Conference yukon::christian_v7

 Snarfing usually goes in the Chit chat topic, but occasionally when the
 opportunity presents itself, some of us may take advantage of it.

 I apologize for any offense you (or anyone else) may have taken.  Sometimes
 I (we) like to toss in a little humor from time to time.  That was the only
 intent.



 Jim

    Welcome, Rik. I'm so glad you posted this. I am not a novice to Notes
    (having cut my teeth on the old K-note "product" a dozen or so years
    ago), nor am I a novice to CHRISTIAN. The snarfing is a relatively new
    (compared to the past dozen years) activity.
    
    To be honest, and I may surprise many here by saying this, I have never
    liked snarfing either. I guess it's a way for someone to exercise their
    creativity and/or take a breather during an otherwise tiring day. For
    those inclined to snarf, I'd guess that they really wouldn't have much
    opportunity to do so in a designated snarf topic. Too bad, too. As you
    say, snarfing does tend to break up the thread of a discussion. Imagine
    how I'd feel if I was pouring my heart out to the brethren/sistern here
    about some tragedy in my life, only to have a snarf pop in.
    
    Thanks for voicing your concern, Rik. Although it's always bugged me,
    I've gotten used to zipping past the snarfs without too much of an
    interruption in my train of thought. I guess between the two of us we
    have, well, two that have declared our displeasure with snarfing.
    
    	BD�

Welcome, Rik!  I'm glad that you have found us and joined us!  Welcome to
this place in the Lord's Name.

I guess a primary question to ask in trying to address your concern is "What
*IS* this place?"  Is it a place to share teaching?  Is it a place to debate
doctrine?  Is it a place to encourage and love one another?  Or is it all of
those, and more - is it a place of fellowship where in addition to all of
those things we can sometimes just laugh and play and enjoy one another?

To the best of our ability, we try to encourage and allow this conference to
be a place of full fellowship with each other, which includes just plain
enjoyment and play.  Though because of the limitations of a notesfile format
we have had to come up with some new types of games. :-)

Is a church volleyball game a bad thing?  There's really no purpose to it
other than to just play together.  If you stopped in to visit a church on a
Sunday afternoon and they had a volleyball game going, you might be shocked
if you weren't familiar with it.  The people are dressed very casually - in
just shorts and T-shirts.  They're not talking about God much, they're
talking about other mundane things.  Suppose they invite you in, and explain
some of what's going on, and then someone on the other team spikes the ball
at you, and everyone laughs good-naturedly.  I can easily picture someone who
did not understand what was happening being very offended by this situation. 
Yet is it a bad thing?

We're in a bit of a different situation here than a normal church body. 
We're trying to be a fellowship, while being scattered all over the globe and
having no real means of communication other than this file.  'Snarfing' has
emerged as simply a way of having good-natured fellowship and fun with one
another.  People are free to participate or not, as they will.  For the most
part, it is done in a respectful way - while snarfs may pop up in topics of
various levels of earnest such as the one you mention, I don't recall ever
seeing a snarf in the middle of anyone really pouring their heart out about
something.  Actually, in some of our long, drawn-out 'discussions' a snarf
has provided a welcome break.  

And those who choose not to participate have a wonderful opportunity to 'bear
with one another' (Col 3:13)

Paul

I'm having second thoughts about my last line:

> And those who choose not to participate have a wonderful opportunity to
>'bear with one another' (Col 3:13)

It sounds almost like a dig or admonition.  I was about to say that I didn't
mean it that way but the Holy Spirit reminded me that I *DID* feel that way,
at least a little bit.

Part of me would like to delete and repost the note without that bit, but I
generally won't do that.  If I screw up, I'll leave the screw-up for all to
see and then repent publically, too.

So I'm sorry.  I don't want to admonish or try to get in any sort of a dig. 
But snarfs are generally, from all I can see, harmless fun.  And I'll
personally, as a moderator, delete any that I think are really inappropriate,
such as any that interrupts any sort of heart-felt sharing.  Can you bear
with that? :-) :-) :-)

Paul

    you are fun Paul

    Hmmm...
    
    the topic of Snarfing. a toughie indeed.
    
    A brief (all be it confused) history. Several versions of this
    conference back, there wasn't any 'chit-chat' topic. It was felt by
    some participants that there needed to be a "fire-side" area where we
    could just meet and chat, without having the deep and meaningful
    theological discussion. So the 'cit-chat' topic was born.
    
    After a while, this started to get a little unweildy, and as a
    "first-cut" to trying to keep the file size manageable, the replys in
    the chit-chat topic were deleted (by me - well, a process I had in
    batch) each Sunday night/Monday morning.
    
    This soon brought howls of outrage, as someone would enter something in
    chit-chat late on the US sunday evening, and then my process would blow
    it away, so the process was modified to delete replys older than 7 days
    (the current practice).
    
    Before this '7 day sliding window', a common practice was to try and
    get to '.100' before the end of the week. Some weeks we even made it to
    '.200'. I think this was the beginning of snarfing.
    
    After the sliding 7 day window was introduced, the practive of trying
    to grab certain "magic numbers" became entrenched. This disease has
    spread throughout many participants here, as has other variants - such
    as "anti-snarfing" (a resolve to dislike 'snarfs') and "ante-snarfing"
    (a compulsion to grab a reply one _before_ a snarf, e.g. 8.7 instead of
    8.8).
    
    All in all, the snarfing, and the variants, are an attempt to lighten
    an otherwise dreary day in the company that is now Digital.
    
    Interesting to note the increase in snarfing behaviour since the
    'decline' of the "fun-ness" in this company :'/
    
    Harry
    
    ex-Mod ::christian and on reflection probably the original cause of
    snarfing (OH THE _SHAME_ !!)

Hello?  Rik?  Did we scare you off?

    musta been you you big bully you ;') :') :') :') :') :') :') :') :')
    :') :')
    
    Harry (who_is_hanging_out_to_be_hugged_by_said_bully ;') (and some
    other ones too :'D

    Hello -- to all !!!
    
    To be perfectly honest with you -- I don't scare easily.  Ha, ha !!! 
    But seriously, I wanted to ensure that I provided ample opportunity for
    anyone, who felt led to, to respond.  And though there weren't as many
    responses as I had thought there might be -- the responses were "a
    mixed bag" (which. to be perfectly honest with you, was as I had felt
    it would be).
    
    re. .1
    
    Thank you, Jim -- your apology is accepted.  I enjoy interjecting "a
    little humor from time to time", too.  But, as the OLD saying goes, 
    "There's a time and place for everything." --- which is along the lines
    of Ecclesiastes 1:1 [To every thing there is a season, ...] KJV.
    
    Thanks again for being sensitive to "others" sensitivities.
    
    Your Brother in The Lord --- Rik
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    re. .2
    
    Thank you, Barry, for your sharing and support.  Before I became SAVED
    I probably would have "zipped past the snarfs" (& entertained ALL sorts
    of "unholy thoughts") -- however, I HAD TO insert my note because "my
    spirit" was disturbed.  But, I KNEW that NEEDED to "pray first" for
    God's grace and wisdom -- to ensure that I would do my best to be as
    sensitive and understanding of others as I was requesting. [Along the
    lines of Luke 6:31 -- "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye
    also to them likewise." (KJV)]
    
    Your Brother -- Rik
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    re. .3
    
    "Is a church volleyball game a bad thing? ..." -- The analogy is POOR
    (at best).  Stopping in to visit a church (on a Sunday afternoon) AND
    (earnestly) seeking a church (in which to worship & praise The Lord)
    are definitely two entirely different scenarios.
    
    re. .4
    
    I appreciate your honesty, candor, and apology (& even your sarcasm --
    "Can you bear with that? :-) :-) :-)
    
    In His service, your Brother -- Rik
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    re. .5
    
    I agree with that assessment -- based simply on my "new-ness" to the
    Conference.
    
    It sort of reminds me of the picture I have in my office -- directly 
    above my terminal.  It is a picture of "The Laughing Christ" -- and
    I smile every time I look at it.  Jesus appears to be REALLY enjoying
    a good "belly-laugh" -- you know, the kind when you are holding your
    belly and laughing so hard that your sides ache.  I personally enjoy
    this picture because it portrays Jesus in a completely human way --
    enjoying himself -- in addition to all of the pain and suffering He
    endured.  At any rate, I just thought I would share that with you.
    
    A "fun-loving" servant of The Lord -- Rik
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    re. .6
    
    Thanks for "The History of Snarfing".  I hope you won't be too upset
    with my proposal for "Snarfing with a SPIN".
    
    Your Brother -- Rik
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    And to all of the readers who didn't respond (whatever the reason), I
    am grateful for this medium in which to "fellowship".  I will await ALL
    responses to my "Snarfing with a SPIN".
    
    Until next time we meet, either in this conference or (hopefully) in
    person --- PRAISE THE LORD for He is worthy.
    
    Your Brother in loving service to Our Lord,
    
    Rik

    I haven't responded in here because to be perfectly honest, I felt that
    I didn't want to get involved with the negativity surrounding your
    note.  I have been at Digital for 11 years and in this conference now 4
    years.
    
    I have never in the history of my career seen Digital and its employees
    at this low a level of morale.  It concerns me greatly because
    employees are the greatest asset to any company and when they are
    wounded it is hard to fight the technology battles in our industries.
    
    Believe it or not there are still long-term people in this company.  I
    know myself personally over 6 people in my office with over 20 years. 
    But everyone is hurting at some level.  The last round of layoffs in
    MCS created a wound in the Digital soldiers that has still many of 
    its victims in ICU.  Why would this round of layoffs be any different
    than the last round of layoffs, you may ask?  Because there were 2
    within very short weeks of one another.  It created the insecurity that
    the stockholders tipped the triangle in importance.  We've all come to
    accept that layoffs are inevitable, but the second layoff appeared fast
    and furious now digging into the meat of employees, not trimming fat.
    
    And honestly, you're note was just another negative for me that week. 
    And I felt horrible for my dear friend, Jim that this was blatantly
    pointing a finger at him.  Jim didn't deserve this kind of humiliation,
    he's in MCS too.  
    
    You can honestly believe in your spiritual attitude towards snarfing
    and be entirely wrong, dear Brother Rik.  Snarfing allows for some
    lightheartedness which is needed now amongst Digital employees more
    than ever before.
    
    I not only support snarfing, I do snarfing [men's hairclub :-)] and I
    am not ashamed or feel less spiritual because I do.  Praise God that
    our hope is in Him because if its in this notes conference, we are all
    in trouble.
    
    God has and will continue to use this notesconference to touch people's
    hearts, as long as we have people who share a heart immersed in God's
    love.  Snarfing will never take away from that.  We limit God too
    easily imo.
    
    Rik, I hope you will take my note in the vein of which it was written. 
    Which is simply to offer another perspective.
    
    In His love,
    Nancy

You're right, Rik, the volleyball analogy doesn't work too well.  Those who
have been here a while will tell you that I usually can't resist the
opportunity to make an analogy.  :-) Some work, some don't.  I was just
trying to say that a judgement made, or a spirit disturbed, when new to a
situation and the context is not understood, may not be accurate.

But that judgement or disturbed spirit may also point out something that the
people who have become used to it may have lost sight of, and I thank you for
providing that opportunity.  Your bringing this up will cause me to be a bit
more careful in snarfing to be aware of whether the people in the discussion
understand snarfing, or whether they might be disturbed by it.

***

I love that picture of the laughing Jesus, if it's the same one I'm thinking
of.  I've never even seen the orginal, but for a while we had what must have
been about a 10th generation Xerox copy on our refridgerator, that was very
faded and indistinct, but I STILL loved it. :-)  I'd love to see an original
sometime.

***

I can never be quite 100% clear about my own motives (the heart is deceitful
above all else - who can understand it?).  But I *think* I was (mostly, at
least) poking fun at *myself* with my 'Can you bear that?' line, poking at my
own veiled admonition in the previous note.  But there IS that human
tendency, even when sincerely apologizing, to want to re-state the thing that
we were apologizing for.  To whatever extent I might have been poking at you,
I continue to ask forgiveness, and I thank you for accepting it graciously. 
:-)

Paul

      Hi Rik,
    
        I kind'a wished you had ended your reply to .3 by saying...
    
        Your Brother - Rik
    
        To be honest, its omission was the most compelling thing
        I read in your reply!  Not that I didn't think you said some
        real good stuff.  (I hope the omission was accidental.)
    
    						Tony

    Hi Tony !
    
    I purposefully responded to .3 AND .4 together because Brother Paul
    wrote BOTH of them -- I simply linked my responses AND my signature
    ("In His service, your Brother -- Rik).
    
    Your Brother in The Lord -- Rik 

The following is a proposal with regards to the topic of SNARFing.  Please
understand that I am merely making a suggestion --- NOT in any way stating
ANYTHING other than the fact that this is ONLY a suggestion.

The thought I have involves a "different SPIN" to the current acceptable
practice of SNARFing.  It is my understanding that currently a SNARF can
be initiated whenever and wherever -- in order to interject humor -- all
for the purpose of boosting morale.  There is no denying that humor DOES 
offset the negative aspects of life and is often the right answer ("Yeah,
yeah -- that's the ticket!!!") to ensure a balance in life.

What I propose is that within the space of a legitimate response, should
a SNARF become apparent, the NOTE is NOT compromised by inserting a SNARF.
Instead -- provide the response accordingly.  THEN, when out of that Note,
file the SNARF into the SNARF note & "chalk it up" (if "keeping score" is
desirable).

[i.e. NOTE 1010 is about THE HOLY SPIRIT'S ROLE IN THE CHURCH -- Response 
10 makes an honest effort to address the issue and provide an important &
valid viewpoint.  Afterwards, the writer of 1010.10 could file the SNARF
in the SNARF Note file.]

At any rate, the above is just an idea that could provide the sensitivity
to and maintain the integrity of the topic(s) and STILL ensure that humor
remain within the conference -- thereby assisting each of us in many ways.

Again, I am hopeful that my interjection with regard to SNARFing -- and
with my suggestion about the "SNARFing with a Spin" -- is NOT offensive
to anyone.

Loving you in The Lord,

Rik

I think my first reaction, Rik, is that before we come up with a solution, we
need to determine whether a problem actually exists.  You were offended on
behalf of a brother - I've yet to hear whether that brother was actually
offended himself.  There was agreement from one person that he didn't really
like snarfing, but had learned to just ignore it.

I'm not ignoring the fact that this bothers you, and I don't want to do
anything to cause stumbling, but:

1) Except in rare cases, I still can't see this as anything other than
   harmless fun, easily ignored by those who choose not to participate.

2) We've been happily doing this for years.

3) Formalizing it will kill it.

4) Are you suggesting some sort of moderatorial action toward 'inappropriate'
   snarfing?  Moderators have enough to do already.

***

Can I ask this of other participants, including Read-onlies?  Is snarfing
ever a cause of stumbling for you?  I'm not asking if you don't care for it,
or if you just ignore it.  That's fine.  I'm asking - does a snarf in the
middle of a discussion cause you to feel anger or annoyance or offense?

If we *ARE* being a cause of stumbling because of snarfing, regardless of
whether there is anything wrong with it in and of itself, then I'll be the
first to suggest that we eliminate it.

Paul

    Re: Note 889.15 by PAULKM::WEISS
    
>Can I ask this of other participants, including Read-onlies?  Is snarfing
>ever a cause of stumbling for you?  
    
    No, never.  I like it.
    
>[...] I'm asking - does a snarf in the
>middle of a {NOTES} discussion cause you to feel anger or annoyance or offense?
    
    No.
    
    In my relationships with others in my local physical church, I often
    interject small tidbits of unrelated information, even into "solemn"
    occasions.  Many of them are non-verbal; a sigh, a wink, a grin, a nod,
    a cackle, lots of things I can't do easily in notes.
    
    I say to those who have a problem with this that I firmly believe the
    problem is yours, and not mine.  I am me.  I'm not going to radically
    change my behaviour at such a low level just to please you, even if you
    do claim that it is a "stumbling" for you.  I'd work to re-educate you
    instead.  It is simpler for me to do this than to try to change. I'd
    rather leave.
    
    Offense, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
    
    James