On the subject of Jim Hill
XXXXXXX@hotmail.com wrote:
Can someone please tell me what is going on? I go to the web site one day and everything is fine. I go in another day and I am banned. What is the deal? I have written twice now and have never heard back. If I am to be banned, I would like to know why. If not, I would like to know why I keep being told that I am.
What is going on?
…
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:59:38 -0400
From: XXX@XXXXXXXXXXXX.com
To:XXXXXXX@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: MayBeSpam: (Jim Hill) : On again off again banningPhilip –
Jim here. At this point, I’ve sent you multiple messages in response to your queries. But your Spam filter (or something to that effect) always stops them. So it’s a zero sum game for me to keep sending you the full-blown explanation.
But — just in case this explanation does get through this time — you got banned from JHM because, a month or so back, you made a rude, cheap shot remark. While I am a big fan of free speech and all that, I am not a big fan of rude people. So until you can learn how to disagree with other people’s opinions without going out of your way to be excessively disagreeable … You’re going to have to find some other website to note on.
Sorry about that,
j
…
Frey wrote:
Well I certainly have been checking my email and spam filter looking for a response, but this is the first to get through. The IT guy in me makes me wonder if there isn’t something wrong with your web site or hosting services that could explain both the problems with your emails and the oddness of my apparent “unbanning” that comes and goes.
Anyway, I’m not sure what I could have said that would be construed as a “cheap shot”, but I still feel that some sort of warning would be in order before banning people. I think that, given the fact that you do not respond directly to the comments made on your Web Site, it is difficult to tell where the line is and when one has crossed it. I certainly don’t feel that *I* have gone out of my way to be excessively disagreeable. It’s a fact that I often disagree with you and would often voice that opinion. It’s your Site and you can ban whoever you want to, but I think it indicates an extremely thin skin if you can’t take a hit now and again, “cheap” or not. Again, I’m not sure what I said that got your nose out of joint, but I’m fairly confident that I wasn’t crude or abusive (I rarely am). Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe I went way too far withut thinking. That happens in the instant response world of the web. Another reason why a warning would be nice. (i.e. “Please do not use that sort of language. While I appreciate your opinion, abusive language such as you used in “X” will not be tolerated. Further similar instances will result in a ban.”)
That is how you build a community. Again, it’s your Site. You make the rules. I won’t deny that this experience (the only time I’ve been banned from *any* Site) has made me think less of you. One would hope that someone who sets themselves up as an expert could better handle the inevitable negativity they receive from placing themselves in the public eye.
Well, good day to you, sir.
-
–
Philip R. Frey
a.k.a. ‘Rhindle The Red’
…
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:32:05 -0400
From: XXX@XXXXXXXXXXXX.com
To: XXXXXXX@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: MayBeSpam: (Jim Hill) : On again off again banningPhilip –
How typical. Now I’m the one with the thin skin? Have you actually looked at what’s regularly posted about me over in JHM’s TalkBack section? I’ve got a hide like an elephant. Strong critics don’t bother me. Rude jerks do.
In your e-mail, you want to brush this all off as something that said in the heat of the moment, that you should be forgiven because things like this happen ” … in the instant response world of the web.” I say life is too short to have to deal with rude jerks who — once they offend — try to explain away and/or justify their behavior.
This isn’t a free speech or First Amendment issue, Philip. You took an unnecessarily cheap shot in JHM’s TalkBack section, going out of your way to be offensive. So now you have to pay the price.
Think of this as an object lesson. Try and learn from it so that — in the future — you don’t wind up getting bounced from any other website.
And a “Good day to you, sir” too.
j
…
RE: MayBeSpam: (Jim Hill) : On again off again banning
From: Philip Frey (XXXXXXX@hotmail.com)
Sent:Wed 9/26/07 10:27 PM
To: JimHillMedia (XXX@XXXXXXXXXXXX.com)Yes, I have read what has been posted about you and I’ve noticed a lot of people get banned. I would say that somebody who can’t take a criticism or a few pot shots (I can’t say whether mine in particular was a cheap shot or not since you still haven’t told me which comment upset you) has a thin skin. I, on the other hand, do not. I have never backed away from criticism, no matter how harsh. Not even yours. So, am I turning this on to you? Well, you’re the one who banned me when I don’t think I deserved it, so, yeah, I guess I am. That’s kind of the point. I think you’ve overreacted and you think you haven’t. That’s the very nature of a difference of opinion. I haven’t tried to “explain away” or “justify my behavior”, I just stated that I don’t usually use abusive language but that (again since you haven’t told me what upset you) I can’t swear to it. And, yes, it is possible that I may have and if that were the case and you had brought it to my attention, I would have apologized. But as you have chosen not to let me know exactly what I said, I find it difficult to do so.
I also never claimed it was a free speech issue. You brought that up (twice now). I believe I specifically stated that it is your Site and you are free to do what you want. I am not trying to get back in your good graces or get myself unbanned. (I don’t think I asked for that. Right from the get-go all I wanted to know was what I had said and why it had crossed the line.) I am just pointing out my personal opinion of how one in the public eye should conduct themselves when faced with adversity. You are, of course, free to disagree.
The fact is, when I was first banned, I was surprised. I really didn’t know what I could have said that would warrant it. As you stated, there’s a lot of stuff on your talkback and I didn’t think I had said anything that was outside of the parameters that I saw.
Then I wrote to you asking why I was banned. I did not hear back. (Yes, you say you wrote. I’m sure you did. I didn’t receive it.) When I noticed that I appeared to *not* be banned anymore (because of that weird glitch I mentioned earlier) I though “well, I suppose he just banned me as a knee-jerk reaction and changed his mind when he read my note.” Of course, that turned out not to be the case. Oh, well. It doesn’t really matter to me in the end.
And whether you believe it or not, I do appreciate you taking the time to write to me, even if we’ve done nothing to convince each other of our different viewpoints.
-
–
Philip R. Frey
a.k.a. ‘Rhindle The Red’
And….I never heard back again. There is certainly no reason why he should. He thinks he did the right thing and that he’s got a “thick skin” and I think he’s a little weasel who refuses to face legitimate questioning. (And, no, I never used phrases like that on his Site, no matter how many times I may have thought it.)
What really got me about this whole thing is that he treated me like a child. Attempting to explain to me the way things are despite the fact that I made it quite clear that I didn’t need such explanations. It kind of explains his disregard for his critics over at his site. Since *he* knows everything (after all, he’s an insider), *they* are obviously just ignorant of the facts. They can’t see how disastrous the Pixar acquisition was. They don’t understand why “Tarzan” failed. He does. So, on the Site at least, he doesn’t feel the need to actually respond to anything. Oh, he’ll make the occasional symbolic response. (Like this recent answer to a question about single-disc DVD releases - “Given that I am regularly accused by JHM readers of being far too tough on that Emeryville-based animation studio, let me say — right from the get-go here — that this single disc thing isn’t Pixar’s fault.”) No one accuses him of being “tough”. They accuse him of outright distorting the facts to support his comments.
Perhaps he’s just bitter over the fact that he predicted doom-and-gloom in the Disney/Pixar relationship (See here for an example of him being certain that the relationship would end with Cars), that he just can’t abide good news on that front. He’s got a real blind spot. He seems to actually believe he is being even-handed when he leaves out facts and figures or mis-quotes people or takes statements out of context in order to make his points. This is what he never really responds to. As recently as September 3rd, he was still claiming that Disney was disappointed in Ratatouille’s performance. No one else in the industry is saying that. In fact, the news seems to be nothing short of spectacular, given its amazing performance overseas (which Jim neatly sidesteps by writing that last article before the film had even opened in most countries) and even a potential Best Picture Oscar bid. This is not a film anyone is disappointed with except, apparently, the handful of people Jim knows at Disney whom he allows to speak for the entire company.
It’s not like Jim doesn’t understand what it’s like to have one’s motivations misconstrued by the “powers that be”. After all, he was kicked out of Disneyland for giving unauthorized tours that conflicted with Disney’s official ones. It caused a bit of a backlash at the time, with Jim claiming he was being targeted for pointing out “negative” stories about Disney. Apparently informal tours run for churches, school groups and the like are allowed all the time. Of course, none of them are selling these tours to individuals through a travel agency as Jim did, but he failed to see the distinction. He also claimed that he was eventually going to release a CD or podcast that people could listen to while doing a walk through the park, but like so many series on his blog, he’s never completed that, either. Seems to me he’s probably learned that it’s more difficult to actually create something than it is to talk about things other people create. He never mentions the audio tours anymore.
Ah, why go on? There’s no point trying to reason with people like him. And, of course, he’s a fool anyway, since it was far too easy to re-register under a new name and I can still post whenever I really want to. (I won’t say what that new name is, of course. I’m sure I’ll upset his delicate nature on my own soon enough and get banned again. Or maybe he’s clever enough to figure it out on his own. But I doubt it.)
All in all, one of my more interesting online experiences.