Post by Frank Berger
It is true that one of us is babbling.
Perhaps I've gathered a little patience. I've said all
this in one form or another, at various points, but perhaps not
quite in this order. So let's see how foolhardy this is....
A few numbered scenes....
1) I've seen various comments here that people shouldn't jump to
conclusions or similar. I generally agree, but then I also wonder
who it is jumping to what conclusions. No one has jumped all over
e.g. Domingo here. So I wonder why this is constantly being said.
What could it possibly mean? (I have been asking about this in
2) But then there are various points where I'm told that I *must*
form a conclusion. I tried to ask Mr. Design about that, but you
jumped into it. Why? And why are people who are saying that people
need to be wary & offer protections & whatnot also among those
insisting that people must form conclusions?
3) Then I think, OK, I am being told that I *have* come to a
conclusion & I just don't know it. Well, I eventually told you
what I thought ought to happen in the Curtis situation. I have no
idea if it was what you thought I thought.... In that case, I did
feel a sense of concern specifically because of the institutional
situation, and so formed an opinion. With Domingo? I didn't read
the allegations in any detail.
4) After all, as noted multiple times in a row, he's just not someone
on my radar or whom I've patronized anyway. (I do know who he is,
at least, as opposed to so many other celebrities implicated in
such things.) So even if I were to suppose that I'd drawn a
conclusion of which I myself was unware -- I mean, such things do
happen to people, generally speaking -- what would be the result
of this conclusion? What would be the evidence in my behavior
regarding Domingo? How else would I possibly behave? Would I
*start* patronizing him? Now that seems bizarre.
5) But then I'm reminded of the sequence from #1 to #2 again, and
I think, well yes, of course, the only possible point of this
sequence is to make me care more about the accused now than prior
to the accusation! It's to insist that I must (or did) make a
decision, while (correctly) insisting that I also have no direct
knowledge on which to base one -- something of which I'm well aware
-- and (oh yes!) that this is like a trial. Or else like voting.
(Not like! Identical!) And so if I'm being responsible, if I care,
I'll... find Mr. Domingo NOT GUILTY and VOTE with my wallet to give
him the money I would have never given him in the first place! Wow.
6) Yes, I know, what a crazy world. (Indeed, I'm reminded of an
old thread about Chick Fil-A... I think the first time I'd ever
really seen a bunch of libertarian nutjobs go on about a company
somehow being entitled to the public's money....)
OK, so now I'm not really addressing this response to you,
Frank, but I'm putting it here because you usually interrupt anything
I'm trying to ask or say anyway. (That means those questions were
really for others who might read this.)