Wednesday, March 22, 2006

HAFTR & Rambam - Response To Comments

Those (HC, Ben Matok, and H) who feel that I'm only out to gossip couldn't be farther from the truth. They can't differentiate between an honest discussion of issues that are about to come up, and gossip. That's a real shame. In this thread, H replied with an interesting comment. Below is his comment, with my reply (a must read) following:

Actually, having been reading these comments and others through the past few weeks, I think HC makes a very valid point. Were Romach, MoChasid and any others at all interested in anything other than the gossip factor, they would not be posting and looking for gossip. They would have endeavored to call and ascertain the facts as they existed and they would have been 'dan l'caf zchut' that those involved are truly operating l'shma and in the interests of the community at large. Having no particular say in the proceedings, but knowing the people involved, I believe that the community in general could benefit from such an alliance - if done the right way. The meddling of the gossip mongers cannot help as it brings things to a boil before it is ready.
My response:
H, there are a number of incorrect assumptions in your comment. What you characterize as "posting and looking for gossip" I, and others, characterize as "looking for information that is already publicly available." Posting really has nothing to do with this, its inherently neutral. If you believe that posting makes it automatically gossip, then we're on totally different pages.

Indeed, if I had called (and who is to say I didn't), odds are the administration would not divulge information. Even if they had previously related that information to the student body.

You can't point out one instance where I said or implied that the members of the HAFTR or Rambam yeshivas were not operating with the most honorable of intentions. That assumption, one which characterizes comments from HC, Ben Matok and you, is totally off. You can agree that people are acting honorably, yet disagree on whether it is a good idea. Good intentions do not translate to good ideas.

I have no particular say in the proceedings either, and, like you, I know the people involved. I have no doubt they believe such an alliance is a good idea.

I agree with you insofar that you think an alliance, done in the right way, could benefit the community. But, a priori, I don't see a large window for it to be done the right way. The schools are just too different. That's not a bad thing, or a good thing, its just the facts on the ground.

Note that you also leave open the possibility that the alliance will not be good for the greater community. How is that different than my posts? Except that while I outlined my reasons to think the alliance wouldn't work, you've kept yours secret.