
The very next day, I was suddenly given a huge programming project which occupied my every waking hour (and made some withdrawals from my sleeping hours, too) for the next three weeks. During this time (which ended yesterday) I went from my normal schedule of blogging once daily about topics of general interest, to blogging sporadically, and only about my game development.
And so a lot went on in the world which I failed to report to you: wars and politics and weather and other things besides. I apologize for my recent lack of non-Texas-Holdem reportage, and hope you found an alternate source in the interim. But most especially, I apologize for not relaying recent Bustard-related events, of which there have been three!
1. On October 11, Bustard updated his post which linked to me, this time with a correct URL. Wrote a new description too. Then, he left a comment here on my blog announcing the correction.
2. On October 18, Bustard sent me an e-mail, objecting to my post of October 7, which it turns out was unfair. When I got this e-mail, I resolved to redress my unfairness just as soon as I finished my project; a resolution I am now keeping. Rather than synopsize or excerpt this e-mail, I had best just publish it here in its entirety, with a few explanatory notes of my own, to avoid any further commissions of unfairness.
(I’ll demur on the charge of unfairness, and extend my apologies to the old Bustard.)Hey Sean -
We seem to be having some communication problems, which are probably my fault. I am of a certain age - and computers, blogs and webs do not come easily. (Except of course for the cobwebs in my brain.)
I do want to object to some comments which you made that seem a tad unfair. In your post you claim that my response (”Well Said”) was in reference to your correcting me as to your URL. For some reason you did not include the rest of your message: “I am working on a post spotlighting left-wing blogs which break the mold by being civil and somewhat coherent. As you can imagine the search is time consuming.” Although I disagree with this assessment, I did think it both clever and witty. Or “Well Said.”
You also complain about my description of you site. I did not mean to wound you. I actually thought that someone who pleaded for inclusion in a “right-minded blogroll” would not be happy to have the liberal host of that site wholeheartedly agree with you.(Except that I never complained about his description of my site, only the incorrect URL, which I thought could have been a nexus of agreement.)
Additionally, when I added you to the list, I sent you an e-mail stating ” I did list your site on the cdbustard - if you have any corrections please let me know.” I did not hear back from you.(Except that he did hear back from me. That’s the very e-mail I was replying to when I sent him the correct URL.)
I have corrected my description of your site, and can only hope that you no longer feel the victim.
With Best Regards, bbbustard.
(”No longer feel the victim”? Jeez. All I did was correct a URL, and that was in reply to an e-mail that said, “if you have any corrections please let me know.”)
3. On October 28, Bustard left another comment on this blog.
When I, admittedly belately, answer your points, I get no response? How odd of one who acts as if he defines civilization.
So now I apologize for my belated response to Bustard’s belated correction. And I apologize for defining civilization too, for good measure. And I preemptively apologize for any offense taken at this post, or at any Bustard-related action or inaction on my part in the future. When taken with my foregoing apology for my unfair post of October 7, that’s four total apologies to the Civil Discourse Bustard.
And that’s as many as I can manage today.
The BBC would like to apologise for the previous apology.
Well said.
Dear Sean,
Happily, today is another day.
I do appreciate your honesty and your apologies. I just need some more of them. In fact you and your readership had quite a discussion complaining about my characterization of your opinions as “wrong.” I certainly might be wrong about calling your opinions wrong, but I am not wrong in calling attention to those complaints about my wrong-headedness. Your statement that “I never complained about his description of my site” is less than accurate. Nonetheless, I want to apologize for my impatience in looking for a response, and I do understand the defense of ‘being too busy to remember things accurately.’ (also know as the Scooter Libby defense)
Looking forward to your next, and I’m sure, last, apology.
BRgds,
bbbustard
Heya Bustard!
Not only had I never complained about your description, but I had specifically abjured complaining about it. Here’s what I said: “But I wouldn’t complain about it. Anyone can write whatever he likes about me.” I quoted your description, and wondered about it, but never complained. Most of my readers agreed with it.
Surely there is no need for more apologies; that’s why I thought to add the fourth, preemptive one, for just such a situation as this. Please apply that apology to your current grievance.
Hi There Mr. Sean,
I really appreciate the way in which you are responding to this very difficult and intricate matter, and I hate to disappoint, yet feel the need to mention:
1. I understand that your pre-emptive apology could be considered a response to issues concerning “complaints as to descriptive content.” But us lefties do not approve pf pre-emptive strikes. This sort of sums it all up - you want an apology accepted before you have admitted to the crime! How crazy is that?
2. Contrary to your apparent belief system, a bustard of a ‘certain age ‘is not asking to be reclassified as an “Old Bustard”
Now, I certainly agree that two more apologies would be over the top. But to suggest that one pre-emptive “sorry” is sufficient does not work either.
Confidently awaiting your revised plan for reconciliation,
bbbustard
This is a mighty difficult and intricate matter, all right, and I am impressed that you are managing to keep it all straight. Honestly, I’ve lost track of what it is I’m supposed to be sorry about. Let me try to pinpoint your extant bones of contention, with a view toward deboning them. Using your own numbered paragraphs as a guide, it seems there are still two infractions for which your honor requires atonement:
1) Something about your description of my blog, and
2) Referring to you as “the old Bustard.”
I really cannot figure out grievance number 1. I’ve re-read every word of our previous correspondence several times, and I am still at sea. You say that I (or my “readership”) complained about something, and that I owe you an apology for this complaint? What is that all about? I thank you in advance (if preemptive gratitude is permitted) for your patient explanation.
And the term at the heart of grievance number 2 was one of endearment. Here in Oklahoma, the best of chums call one another “old” this-and-that. Apparently my cameraderie got lost in translation. I cannot apologize for the idiom, as such, as it was not a wrongdoing, but I can promise never to repeat it, if that helps.
Well, you can call me old any time you like. But don’t you dare call me a bustard. (Dear Bustard, I am sorry.)
I for one would like to apologize for reading this thread, and making this comment. I would also like to apologize for any future comments, any prior comments, and the content of this apology.
For that, I sincerely apologize.
See, Bustard, now you’ve got five apologies (by my count) from old Dan, and one from old Jan! Taken with my four, that’s a total of ten! And if you count old Chaz’s apology on behalf of the BBC as maybe a half of an apology, it’s ten-point-five! Only a churl would demand more.
(I haven’t had this many apologies in one post since October 16, 2004.)
You’d have another if pings weren’t coming back 403.
They are? So sorry. So very sorry. (You didn’t by any chance try to ping me with the word “curl” in the text?)
Well, I’ll be [insert participle here]. Hadn’t heard about that particular, um, feature.
(Yes, it did contain the Forbidden Word, mostly for purposes of prosody.)
I only learned of it last night myself, when Phoebe kept getting 403 errors trying to post about a scarf. I deleted one word at a time from her post until I found the culprit.
Since the filter is high above me on the root server (it’s not part of WordPress, it’s part of Apache), there isn’t much I can do about it. We can’t even write “curl” in our own posts or comments! But I can go back and edit the actual MySQL after posting, to put the word in where we wanted it. That doesn’t help at all with other people’s comments and pings, though. If I come up with a work-around, I’ll blog about it.
I just hope whoever wrote the “mod_security” filter eventually rewrites it to fix this silly problem.
It’s a sorry sorry world we live in.
This is my first time here, and boy, am I ever sorry.
BTW, does “çurl” get through your filter? If so, that would be a fun word to write a lot in comments and such.
Old Sean,
First please give my best to your old wife.
All the apologies are humbly acknowledged, and accepted. And I am sorry if I have been overly demanding. A member of a species not far from extinction tends to be a tad paranoid.
I understand and accept your claim that “old” is in no way meant to be insulting. Still, paranoid that I am, I have my doubts. I have not been lucky enough to be in OK for a few decades. But if my memory serves me correctly, and as you point out it rarely does, the use of the word “old” is not quite so straightforward as you suggest.
Let me give you a hypothetical:
Old Sean, actually a 32 year old who is a happily married father of some delightful young ones, lives at 194 Plains Boulevard. At 196 Plains lives the tragically widowed Mrs. Robinson. She is 57 years old, trim of figure and stylishly dressed; her children have grown and left the house.
Suddenly a Toyota Camry pulls into your driveway. You approach the car, and the well-built, grey haired driver asks you for your help in finding 196 Plains Blvd. You respond in one of two ways:
1. “Oh, you want Old Mrs Robinson! - Yes Sir, her drive is right next door. Just head on over: I’m sure she’d like some company” (She is, after all a good friend) OR
2. Yes, Sir, Sandy Robinson lives right next door, but I have to say she’s a real busy woman. Who knows if she’d be at home at this time of day?!?
Old is not so easy,eh?
At this rate, you can spend the rest of your life commenting on a single post. If that’s anyone’s idea of a good time.
Left-leaning sites that are civil and coherent ARE as rare as hen’s teeth. Period.
Bustard, your hypothetical raises more questions than it answers. (Since it doesn’t answer any, that ain’t saying much, but still.)
First of all, why would I approach a Toyota that pulls into my driveway? I don’t have a question for the stranger; he’s the one with the question. And as I am usually out whittling or tying flies on my front stoop, he can just shout his question out his window.
Second, why would I have to invoke anyone by name, if all he asks about is an address? If he asks, “Where’s 196 Plains Boulevard?” I could say “It’s next door,” or better, I could nod or point to the next house without speaking, and so not have to rearrange the wad of tobacco in my mouth.
Third, what’s he want with old Mrs. Robinson, anyways? I don’t trust him.
Far be it from me to let this die of neglect.
As I recall, Old Mrs. Robinson enjoys visits from young men, and it might do some good to point out to this presumably young Camry driver (because you rarely see older people driving a Camry) that Mrs. Robinson is, indeed, old and he should just move along.
Ah, but we have already been told that the Camry driver is “well-built” and “grey haired,” which all seems oddly specific for an hypothetical. Maybe we’re supposed to be reading between the lines. Bustard, you don’t drive a… Camry, by any chance?
Actually, the Camry itself is well-built; its driver is merely grey-haired.
I hate to admit it - CGHill got it closest I am grey haired,and most any car is better built than I. And I have no Camry.
I do have a big desire to discuss how truth fits into modern ways of thinking about Christianity - some of your responses were smart,some sort of folksy, some cute. But no one addressed the honesty involved in calling bbbustard, or his paramour, Mrs. Robinson, old. And how does this relate to the state we find our politcal culture in. If you were to be honest, I guess you’d have to admit that the use of “old” in talking about the bustard was originally more of a put down than it was friendly, I do in fact know that this discussion is a bit silly, but it is not so silly when lies dominate our national political discourse as well.
I’m afraid I can only be of limited help in your research on modern ways of thinking, as I do not understand these modern ways very well. But truth and honesty are ancient ways. Downright old, even, if I were to be honest. (And by the way, why would you say “if you were to be honest” to anyone unless you intended it as an insult? Please apologize.)
I refer you to the online dictionary at Answers.com, specifically the definition of ‘old,’ entry number 13 § b.
Besides entry 13 § b (the one I was using when I said ‘old’), there are other meanings of ‘old,’ some of them complimentary. “Having or exhibiting the wisdom of age.” “Skilled or able through long experience; practiced.”
As for the relationship of “oldness” to Christianity, volumes could be written. I can offer briefly my opinion that in the most literal sense, there is no such thing as an old Christian. “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”
Bbbustard, Steve Martin has you long beat on the apology running gag.
Hey, it stripped my link tag!
I am deeply sorry about that, Kevin. I’ve never seen it do that before. I didn’t even know there was any code on my blog for stripping out link tags. Where were you trying to link to?
(I fixed Kevin’s link, in comment 25. I am profoundly sorry it took so long, and beg for your clemency.)
WHOA - -
A whole lot of unfairness going on in my absence.
Kevins seems to think that I’ve been making apologies by the dozen here.Not so ! Sean’s side of the table has been doing most of the apologizing, I’ve been mostly just graciously accepting them. (Just because I said that I have grey hair - you have to go with Steve Martin jokes?)
What I think is my first apology is coming now. I am sure it sounds like one of those phony “I apologize if I’ve offended anyone kinds of apologies, but it is hearfelt. I apologize to Sean for seeming to question his honesty. I am actually quite confident that he’s a very honest guy. I really was not trying to accuse him of dishonesty - it was more of a “If you really honestly look into your heart what do you see” kind of a question. No insult was intended.
I probably was a bit sloppy in my thinking because I am intriqued by the blog-o-sphere, Chirstianity, and Honesty. I visit a lot of Christian sites where what is being asserted is really not true. I think President Bush often is less than honest. I don’t see how this works with the teachings of Christ.
But I seriously do not think Sean fits into this category, but I am interested in the question.
P.S. I do note that 12 other definitions of “old” (not including 13a)preceded Sean’s choice!
Bustard,
My brother Sean doesn’t need me to come to his rescue, so that’s not what I’m doing. Just offering my 2 cents.
I wouldn’t have gotten mired in the “I meant to say you were old as in chum, not as in age” tack he’s taken, but rather that you’d led me to believe you’re along in years with your own words here:
Age, cobwebs. All this and gray hair too.
Hey, my hair is a third brown, a third gray, and a third gone. At 40, I’m no spring chicken. Call me old. Go ahead. See! No pain.
But if I’ve pained you by going this road, please accept my appy polly loggy.
Bustard, I accept your apology. Your questions regarding honesty, Christianity, and current events are similar to those of Mr. Ziegler, commenting on another post. With so much interest in that noble topic, I have decided to present my own honest musings in a new post. I have to go teach my Web Design class now, and then take my daughters to dance class, but my honesty essay will be posted sometime this evening. Honest!
I am also drafting a letter to the Houghton Mifflin Company, demanding an apology for listing the cordial usage of ‘old’ below the literal usage in their dictionary. But I don’t know when I’ll finish that.