i waited until the end of the thread to post this comment, so as not to derail the conversation further:

phred, putting aside whether or not i am, or you believe me to, be mean-spirited, entitled, rigid, revisionist, pretender, small-minded, petty and ignorant with an axe to grind….

i’d like to focus back on the point i was attempting to make (not very well apparently).

my comment was not about access, not about cost and not about the hard work and dedication of good people.

it was not about the webinars (other than to say i thought they were great).

it was about the words used to describe the events: members, town hall and “our community.”

a logical implication that flows from those words is of “gated community.”

i wish you, and others who use those words, would do is consider that implication and think about not using those words (“benefit to donors” is an alternative). the implication would go away without changing anything else — not access, not cost to participate.

It insulted all the young people who work here

if any of them were insulted by my comment to phred, i apologize to them: i appreciate what it means to work hard for little or no financial reward for a cause you believe in. you have my admiration, respect and thanks for that.

has it occurred to you that sometimes you’re the one taking things out of context?

sure. please tell me when you think that’s what i’m doing.

Honestly selise, did you really think my original comment was about the definition of “our community”???

no, not about. seemed to me more like it was assumed.

You just used it as an opportunity to grind your axe about access.

i do have very strong opinions about what community means. (see discussion starting here). it’s ok, i hope, if we don’t think the same way about it (i don’t even know if that’s so)?

This is the problem with type-written comments and grammar, one sometimes reads something with the emphasis in all the wrong places.

very true.

my objection was calling it something other than what it is. words matter. and the stories we tell ourselves and each other matters too.

as for the rest of your thoughtful comment, i’d like to reply, but apparently the issue to contentious for a thread. would email be ok?

you’ve misunderstood my comment to phred. in it i did not object the webinars, or to the limited participation. only to the use of the phrase “our community.”

Opening it up to the whole community would cost several thousand dollars a month. Do you have that kind of money? I’m quite sure you don’t. So what you are saying is that we shouldn’t have them at all if we can’t afford the tens of thousands of dollars it would take to open them to everyone.

i said no such thing.

I also don’t appreciate the nasty with crack about “gated communities.” It’s mean-spirited, and reeks of sense of entitlement, as if everyone here is supposed to work their asses off and owes you something.

i have no idea where this came from. my comment was directed to phred and what phred wrote and thinks.

jane, you are totally and wildly off base. i don’t think anyone owes me anything (*). if i had the sense of entitlement you accuse me of, i would never have have offered — repeatedly and over many years — to volunteer my time for fdl related projects.

(*) other than the common decency and honest we all owe each other, but i don’t think that’s what you were referring to.

bill black from feb 2009 on s&p fraud:

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/02/04/bill-blacks-primer-on-the-fraud-at-the-heart-of-the-financial-system/

and here is bill black in march 2009 here at fdl to talk with us about fraud:

http://firedoglake.com/2009/03/23/talking-economic-accountability-with-william-black/

for anyone still not reading bill mitchell every day (you should be!), please at least read today’s: S&P decision is irrelevant

mike norman (link in original):

My time at S&P

I worked for Standard & Poor’s in 2000 and 2001. Please read about my experience here. If you don’t think this is the most corrupt company in the financial industry in the entire world, then you have some sort of cognitive disorder.

When you see S&P not as some dispassionate political commentator but more akin to a corporate lobbyist things come into focus.

not lobbyists. crooks. see bill black.

In a sane world, we’d be raiding the Standard and Poor’s offices searching for evidence of their using their power and influence for a political result. Like they just did in Milan.

in a sane world:

first, years ago there would have massive fbi investigations for fraud, fair trials and prison time.

second, everyone would be laughing at s&p because we would all understand that the usa is not italy and that the difference (currency issuer vs currency user) makes their stupid down grade as threatening as a child’s unloaded water gun.

I think what makes the webinars uniquely useful is the opportunity for our community to discuss ideas with the guests (similar to the book salons).

phred, i love you, but do you really think “our community” includes only those who have paid $45 to join?

i think the webinars are great. but participation is a benefit to $$ donors. full stop.

unless, that is, you (and i don’t think you do) believe in the concept of the gated community.

yeah, i’m always bummed when i miss it. :)

not sure it was ever otherwise.

by that i mean party identification (or any in-group identification), rather than putting empathy and enlightenment first.

p.s. to glenn: i really like the synergy of “empathy and enlightenment.” the sum is much more than the individual components.

many have some of both values.

i’m going to go with “most” and rather than “many”

and that “most” also includes us.

no data or anything, just that has been my experience.

that’s why i wrote, “it’s not just about “them,” it’s about “us” too.”

not much we can do about others… at least not when compared to what we can do about us.

howdy demi. thank you for the kind greating. very nice to “see” you too!

Their foremost value is their own authority. Every thing else is means to that end.

glenn, we do this too.

it’s not just about “them,” it’s about “us” too.

it feels good to have another to blame, but that is not the path of either compassion or enlightenment.

I think there are those, however, who want to enforce both individual and collective ignorance.

yes, i agree.

however, my contention is that, especially for progressives, the “the right-wing noise machine” is not even close to being among the most dangerous of those counter-enlightenment forces.

for progressives (i’m including myself), the forces for ignorance are far more often found within Democratic Party politics.