Tuesday 23 September 2008

Sandy The Racist Bigot - More Examples

ESOL vs EFL

Even when trying to be serious this guy offends people. This is taken from "dogme" on Yahoo, a serious forum for English Language Teaching. Read how even they criticize his racist rudeness. Sandy thinks that ''there are no stupid comments, there are only stupid reactions''. Wow!

..........It is rude through-and-through and I am honestly appalled that it is at all defended by others. We can discuss anything (including dogme, of which there is less of recent) but shouldn't we do it in a civilised manner? a list where members call others stupid is not provocative, it is just uncouth

Re: [dogme] Re: ESOL vs EFL

Actually, Zosia, I did reply to your message - but it got 'deleted' en route by the Dogme Gatekeepers (who will probably delete this one too, which is why I'm sending it to you personally as well as to the list).
A
This was the message...
A
''there are no stupid comments, there are only stupid reactions'' ... and your reaction proves the point, to some degree. Actually I find your dull cliche a little too much for me, together with ''everyone is different therefore there cannot be the same end result for everyone", which is equally nonsensical. Yes, we are all different in that we are not mere clones of each other, but we all manage to walk, eat, sleep, and communicate in a broadly similar fashion, and the result is broadly the same - a human society.
A
I think all Teflers should be obliged to take a course in logic or critical thinking before entering a classroom. They would then see that most of the unsubstantiated statements that pass for wisdom in teaching are nothing but short-cuts to sloth and the abandonment of common-sense.
A
Who luvs ya baby!!?
A
SM

In retrospect I feel it did perhaps appear a little too mocking for the thin-blooded censors, and maybe they were right to kick it into touch. I did not mean to mock in an ad hominem style, but I guess that's how it came across - for which I apologise.
A
Actually, I don't think I accused anybody of 'being stupid', but rather I voiced my dismay at the apparent stupidity of some people. We are all capable of being stupid at times; but it's different to say 'he is being stupid' instead of 'he is stupid', don't you agree? Or am I the stupid one - sorry, the one who's being stupid?!?
A
SM


Try ... the wonderful world of TEFL!

http://tefltradesman.blogspot.com

--- On Tue, 8/7/08, pannazosia@
Subject: Re: [dogme] Re: ESOL vs EFL
To: dogme@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, 8 July, 2008, 5:37 PM

I have reread Sandy's posting about stupidity and I disagree with your evaluation, Diarmuid. It is rude through and through and I am honestly appalled that it is at all defended by others. We can discuss anything (including dogme, of which there is less of recent) but shouldn't we do it in a civilised manner? a list where members call others stupid is not provocative, it is just uncouth. Incidentally, why did Sandy answer all other postings but mine? why didn't he defend his "provocatice manner"? Perhaps he feels my postings horrendously stupid? personally, I would be proud if that were the case.

Zosia

dogme@yahoogroups.com:

As usual, Dennis, we are in agreement about more than might appear. I know what you mean entirely, and I understand perfectly why you wrote. However, I don't think Sandy's barbed criticisms should be taken Overly seriously. He writes that he is happy to be proven a fool, and I think that there are several ways of responding to that. Personally, I think that anybody should be happy to be proven a fool, but that's probably Bakhtin talking.

I like this group because, from time to time, the group gets to argue about how it moderates itself. That can only be a healthy thing. I agree that racist and sexist tripe is unwelcome here, but believe that it is better to confront it directly rather than ban it. My enemies say I'm a liberal...As for unsolicited advertising, Yahoogroups is awash with it!

I don't think Sandy was being rude, as such. I think that Sandy is a persona who believes that he can speak great truths in a provocative manner. At times he may be right. I don't think he was this time. I maintain that it is quite right to take testing to task because the premise that it is fair to test everyone using the same test fails to take into account that there are many ways to skin a cat. As I hinted before, I think that Derek Rowntree has much more interesting proposals to consider.

Diarmuid

--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Newson" wrote:

Diarmuid,
I hadn't really got the assessment issue in mind, I was thinking more of the issue of being rude to people who have sent messages. As for not having guidelines for what goes and what doesn't I'm as against rules for a list as I am against teaching grammar rules, but I still think there are a few things one can frown on severely - racism, sexism, un-sanctioned advertising.

Dennis


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Really, Paul - is business SO bad that you have nothing better to do than trawl the web looking for examples of my apparently incorrigible character? We don't have to look far for yours, either, do we? Stealing, lying, cheating - it's all there for anybody who googles "windsor tefl" and "paul lowe" together.

Come to think of it, it's time they were all assembled together in one place, these tributes to your fine upstanding character. Watch this space!!