Comments on: ze livebloggin’: Brooks v. Shuster & Rutrick http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/ A blog about Brandeis University, progressive politics, and the spirit of Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis on the campus today. Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:33:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: reader http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-20787 reader Sun, 05 Jun 2011 08:03:22 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-20787 This was one of the weaker days in IMP's history. Humor at the expense of readership? Bad idea. Controversy for the sake of controversy is never controversial. This was one of the weaker days in IMP’s history. Humor at the expense of readership? Bad idea. Controversy for the sake of controversy is never controversial.

]]> By: Innermost Parts » Blog Archive » Our Broken Senate(s) http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-15238 Innermost Parts » Blog Archive » Our Broken Senate(s) Tue, 03 Aug 2010 08:34:15 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-15238 [...] senate has drama, yes, but perhaps because it is the most democratic of union institutions. Barring high-profile Student Judiciary Trials, it is the one institutions where “common students” can come and confront the [...] [...] senate has drama, yes, but perhaps because it is the most democratic of union institutions. Barring high-profile Student Judiciary Trials, it is the one institutions where “common students” can come and confront the [...]

]]> By: Jonathan http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-858 Jonathan Fri, 09 May 2008 00:31:33 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-858 *beliefs above in the second sentence, was a mistake. I meant opinions. *beliefs above in the second sentence, was a mistake. I meant opinions.

]]> By: Jonathan http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-857 Jonathan Thu, 08 May 2008 21:18:07 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-857 Thanks Nelson for your comment. I think everyone, even the writers of the blog, know that there is a difference between ridiculing someone for there beliefs and ridiculing a person on how they "looked" in the trial. One is an expression of disagreement, and the other is an expression of being a jerk. Brandeis is a small community, how about being a little sensitive? I'm not saying that the website is not allowed to put up offensive material, (I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech) , what I'm saying is that they should be considerate. Oh, why does someone need a defense? I meant a defense to there character. After reading this blog, the writers of it just seemed like jerks. I'm not saying that they are, what I'm saying is that everything you do is a little revealing of your character. That is why I they, the writers of this blog, originally, tried to "defend" themselves. The quote you were questioning was my comment on their defense. That being bored is not an excuse to insulting someone's looks. Thanks Nelson for your comment. I think everyone, even the writers of the blog, know that there is a difference between ridiculing someone for there beliefs and ridiculing a person on how they “looked” in the trial. One is an expression of disagreement, and the other is an expression of being a jerk. Brandeis is a small community, how about being a little sensitive? I’m not saying that the website is not allowed to put up offensive material, (I’m a firm believer in freedom of speech) , what I’m saying is that they should be considerate. Oh, why does someone need a defense? I meant a defense to there character. After reading this blog, the writers of it just seemed like jerks. I’m not saying that they are, what I’m saying is that everything you do is a little revealing of your character. That is why I they, the writers of this blog, originally, tried to “defend” themselves. The quote you were questioning was my comment on their defense. That being bored is not an excuse to insulting someone’s looks.

]]> By: Marissa Linzi http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-855 Marissa Linzi Thu, 08 May 2008 18:17:11 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-855 I came by to see what all the fuss was about. Here are my conclusions: The live blog was funny, but I agree with whoever wadodaw is. That was unnecessarily mean. It's one thing to pin childish insults on remote public figures, but come on, guys. We're all classmates here. I applaud Lev and Adam and Sahar for maintaining a level of professionalism. But Alex Melman, I think I've lost a little bit of respect for you. I think Taylor's post was completely justified, despite the profanity. If I'd been called a constipated walrus, I'd have cussed you guys out too. Anyway, we can all agree that this entire thing was indeed very silly. There's just no need to be mean. I came by to see what all the fuss was about. Here are my conclusions:
The live blog was funny, but I agree with whoever wadodaw is. That was unnecessarily mean. It’s one thing to pin childish insults on remote public figures, but come on, guys. We’re all classmates here. I applaud Lev and Adam and Sahar for maintaining a level of professionalism. But Alex Melman, I think I’ve lost a little bit of respect for you. I think Taylor’s post was completely justified, despite the profanity. If I’d been called a constipated walrus, I’d have cussed you guys out too.

Anyway, we can all agree that this entire thing was indeed very silly. There’s just no need to be mean.

]]> By: Nelson Rutrick http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-854 Nelson Rutrick Thu, 08 May 2008 17:39:40 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-854 Why does one need a defense for publicly ridiculing someone online? Thank god the internets aren't monitored by Jonathan's. Why does one need a defense for publicly ridiculing someone online? Thank god the internets aren’t monitored by Jonathan’s.

]]> By: Jonathan http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-843 Jonathan Wed, 07 May 2008 22:42:58 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-843 Wow, I just found the whole blog ridiculously immature and offensive. Being bored isn't a defense for publicly ridiculing someone online, just because he represented a side you didn't like. Honestly, this whole blog disgusted me. Wow, I just found the whole blog ridiculously immature and offensive. Being bored isn’t a defense for publicly ridiculing someone online, just because he represented a side you didn’t like. Honestly, this whole blog disgusted me.

]]> By: Loki http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-831 Loki Tue, 06 May 2008 19:35:53 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-831 wadodaw - You're right. Our apology is below: Dear Mr Shiells, We apologize for comparing your face to that of a constipated walrus. As merely amateur observers of walrii, we were by no means qualified to make that judgement. Merely because your face may have <i>prima facie</i> resembled a walrus in need of immediate relief did not mean that we should have made that judgement ourselves. The proper course of action would have been to recommend that evaluation to a Special Executive committee of the Student Union. We hereby recommend such action be taken. Sincerely, <i>Loki, Lev, and Sahar</i> wadodaw –

You’re right. Our apology is below:

Dear Mr Shiells,

We apologize for comparing your face to that of a constipated walrus. As merely amateur observers of walrii, we were by no means qualified to make that judgement. Merely because your face may have prima facie resembled a walrus in need of immediate relief did not mean that we should have made that judgement ourselves. The proper course of action would have been to recommend that evaluation to a Special Executive committee of the Student Union. We hereby recommend such action be taken.

Sincerely,
Loki, Lev, and Sahar

]]> By: wadodaw http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-818 wadodaw Mon, 05 May 2008 06:37:47 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-818 I think Innermost Parts owes Taylor Shiells a formal apology, for comparing his face to a constipated walrus. Though it may be an opinion, it is without doubt malicious, and has no place in a blog that attempts to maintain some level of self-dignity. I think Innermost Parts owes Taylor Shiells a formal apology, for comparing his face to a constipated walrus. Though it may be an opinion, it is without doubt malicious, and has no place in a blog that attempts to maintain some level of self-dignity.

]]> By: Adam Hughes http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-809 Adam Hughes Sun, 04 May 2008 18:18:21 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-809 Nelson -- I was an extremely stupid idea?!?!? That's it, I'm endorsing Brooks. Nelson — I was an extremely stupid idea?!?!? That’s it, I’m endorsing Brooks.

]]> By: Adam Hughes http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-808 Adam Hughes Sun, 04 May 2008 18:16:40 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-808 Did anyone actually read Taylor Shiells's op-ed? Exactly what parts are ridiculous and scathing? He offered a well-articulated criticism of the tactics SAJR employed (NOT their actual goals), and even if you disagree with it, you have to admit it offers a valid point in a respectful way. Taylor -- I obviously disagree with some of your more extreme characterizations, but I understand where you're coming from to some extent. This was a seven hour trial, and to keep things interesting, Lev, Loki, and Sahar added a little humor to their report. They went after everyone, but obviously their main focus was the opposing case (we are an opinion site and we did face a fair amount of criticism in the trial itself). Please don't think that anything they said was meant to be taken personally (as Lev explains in his post). Personally, I think you did a really great job as counsel, and I really respect your efforts. I ask that you take a look at some of our other posts; I think you'll realize that we're not the libelous monsters that we're made out to be, and that we are serious in fighting for a lot of issues I think you'll find important as well. Did anyone actually read Taylor Shiells’s op-ed? Exactly what parts are ridiculous and scathing? He offered a well-articulated criticism of the tactics SAJR employed (NOT their actual goals), and even if you disagree with it, you have to admit it offers a valid point in a respectful way.

Taylor — I obviously disagree with some of your more extreme characterizations, but I understand where you’re coming from to some extent. This was a seven hour trial, and to keep things interesting, Lev, Loki, and Sahar added a little humor to their report. They went after everyone, but obviously their main focus was the opposing case (we are an opinion site and we did face a fair amount of criticism in the trial itself). Please don’t think that anything they said was meant to be taken personally (as Lev explains in his post). Personally, I think you did a really great job as counsel, and I really respect your efforts. I ask that you take a look at some of our other posts; I think you’ll realize that we’re not the libelous monsters that we’re made out to be, and that we are serious in fighting for a lot of issues I think you’ll find important as well.

]]> By: Nelson Rutrick http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-807 Nelson Rutrick Sun, 04 May 2008 15:40:23 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-807 Someone told me that the best thing I could do is get counsel that had nothing to do with the student union. I told them that was an extremely stupid idea. You have no idea how the student union works unless you have worked closely with the student union - the place is an absolute shitshow. Thrusting somebody into that environment with only a day of preparation means that they aren't going to see the punches coming. Someone told me that the best thing I could do is get counsel that had nothing to do with the student union. I told them that was an extremely stupid idea.

You have no idea how the student union works unless you have worked closely with the student union – the place is an absolute shitshow. Thrusting somebody into that environment with only a day of preparation means that they aren’t going to see the punches coming.

]]> By: symphonyofdissent http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-801 symphonyofdissent Sun, 04 May 2008 05:21:48 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-801 Taylor I feel you did a great job as consul. I have no relationship with Innermostparts and mostly found their updates entertaining during a long trial. As someone who had volunteered to be part of either consul if wanted, I certainly know what you mean when you say that preparation in a single day is exhaustive and difficult. Moreover, you were defending a more unpopular side which adds an extra layer of difficulty. Just wanted to put my thoughts out there Daniel Ortner Taylor

I feel you did a great job as consul. I have no relationship with Innermostparts and mostly found their updates entertaining during a long trial. As someone who had volunteered to be part of either consul if wanted, I certainly know what you mean when you say that preparation in a single day is exhaustive and difficult. Moreover, you were defending a more unpopular side which adds an extra layer of difficulty. Just wanted to put my thoughts out there

Daniel Ortner

]]> By: Loki http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-799 Loki Sun, 04 May 2008 02:13:28 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-799 Taylor - We couldn't agree more. Thanks for all your hard work. Taylor –
We couldn’t agree more. Thanks for all your hard work.

]]> By: Robbie Schwartz http://innermostparts.org/2008/05/03/ze-livebloggin-brooks-v-shuster-rutrick/comment-page-1/#comment-798 Robbie Schwartz Sun, 04 May 2008 01:10:15 +0000 http://innermostparts.org/?p=255#comment-798 Wow, incredible! If this was submitted to a creative writing contest, it would win HANDS DOWN! Wow, incredible! If this was submitted to a creative writing contest, it would win HANDS DOWN!

]]>