Comments on: In Good Faith

By: Syria: Snag Hits Blogging Contest :: Elites TV

Syria: Snag Hits Blogging Contest :: Elites TV — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:37:23 +0000

[...] aftermath of Abu Fares‘ observations, analyzed the situation and, following its resolution, wrote: The discussion that followed was an interesting experience. After years at Wikipedia, I’ve [...]

By: Global Voices Online » Syria: Snag Hits the Honouring of Outstanding Syrian Blogs

Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:27:01 +0000

By: razan

razan — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 09:12:44 +0000

أبو فارس, ما عاش ياللي بدو يزعل منك, الحقيقة أنا خجلانة منك, بس انته قلبك كبير ونحنا منستاهل :)

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:42:50 +0000

I’m not really sure what you mean by “post-democratic”. Democracy is a form of government. I’d describe wikipedia as the worst of the “design by committee” mentality of the corporate world. And I’d describe blogs (in a political context) as either a form of dissent or a form of propaganda, depending on the intent of the blogger. I don’t quite get the tie in to democracy? Freedom of expression?

By: Abufares

Abufares — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:57:21 +0000

Bravo Yazan for extending your hand in good faith.

Razan ze3lani menni and I have no idea why. But I like you still the same.

By: razan

razan — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:46:25 +0000

I too have respect to Omar, regardless of major disagreements with him, but my respect to his flexibility is perhaps the only reason why I didn’t make a big deal out of the fifth condition stated on the contest’s page.

Nevertheless, this condition does not stand on its own when it comes to Almudawen’s problems. On AlMudawwen’s “add your blog” page, the same condition appears at the bottom of the “conditions” list to add a blog.

My reservation on Almudawwen is not about a condition, but a rhetoric, a pattern that seems to be part of its community, and I find it weird, that even though they want to encourage Syrian virtual networking, they seem to be having an idea who and how this virtual syrian community will look like; it should not “dissent from the accepted mores and morals” [it does not mention what exactly are these morals, not on the contest page nor on Almudawwen add-your-blog page]. So only Al Mudawwen knows what are “our morals”.

It’s like what Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid said at his last visit to Beirut one year ago:
عندما يتحدث العرب عن الديموقراطية, يبدأون بالحماية

It’s worth to note, that posts on intimacy and sex is another approach to understanding a given society. So if there is a blogger telling us about Hash and sex, I think it tells us a lot about a certain society that it exists in Syria and it’s marginalized by “our given morals”. By marginalizing these voices, we are to put it bluntly: censors, worst type of censors, since we advocate “free speech”. I don’t mind at all, for almudawwen to accept certain voices, but it should be clear about it, presenting itself as accepting like-minded voices, but i think it’s not right to say something and do otherwise.

One last thing about “swearing religions”, I think many of Syrian bloggers, myself included, swear other bloggers, on just about every single post we don’t like. that links to your good faith idea, which i think many of us lack in our virtual matureness. so i guess it’s a better idea, if i may suggest, that al mudawwen would favor bloggers who dont swear at all, since after all, to be a blogger is to speak. it’s better to focus on “bad approach” than bad appeoach on “religion”.

I like Omar, and some of Almudawwen community, i respect a lot their efforts, it’s inspiring indeed, but there are problems in their rhetoric that i consider problematic and i am not so encouraged to participate in any of its activities. nevertheless, i am watching it closely,hopefully it will change in time.

By: Katia

Katia — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:43:30 +0000

Well said, Yazan!
The majority is not always right, that is a fact. In a pure democracy, both the majority and the minority each have common interests and that is basically the only rope holding them together. Once the cards get shuffled, the positions change and individuals whose interests do not match the group’s anymore, end up disappointed and bitter. Eventually, many of those who find themselves at the short end turn to extremes to show off their difference from the “evil” group and its “corrupt” stands. Now, if only the concepts of compromise and consensus were practiced as thoroughly as pure lobbying, we could see some sunbeams shining through again.
You can be proud of what you’re doing in that virtual world! Let’s hope it will rub off on our real world.