above in quotes by alana

anyway be well

frankD

“When any group believes that they are a law unto themselves, abuse is sure to follow. Whatever happens in this case, that issue must be addressed by members of the community. If they don’t, and ethnicity is allowed to trump ethics, then they will have nobody to blame but themselves for the anger directed against them.

This is moment in time, both because of these events and where we stand in the Jewish calendar – just days before Tisha B’av , when the tradition invites introspection. I hope that the community has the moral courage to undertake such introspection and those outside it have the sensitivity and discipline to allow them to do so without being humiliated.”

the quote is from brad h

frankD

well, now that the dust has settled, i guess i can respond – mainstream indicats a group has assimilated to the extent whereby its own members reach all ends of a spectrum and certain individuals embedded within the group will be potentially more dangerous than a fanatic fringe element – what does that mean ?

let me ask you, who in the last few years has done the most damage to any of your causes ? –
1) the NYT
2) madoff
3) the holocaust deniers

i think your answer will expose that waiving the anti-semetic flag on the “creepy insinuation” of mainstream is like tiger woods ever again playing the race card – thirteen mistresses and counting and not a single sister in sight !

“creepy” is what madoff did IMHO, leaving so many real people and needy charitable effort to go begging, all for his own individual pursuit of an extravagant ego-driven lifestyle – but that is what joining the mainstream is, insulated from history being changed by deniers yet open to trusted and close relationships going very badly

my suggestion would be to put the flag away and not be too quick to blame or color outsiders and others opinions and advise until you explore from within – that is part of knowing history also, which no one can deny

anyway be well,

frankD

As a newspaper editor I am always happy to correct the record, especially when someone points out that something we printed contradicts our own standards or style.

Word nerds, like me, regularly pick nits — what is the Times crossword blog if not a nit-pickers’ delight? Why is asking if a cobbler has a crust within the rules, but raising a question about a literary issue out of bounds or imply a threat?

Readers know I’m not one to raise the anti-Semitism flag too quickly, but there’s a creepy insinuation about your use of the word “mainstream.” I wonder if you would have had the same reaction, or would the unnamed Times-men you cite, if this hadn’t involved Wiesel and the query hadn’t come from a Jewish newspaper.

mr carroll,

as you can see above, it was not only you who objected, although i think you are well aware of that by now

the point i would like to make is many more who daily scower the puzzle for inaccuracies and errors did not make note of the clue

my assessment is, well, welcome to the mainstream

the crossword puzzle community, IMHO,word-nerds as they are, hardly fit the profile of wanting to create ill feelings or incite trouble or dredge up past hurtful reminders

the professor, and his cause, have been and will continue to be sponsored by myself, of course, as well as many others, however, it looks a little heavy handed to pounce on a crossword puzzle editor, his staff and the newspaper over this

i can also share with you, that some at NYT saw your response as a threat, to make a correction or else, and i have to tell you this is the part that was unacceptable to me

to stay mainstream implies rolling with the punches and my advise would be to soften the approach to an error, especially an unintentional one, with a more positive highlighting of why it is wrong and identify who it may have offended

always allow the other to save face, just like shimon perez talks about in today’s NYT feature

anyway be well

frankD