Shortlog - a log of everyday things



Today I discovered Tax The Churches. I'm curious as to what other people think about this idea, but also about some of the background behind taxes and tax-exempt organizations. I had some other thoughts, but I couldn't express them clearly, so I opted not to write them.

Sometimes there are things that I want to say, or write about, but I'm afraid to make them public for fear of the social consequences of saying such things. Thus, I'm planning to take after roc, write my thoughts anyway, and publish only the hashes. If, someday, I reveal the posts, you'll be able to verify that I had written them at the earlier time. I doubt these hashed posts will be common; I've got too much to do anyway. :P

This weekend is the Southwest Regional Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition. Go A&M! Show off your skills and your teamwork! You guys make me proud.


avatar from Gravatar

Sarah Luna | 2011-03-13T10:11:58.973101

So...writing and only publishing the hashes is your way of being able to say "I told you so" in the future without taking the risk of sharing your ideas now.

Am I missing something?

avatar from Gravatar

Drew Fisher | 2011-03-14T20:22:45.946207

I guess there are multiple purposes:

  • Yes, so I can say "I told you so" :P
  • Like you, I self-censor. This is a way that I can go back and reevaluate (or even reverse) said self-censorship at a later date.
  • I hope it might make me (and maybe even others) more thoughtful about what we consider taboo, and what we cause others to fear to say. In this odd publication manner, I can make my self-reflection public, to an extent that I feel it is safe to do so. Ideally, in the long run, I hope less things are taboo, and more can be discussed freely without fear of consequence. If only it were like Walden Two.

I guess the better way to end this post would have been: Why do we censor ourselves? What do we gain or lose by doing so?

avatar from Gravatar

Sarah Luna | 2011-03-14T20:53:04.349928

You know I love Walden Two. I guess my main frustration was you saying you had a comment and then withholding said comment. If you're going to self-censor, it's a bit snide to proclaim that to the world.

Either share your thoughts or don't. None of this half-hearted skittering about. :)

About Tax the Churches, I was impressed by the home page. The authors laid out logical and Constitutional arguments for their position. However, once you explore the rest of the site, the writings degenerate into whiny, finger-pointing attacks. I was disappointed by the immaturity of their condescension.

Debasing religions has no place on a political site that claims that "no one is suggesting that you abandon your church, or more particularly, your faith." Oh really? Then show a little respect, please.

Overall, the information was thought-provoking, but the presentation was poorly executed.

avatar from Gravatar

Drew Fisher | 2011-03-14T21:18:16.237583

Your reply reminds me of two of Paul Graham's essays: How To Disagree and What You Can't Say. You make some of the same points as he does in How To Disagree (that we should keep discussion on-topic and avoid personal attack), and my motivations for reviewing self-censorship are to some extent informed by What You Can't Say.