mentalblog.com comments:
I am not sure this is the same 770 bochur. Any other opinions?
it's him.
i am not sure about Rabbeinu Gershom analogy. the herem explicitly excludes ואם זרקו מותר. i would say that in the case of internet אין לך “זרקו” גדול מזה.
770 bochur
im sure theres a better metaphor.
go outside naked and then complain that all the cars are braking to look at you.
mind you, this all reminds me of the two women who were arguing loudly at a movie. after a few minutes of this, the guy behind them says "ladies im sorry, but i can't hear" to which they reply "we sure hope not, this is a private conversation!"
I agree with sto & faruq. 770 bochur, you are off on this one. Everybody knows that internet sites & blogs are not private. In fact, they are as un-private as can be.
אטו בשופטני עסקינן ?
I was just thinking that Lubavitchers are so accustomed to having their own space, ignoring the world, so when they do cross the line they loose any sense of reality and danger and proportion. These blogs are simply stupid, so is the demand of the authors to privacy.
Rabbeinu Gershom was not the analogy, I mentioned him purely in passing. The analogy, I said, was not locking one's house.
Nobody is going out on the street: most of this blog's readership has basic Internet common sense, and would not fall for primitive identity fraud schemes. Among those who are not nearly as aware of the realities of Net life, there is a perception that the Internet is so big that no-one would take notice of my little corner. Much like the fact that many bochrim leave tefillin in 770 for a whole day, even overnight, despite prior incidents of theft. The perception is that in a medium full of these articles, one can "get away" with it.
While being pitifully wrong, this approach exists; what is taking place here is unjustified.
I missed Berl's and TA's last comments; as usual, Berl summed it up very cogently. Yes indeed, בשופטני עסקינן.
770 bochur, I would not go looking at their sites, since I understand their purpose; however, these people are idiots that deserve to be chastised (and if TA’s link will help them realize how stupid they are, all the better). But unfortunately instead of learning their lesson and protecting their sites, they come here demanding 'respect for their privacy'. What morons! Respect would be the last thing I’d consider giving them.
Close the damn blogs or just suffer the abuse quietly!
One down, Pinson closed. I figured Pinson are the smarter of the bunch.
thekaplangang likes it:
http://thekaplangang.blogspot.co...-
publicity.html
אי אפשר לעולם בלא בשם ובלא בורסקי, אשרי מי שאומנותו בשם, אוי לו למי שאומנתו בורסקי
They may, perhaps, deserve to be chastised, just as people who don't lock their front door may "deserve" to be taught a lesson and have their money stolen. That said, some "honors", decent people leave for others.
I think I've made my position clear.
770 bochur, why are you double commenting?
Two can play this game. Before a burglar brakes into an unlocked house, it would be good for someone to chastise the owner to keep the doors locked. I think I've made my position clear as well.
Unintentional. Please be so kind as to remove it.
I think when I refresh the screen, it reposts.
no problem
Two can play this game. Before a burglar brakes into an unlocked house, it would be good for someone to chastise the owner to keep the doors locked
Right. And I wish myself and my friends to belong to the latter and not the former.
The problem is that the policy here seems to be the reverse. It does not befit, IMHO, ehrliche people.
P.S. When R. Yoel was told about the Internet and its downsides, his response was: "צרריכים לדבר עם האחראים, שיסגרו את זה..."
it does not matter if one actually locks one's house. נתפס עליו כגנב וק״ל
fruq, not ק"ל to me. connection please?
the unlocked door does not mean an invitation. a thief is the one who violates obvious boundaries. נתפס עליו כגנב. an open WEB log lacks this boundaries.
I was under an impression that נתפס עליו כגנב is a reference to the state a גוי was found (a state of fear as opposed to feeling גאנץ בעלהבית'יש ).
Right. It's in מאכלות אסורות יב, כג:
אוצר של יין שהיו חבייותיו פתוחות, ויש לגוי חבייות אחרות באותו הפונדק, ונמצא הגוי עומד בין חבייות ישראל הפתוחות--אם נבהל כשנמצא ונתפס עליו כגנב, הרי היין מותר בשתייה: שמפחדו ויראתו, אין לו פנאי לנסך. ואם לא נתפס כגנב אלא הרי הוא בוטח שם, היין אסור. ותינוק הנמצא בין החבייות--בין כך ובין כך, כל היין מותר.
i know you are right, but i mean Baba Kama 6:2 and Rashi there
6:2? which rashi?
berl, שאם יכנס לפנים מן המחיצה לשם גניבה נכנס
sorry, i mean Baba Batra, my apologies, i owe you seven or so minutes... silly me
Very interesting article. Again, I was coming from the point of view of Halacha, not law (not even Halacha, as much as Jewish view of moral standards).
There is a ridiculous article which does, though, reference the relevant Jewish sources very well:
http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~ew206/
...ssertation.html
"צריכים לדבר עם האחראים, שיסגרו את זה..." LOL! kолумб aмерику открыл, а мы ее закроем"
For some people who can’t speak English after 50 years in America, Columb is stuck in Verona...
I wonder how many of the blogs are maintained by women?
770 - the analogies presented so far are useless.
Here's some better ones:
No curtains or shades on your front windows, then complain when someone sees the inside of your home.
Post your family photos in your front windows, and complain when someone takes a picture of it.
Talk on your cellphone on the train, and complain when a nearby passenger starts commenting on your conversation to his friend.
Post a notice addressed to your friend on the SHUL bulletin board, then complain when you hear strangers talking about it.
Post your business card on all the shul bulletin boards, then complain when someone takes one.
Where the secular law does help us is to define what's a reasonable expectation of privacy within this new space. One of the first things I taught my teenager about the Internet is that everything you do on it is publicly viewable unless expressly secured, your email, the sites you visit, and certainly anything you post to any web site. That's not a matter of law, that's a matter of technological fact.
"There's an eye that sees and an ear that hears." Oh no, it's not just in Shamayim anymore!
re: unlocked door.
this isnt unlocked, man. this is leaving the door wide open on kingston avenue.
now i happen to be against idling laws and the like, but there's a reason we dont use our real names while commenting on this blog. we understand that the web is for all to see.
personaly, i happen to care very little as to whats going on in these sem girls or families lives, but these morons are violating their own privacy.
hey akiva, i knew there were better metaphors out there.
thanks!
I am part of a family website and this blog and discussion have been brought to my attention. I would just like to comment briefly.
On our family blog, although we have always been aware that any person from the public may stumble upon our blog and view the contents, this is not the goal of the blog on any level. We use the blog to share within our family, since we are far and wide spread accross the globe and this is a good means for us to see pictures of each other and stay in touch. When we first began the blog we wanted it to be password protected and at that time we didn't know of password protect sites.
On that note I don't think it is fair to assume that these family blogs are vying for 'attention'. And to post the blog links on a site like this is plainly in violation of their wishes. See, you have your site, Tzemach, with the wish that as many people as possible read it. Us, family bloggers, have our site for our own family to share info.
Therefore, the fact this discussion came up here is important and I'm sure is hashgacha protis, and perhaps had you done so without posting the actual links you may have not had such an animated discussion - since it would not have been so controversial, but just you trying to talk about something interesting. Controvesial it being there have therefore been the useful contributors providing links to other 'blog' website which have a password facility.
Everything is Hashgachah protis and I hope that you, as well as all the readers of this blog, learn a good few lessons from this 'parsha'.
The lesson that 770bochur brought up regarding 'ma tovu ohalecha yaakov' is a very important and fundemental one.
An idea clearly related to Lashon Harah. It is commonly known and taught to children in schools that Lashon Harah does not necessarily mean talking 'bad' about another person. It can also be talking 'good' about someone else, since talking 'good' about someone invites critics to talk 'bad'. When a person links the 'general public' to a site that is obviously made for personal use then that could be quite easily seen as bordering, at least, on the lashon harah of 'good' things. Since doing so invites judgements on those families lives.
Obviously, blogs such as yours are made for public consumption.
May this serve as an opportunity for us all to grow in our understanding in the purpose of being a Jew and what we represent and may Hashem guide you and all of Klal Yisroel to do things only l'shem shamayim and al taharas hakodesh.
To add to my previous comment:
The issue with Loshon Horo, gossip, is a facinating and often complicated question.
On the one hand one may argue that press, media and publicity are crucial parts to a society and that without being able to 'freely' discuss issues that affect society we risk not being able to bring 'issues' to the table in order to bring about positive change for everyone.
In that case, what is wrong with talking about what so and so did bad, or even good? What could possibly be negative. Nobody is perfect and why don't I have the right to tell that person that they have done something wrong, or are going about something in the wrong way?! This is after all what the Torah is all about! (Is it not!?) To make the world into a better place, and 'bishvili nivrah haolam' and 'kol yisroel areivim zeh lozeh' - so certainly this is the responsibilty of every single individual to make as much noise as possible about 'issues'! (parents to schools, communities to their leaders, one society/social group to another, race to race etc etc etc)
However, in the Torah it says, 'Odom ki yakriv - mikem korbon l'havaya'. Mikem... from yourself must the offering come. In other words if a person wants to shecht an animal (animalistic/negative trait), they should shecht their own animal rather someone else's.
R' Elimelech of Lizensk & his brother R' Zushe of Anipoli used to have a practice that when they saw a fellow person doing something wrong they would reprove each other for that type of 'sin' in front of the fellow who did the wrongdoing, and awaken in one another the feeling to do teshuvah, talking about how wrong that sin is and how that 'sin' distances a person from Hashem and from the purposeful action that a person should be involved with. The person who had done the wrong-doing would observe this and say, 'but I too have done this! this is terrible...' and subsequently he would repent for his sin. The brothers would say regarding this, "it says in the verse 'lo sisneh es ochicha bilvovecho v'lo sisa olov chet - hochaiach tochiach es amisecha'. The verse says 'one should not place the sin on him' therefore, instead of talking to a person directly about his sin, we will place the sin on ourselves, talk to each other about it since we are comfortable and know that we wish to help each other in avodah, and through that we will re-prove ('moichiach') the notion that this sin is acceptable and help him, the other person, realise that it is wrong; through him observing our own repentance for the very same sin!".
In this way they continually bettered themselves as people.
That is the fundemental of the Torah. To change ourselves and automatically through doing that others will be inspired to better themselves by our exemplary action. This idea is also demonstrated by the fact that the Rebbeim have explained that the way in which they help another yid find a tikkun for something wrong they have done is by finding the place inside themselves where they have dealt with that same issue, and through that they are able to help the other person.
Essentially all people do that. We try to help others in the way we try to help ourselves. Or, in different words, we effect others in the same way that we affect ourselves. Therefore, when a person doesn't help themselves properly it will obviously result in their inability to effectively help others. Looking at other peoples problems in a vocalised way as a way of dealing with oneself is indeed a pathway which often leads to self-justification and blame, etc. However if when one sees the negative deeds other other people do or negative attributes they have, one sees that as a way of seeing one's own negative traits, since, as the idea is commonly known, 'if you see something negative in someone it is because we ourselves suffer from that problem', then if we deal with our own problem then indeed that will cause the other person, if they are observing (which they often are), to see how they too can change.
This is what people often call the vicious circle, but in the latter path becomes a 'positive circle'.
This is why Lashon Horah is bad and the path of Avodah within the self is good.
In a case where it may seem that a more direct approach is necessary and it is necessary to deal with an issue in a public way, there are always ways of discussing issues based purely on the general problem, without mentioning any names, or alluding to any, without criticising anyone in particular but rather the issue itself and seeking into the self as to how one did or will rectify that particlar issue, and with the general cure/advice based and drawn purely from our Torah of life, (which is our inheritance,) and through that issues can be highlighted and dealt with positively.
In this way we cause that those who may hear the discussion will not be insulted and will rather feel inspired to change that particular area of themselves where they are lacking, rather than (if hearing a list of a particular person or group of peoples wrong-doings) using the others wrong-doing as a justification unto themselves, or feeling that the 'criticism' is directed at them, if it is.
In this way media could become a more positive tool and still be financially succesful, since a self-portrayed story telling of strength and change is highly more respectable and conducive to positive change than gossip - which is cheap.
May we all be able to carry out the Mitzvah of Ahavas Yisroel, the basis of the holy Torah, which the Almighty gave us in order to bring His Essence into the world and thereby bring peace and love to all humanity. Ki Chofetz Chessed Hu.
no more?
sto and Akiva: Valid points. I don't know if I will have time to make clear my position before Shabbos.
OK. I will go for it.
From the leaned discussion conducted earlier by this blog's scholars-in-residence, we glean two relevant dinim. The first is that I have no right to build my house in a way that would allow me to peer into my neighbor's. The second is the din of נתפס עליו כגנב (what Berl and I originally thought faruq was referring to). There, as well as several other places, the Halacha says that we may assume that no sane person will do something he should not be doing in a place where he may be observed from a window. This, notwithstanding that as said before, no ehrliche person will observe him in such a fashion.
So we see two separate concepts here (which in reality are both obvious): you should not be an idiot and allow me to see you in a private setting; regardless, if you are indeed such a fool, I have no right to go look. Now on to the relevance of this online:
The issue of how to categorize the Internet is not new. Everyone concerned understands that as a medium, it defies most all prior conceptions of information and the relationship to it. What is relevant to our discussion is the following fundamental difference:
No religious Jew will conceive of living in the red-light district of any town. Nevertheless, religious Jews do reside in the great city of New York and many other metropolises that contain neighborhoods far from beneficial to wholesome chinuch. The reason why we allow ourselves to reside in places conceivably within walking distances of such neighborhoods is obvious: No-one is asking you to go there. And when going there involves a certain minimum degree of time and effort, that is sufficient for one to not be deemed as placing himself in a position of nisayon.
In the Internet, of course, no such limitaitons exist. So the question is asked: can a person be reasonably expected to mind one's own business online? Can we regard the site not being the one I am on right now as the equivalent of being 15 minutes drive away, and expect that I will not go where I know I ought not to?
Sto, akiva et al contend that the answer is no. This is a valid position; one must bear in mind, though, that the logical conclusion of this position is that the very act of accessing the Internet is conceptually the equivalent of going to live in certain areas of NYC; if so, the hellfire denunciations of the Internet and anyone who accesses it have been much understated.
770 bochur, what's your Shidduch situation? It is obvious you can't pasken on this till you resovle this problem.
PS The family sites are not a red light district, not nearly as interesting and exiting.
TA, I am not sure how to take your comment seriously. While it is true that אין חכם כבעל הנסיון, I do not see how my shidduch situation has any bearing whatsoever on my comments.
And I think my alias makes my "situation" clear; at this point in time, I see in it no "problem" up for resolution.
PS lol
I started one of the first family blogs (I am happy to take credit for that) because as Al Taharas Hakodesh mentioned my family is widely spread across the world and it was a way for the family to get to know each other. We are well aware that blogs are public and anyone could read them but we hoped that they would do so quietly, like if you overhear a conversation that isn't for your ears, don't as questions about it. So if you feel the need to read other family blogs, go ahead, knock yourselves out but don't comment on them or criticize them, remember that they don't post with a mass audience in mind.
After all the attempts to find a proper metaphor to linking other people's blog, I'm dismayed by how you failed miserably.
This completely analogous to someone who leaves his shades open, and you make it a point to call the whole neighborhood to look in side, while claiming "you shouldn't have left it open". It's such a stupid excuse to invade in someones privacy on the basis "you should have known".. Tell me one good reason why a normal person should had known of this sick idiot.
Commenting by HaloScan
